Hi,
. . . even if marriages with animals/kids/large amounts of people are allowed to get married . . .
Well, first, it is pretty clear that, once again, people are focusing too much on the sexual part of marriage.
Animals? Hell, I'll gladly marry my cats if that means they'll be covered under my health insurance. I've spent a lot more (out of pocket) for the well being of my animals (cats and dogs and fish) than I have for the 'people' in my family.
Polygamy, line marriages, rings, groups and mobs? Whatever works. As a "child of the '60s" I saw all of those variations in practice and some worked for some people and some didn't. But the "one size fits all" mentality is too authoritarian to appeal to me.
But children? Thank you, thank you, thank you. You've just given me the best argument yet against the "marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman" nonsense. The number of children that have been "married" to each other and to adults over the course of history is amazing. From ancient times to modern, arranged marriages for political or material gain have been exceedingly common, and often the "spouses" were young, even infants. And note that it wasn't just the arrangement that was made for young children. In many cases an actual 'marriage' took place (sometimes by proxy if the children were infants or separated by some distance). So, perhaps "between a male and a female" (I, at least, know of no arranged homosexual marriages) but that at least cracks the people who would interpret the word 'marriage' narrowly.
--Pete
. . . even if marriages with animals/kids/large amounts of people are allowed to get married . . .
Well, first, it is pretty clear that, once again, people are focusing too much on the sexual part of marriage.
Animals? Hell, I'll gladly marry my cats if that means they'll be covered under my health insurance. I've spent a lot more (out of pocket) for the well being of my animals (cats and dogs and fish) than I have for the 'people' in my family.
Polygamy, line marriages, rings, groups and mobs? Whatever works. As a "child of the '60s" I saw all of those variations in practice and some worked for some people and some didn't. But the "one size fits all" mentality is too authoritarian to appeal to me.
But children? Thank you, thank you, thank you. You've just given me the best argument yet against the "marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman" nonsense. The number of children that have been "married" to each other and to adults over the course of history is amazing. From ancient times to modern, arranged marriages for political or material gain have been exceedingly common, and often the "spouses" were young, even infants. And note that it wasn't just the arrangement that was made for young children. In many cases an actual 'marriage' took place (sometimes by proxy if the children were infants or separated by some distance). So, perhaps "between a male and a female" (I, at least, know of no arranged homosexual marriages) but that at least cracks the people who would interpret the word 'marriage' narrowly.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?