Re: POLITICS - Purpose of Marriage

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/25/04 6:24:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,

readnwrite@... writes:

> I didn't say that is the reason homosexuals should not be able to marry. I

> was saying that homosexuals by definition cannot marry, unless of course

> they marry someone of the opposite sex. I was defending the definition of

> marriage as between a man and a woman, and giving support to that

> definition that has been in place for thousands of years.

Right... that's the point I was arguing against. You claimed that the

marriage " by definition " required the intent to procreate, and tried to support

this

Biblically. I argued that the Bible does not define marriage as inherently

constituting the intent to procreate.

> I mentioned that ONE of God's purposes for marriage is procreation, but I

> never said that it was a moral requisite to marriage.

Fair enough. But I argued against both points, and the argument is the same.

The Bible neither considers procreation a definitional purpose of marriage,

nor considers it a moral requisite. The argument against either point is the

same.

However, it seems

> that our discussion went WAY off on a tangent, with you arguing against a

> twisted version of what I had originally said.

I wasn't twisting what you said. You claimed that the procreational purpose

of marriage was definitional, and all my arguments apply.

I don't claim that procreation cannot be a purpose of marriage. I simply

claim that it is not a *definitional* purpose of marriage.

Chris

[Guest guest]

From: <ChrisMasterjohn@...>

> In a message dated 2/25/04 6:24:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,

> readnwrite@... writes:

>

>> I didn't say that is the reason homosexuals should not be able to marry.

I

>> was saying that homosexuals by definition cannot marry, unless of course

>> they marry someone of the opposite sex. I was defending the definition

of

>> marriage as between a man and a woman, and giving support to that

>> definition that has been in place for thousands of years.

>

> Right... that's the point I was arguing against. You claimed that the

> marriage " by definition " required the intent to procreate, and tried to

support this

> Biblically. I argued that the Bible does not define marriage as

inherently

> constituting the intent to procreate.

<BIG SIGH> Where are you getting that I claimed that the definition of

marriage required the INTENT to procreate? I've never that, and if I did I

certainly didn't mean to say it. I think I've already made this

clarification at least once before, though.

> I wasn't twisting what you said. You claimed that the procreational

purpose

> of marriage was definitional, and all my arguments apply.

I'm not sure what you mean that I claimed that the procreational purpose of

marriage was definitional. But it really doesn't matter.

What I HAVE said is that one of God's purposes for creating the institution

of marriage is for the procreation of the human race. I stand by that and

will continue to stand by that. If you disagree, fine, I agree to disagree

with you. I truly have no more interest in continuing this debate.

> I don't claim that procreation cannot be a purpose of marriage. I simply

> claim that it is not a *definitional* purpose of marriage.

And I have no energy left to try to figure out the difference, nor do I

want to.

Blessings to you Chris.

Fern

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/25/04 11:16:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,

readnwrite@... writes:

> What I HAVE said is that one of God's purposes for creating the institution

> of marriage is for the procreation of the human race. I stand by that and

> will continue to stand by that. If you disagree, fine, I agree to disagree

> with you. I truly have no more interest in continuing this debate.

I probably disagree with you, but I'd have to hear more of what you consider

to be the implications of your view. However, you did claim that this purpose

was definitional, and if you don't know what that means, that's probably

where the confusion lies.

Chris