Gay marriage

Okie · Post by **Okie** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:53 am

William Ess wrote: I didn't know you needed a blood test to get a marriage licence. As for polygamy, any man who wants more than one wife (at the same time) wants his head examining.

The age of consent is an interesting question. In Britain it is (I think) 16 and it is probably the same in most parts of the civilised world. Yet it was not always so. The age of the heroine in the world's best-known love story was 13 - and she was pressed to marry because her contemporaries had been married for more than a year and had children. I believe the second wife of Richard II was about the same age.
Yes, here you must have a blood test done before they issue a license. At least they did when i got married. You typically had to wait a week after you applied for your license to actually get it. Some states here did not require a week wait. Arkansas was one. I think Nevada too allowed a quickie wedding.

I dont know when they decided the age of consent to be 16 here. Not even sure its 16 in all the states. But my granny got married at 13. But most states consider it rape to have sex with a person under 16 even if they are willing. Some school teachers here have done time in prison for doing that. One female teacher had to do time and after she got out the the student turned 16 they got married.

But Warren Jeffs was on the FBIs most wanted list for his practices of setting up marriages between undeage girls and middle aged men. He would expel lots of young men from the cult to make it possible to have a lot of young girls to marry his older friends. Some had forty wives. Strange the wives didnt seem to mind. There was one major problem with so many men having many wives is they could not provide for them and so the welfare system had to support them.

William Ess · Post by **William Ess** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:05 am

Okie wrote: Yes, here you must have a blood test done before they issue a license. At least they did when i got married. You typically had to wait a week after you applied for your license to actually get it. Some states here did not require a week wait. Arkansas was one. I think Nevada too allowed a quickie wedding.

.

What is the reason for the blood test? It is the first time I have heard of it. Over here the banns have to be read in church for three Sundays in Succession but that is as painful as it gets.

William Ess · Post by **William Ess** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:07 am

Okie wrote: I dont know when they decided the age of consent to be 16 here. Not even sure its 16 in all the states. But my granny got married at 13. But most states consider it rape to have sex with a person under 16 even if they are willing. Some school teachers here have done time in prison for doing that. One female teacher had to do time and after she got out the the student turned 16 they got married.

.

I have heard of these schoolmistresses who seduce their pupils, alas I was not so blessed when I was at school. Pity.

William Ess · Post by **William Ess** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:09 am

Okie wrote: But Warren Jeffs was on the FBIs most wanted list for his practices of setting up marriages between undeage girls and middle aged men. He would expel lots of young men from the cult to make it possible to have a lot of young girls to marry his older friends. Some had forty wives. Strange the wives didnt seem to mind. There was one major problem with so many men having many wives is they could not provide for them and so the welfare system had to support them.

I have never understood the fascination for young girls. To me, woman don't start to get interesting until they're approaching 40.

Okie · Post by **Okie** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:48 am

William Ess wrote: What is the reason for the blood test? It is the first time I have heard of it. Over here the banns have to be read in church for three Sundays in Succession but that is as painful as it gets.
I think I pointed out that I was not sure of th ereason for a blood test but I think it was to make sure neither had disease like syplillis. They may have also made sure you were not to closely related. In some societys that last part is of no consequence. Like the Egpytians wanting to keep royalty in the family so they married relatives. I think they got some mentally disturbed Royalty.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:15 am

Okie wrote: I think I pointed out that I was not sure of th ereason for a blood test but I think it was to make sure neither had disease like syplillis. They may have also made sure you were not to closely related. In some societys that last part is of no consequence. Like the Egpytians wanting to keep royalty in the family so they married relatives. I think they got some mentally disturbed Royalty.

the blood tests are also performed to identify couplings that are likely to bring forth certain recessive genetic disorders, such as Tay-Sachs disease.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:37 am

William Ess wrote: I doubt if you would understand the answer, so there is little point my offering one.I'm pretty sure Lulu's intelligence level can handle it :yh_eyebro Besides, others of us enjoy watching you paint yourself into corners too.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:46 am

William Ess wrote: It [recognizing homosexual marriage]does an extraordinary amount of harm because to place a homosexual relationship on an equal footing with marriage (and I do not recognise the validity of homosexual 'marriages') weakens the estate of marriage and brings it down to the level of an ordinary relationship. Thus it loses its sanctity.I looked it up to be sure:

sanc‧ti‧ty /ˈsÃ¦ŋktɪti/

–noun, plural -ties. 1.holiness, saintliness, or godliness. 2.sacred or hallowed character: the inviolable sanctity of the temple. 3.a sacred thing.

It's not the government's place to bestow sanctity. Separation and all that.

William Ess wrote: It harms society as a whole. The causes of much of what you see around you - as someone else has pointed out - has been due to the erosion of the marriage balance and the last thing society needs now is something that weakens the estate further.

How can recognizing commitment and loyalty possibly erode society??

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:36 am

SnoozeControl wrote: Do these discussions ever open or change anyone's mind on a subject? The same points are made over and over again, without resolution.

That is true, Snooze, but then how can we resolve people's teachings, ideas, conflicts, etc? Maybe just maybe, somebody might say something that makes a difference in another's thinking or way of handling something. If not at least it makes for good discussion, in my opinion.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 7:05 am

Unless you're just incapable of "understanding" murky mythology! :wah: