Do you support Inter-marriage??

[Simpleton]

Sorry to be presumptuous but my guess is you are not very good with dating/women, and probably are umm a little socially inept - hence the fact that you got along so well with a girl who did not naturally fit in to our society. I could go in to more depth but this praticular portion of social-psychology is way off topic....

Wait a minute, you're suggesting that someone is socially inept because they don't like green hair and pierced nipples? Are you suggesting that women with green hair fit into our society? I hope not, because I don't see too many green haired women, and the ones I do see, are definitely outcasts.

On the subject of piercings, it's really only the nose piercings that I find most unbecoming. Nipple piercings actually make the breasts a little more interesting in my opinion. And women with pierced labias are definitely going places. I mean, the vagina is an ugly organ to begin with. Any little trinkets added to spice it up, are a definite improvement. :lol:

By the way, the dude can't be that bad with women; he managed to marry one. Although, that doesn't really say much, because I know some men that were just snagged by some really overbearing women. I mean, it's not like they had a choice. :lol:

 

[Graeme]

Sorry to be presumptuous but my guess is you are not very good with dating/women, and probably are umm a little socially inept - hence the fact that you got along so well with a girl who did not naturally fit in to our society. I could go in to more depth but this praticular portion of social-psychology is way off topic....

Wait a minute, you're suggesting that someone is socially inept because they don't like green hair and pierced nipples? Are you suggesting that women with green hair fit into our society? I hope not, because I don't see too many green haired women, and the ones I do see, are definitely outcasts.

On the subject of piercings, it's really only the nose piercings that I find most unbecoming. Nipple piercings actually make the breasts a little more interesting in my opinion. And women with pierced labias are definitely going places. I mean, the vagina is an ugly organ to begin with. Any little trinkets added to spice it up, are a definite improvement. :lol:

By the way, the dude can't be that bad with women; he managed to marry one. Although, that doesn't really say much, because I know some men that were just snagged by some really overbearing women. I mean, it's not like they had a choice. :lol:

Simpleton, that is not what I was suggesting at all. but he took what I said exactly as I meant it I think.

Do breasts really need to be more interesting? and what is wrong with the vagina???? are you gay? (that is a serious question)

You can be really bad with women and still get married to a perfectly acceptable woman, generally she will have a similar social ineptness. This is all text book stuff, I am saying nothing new.

Although it does further the argument that we as a species find it far easier to socialize and mate with people like ourselves.



For instance a social butterfly will generally work well with another social butterfly due to the fact that they can both tolerate not always being the center of the other persons life. Both of them will be competely open to the other having many friends including friends of both sexes.
Where as a moderately social person may have problems if his or her significant other spends a lot of time with many people of the opposite sex. A socially inept person (read highly intraverted) would likely find it very hard to cope with there loved one consitantly hanging around with many people of the opposite sex.

 

[Simpleton]

Do breasts really need to be more interesting? and what is wrong with the vagina???? are you gay? (that is a serious question)

I think so. As I have stated in another thread, I don't fully understand the fascination that men have with female breasts. I don't find them to be particularly interesting at all. I mean, there's really nothing to do with them.

Pierced nipples, on the other hand, offer what I term "toys". Meaning, the pierced nipples give the curious mind something to play with and marvel over. Add some chains and whatnot, and you have a veritable human carnival.

As for the vagina, there's really nothing wrong with it. I mean, I guess it's supposed to be that way, but it's obvious that God and/or evolution put very little imagination into its design. The clitoris is clearly in the wrong place. And the whole vagina, at least aesthetically, is really a rather ho hum affair. Especially now that shaving of the pubic region has become fashionable.

I dunno, I just can't imagine that you'd ever see the designer of the vagina working for Apple Computer. :lol:

 

[FiveParadox]

Hear, Hear!

Hear, hear, Simpleton! :lol:

 

[humanbeing]

Re: RE: Do you support Inter-

I do not support inter-marriage or homosexual marriage.

But I do not support heterosexual marriages either.

I don't like the idea of a social contract for that sort of thing, especially one where they get any benefits over the rest of society.

Love doesn't require a social contract, and is not as inflexible as one either.

Anyhow, it's wonderful when people from different (or similar) religion, race, ethnicity, nationality, language, or whatever get together and have a loving relationship.

well, this is dismissing the benefits of a strong family unit, which are numerous. Marriage with the expectation of children serves the born child very well for its development.

Many studies have shown that children with both of their biological parents do better in life than those without. That is across ALL social boundries and wealth classes.

Parents can raise their children together WITHOUT a marital contract. So I am not dismissing anything that you say I am.

Oh absolutely but marriage promotes staying together and provides benefits to those who say they will stay together. You can think of those benefits as reward for helping benefit our economy if you wish.

The fact is that living in sustained units also benefit the economy, groups of people have more disposable income. Much like certain social programs which provide support for people benefit the economy. (Obviously there are limits and hence the term "cost benefit analysis"). This is also why society it self is beneficial by not having everyone do everything for themselves we start to have an economy which allows for growth in said economy.

lol This is turning in to a trans-micro-macro economics lesson


marriage promotes such things, and therefore is deserving of benefits.

If those benefits reward our economy, why not keep them from being applied to just one group, and let them be applied fairly accross the board?

 

[humanbeing]

RE: Do you support Inter-

Originally, married couples were not hammered so hard with income taxes by their state, no?

I don't know exactly how it is in every country now, but shouldn't we just let everyone off this way then, if it benefits the economy?

People are not going to go off and live by themselves when you eliminate the form of marriage that we are talking about. Or do you really believe they will?

 

[lena]

RE: Do you support Inter-

why is this a topic nowadays???????????? a colored girl?????wow I can't believe this...that is unreal........let me guess you are from the 50s...sick sick sick

 

[Graeme]

Humanbeing, I don't understand what you are saying!!

I didn't say the income tax breaks benefit society (although to a certain extent they do and that is why I believe in trying to lower taxes as much as possible)

What I said is a family unit mainly two parents praticularily biological parents who raise children, benefit society. But that raising of the child has to be through-out the childs entire adolecent life.

And to answer your question in the last paragraph, statistically a couple with or without children is more likly to stay together when married. There has to be someway of gaging who is going to stay together and who isn't, also who is more likly to have children. That way, is called marriage, which has a binding legal consequence should the couple break up.
then should they actually have children, they receive additional financial help.

are you trying to say that you want to be forced to give half your savings and things away when you break up with a girlfrend you dated and lived with for a couple years and had no children with, when you decide that she is to much of a lazy bum and not good enough for you???

I didn't think so.

for that there has to be an explicit commitment. Again... That is called marriage.

 

[Graeme]

lena, GROW UP!!!

There is such a thing as race, ethnicity, and religion whether you want to believe it or not. It is a completly worth while topic to discuss, and I have not read one post on here that even comes close to racist.

The fact that we feel more comfertable with people more like us is not some learned trait.. it is primarily biological, inter-racially adopted children do not do NEARLY as well socially/psychologically in general as children adopted by someone of there same race... like-wise a visible minority child even if he or she spends her whole life with people who are all of the same ethnicity (different from his or hers) becomes comfertable much faster when suddenly presented with people of his or her own race.

I actually read in a journal that a limited study was done and children tended to be best friends with someone whom they saw as most like themselves. In fact that many children boast about their similarities with thdir best friends.

I don't know how extensive the study was, but I can certainly remember wanting to be as much like my best friends as possible, when I was a little guy.

So again Lena, please join the conversation... but really GROW UP!!!

 

[shannon]

Absolutely. My wife and myself are from different races/ethnic backgrounds and we get along just fine. We do however (thankfully) share the same religion. Inter marriage between races, ethnicity, nationality and language should be widely accepted in today's society.

The problem arises with inter marriage between different religions.

 

[humanbeing]

Re: RE: Do you support Inter-marriage??

are you trying to say that you want to be forced to give half your savings and things away when you break up with a girlfrend you dated and lived with for a couple years and had no children with, when you decide that she is to much of a lazy bum and not good enough for you???

Well, in no way, shape, or form do I imply that I want this (I don't think so, anyhow)...

I can have an explicit commitment without the government-enforced social contract. If anything, what you've said here justifies my feelings even more about how it's bunk: that the government decides what group of people gets the "right" of marriage, and decides how they shall benefit or be penalized when taking or breaking this contract.

If anything, I am saying that I do not want to be forced, period...

What I said is a family unit mainly two parents praticularily biological parents who raise children, benefit society.

Agreed. Just like if a single parent or two gay people raise children, they can benefit society.

But that raising of the child has to be through-out the childs entire adolecent life.

To maximize this, perhaps the next logical move for the gov't is that they should ban other forms of the "not-so-optimal" child rearing, such as single parent families, homosexual parenting, et cetera...

And have they made a law yet to keep people happy during their wrecked marriages? Y'know, so the next generation benefits.

I'm not implying that you implied this. But it's something to think about!

 

[humanbeing]

RE: Do you support Inter-

There is such a thing as race

Not so much in genetics...

but sadly, there is still in society.

(that is, in many people's minds)

 

[ROBDOG]

I GOT TOGEHTER WITH A GIRL THAT HAD BEN RAISED A MORMAN AND IT WAS FINE WE GOT MARRIED IN A CATHOLIC CHURCH THAT IS MY RELIGION.
WE HAD CHILDREN AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE MADE TO TAKE ANY RELIGION IT'S THERE CHOICE. I WILL SAY THAT AS UNDER 16 YEARS ITS NOT A PROBLEM BUT IT IS TO MY MOTHER IN LAW. SHE TRIED TO SPOIL THE WEDDING DAY AND EVERY THING SHE GETS CHANCE TO CONTROL MUST INVOLVE THE CHURCH. (THATS A PROBLEM) BUT THATS NOT HER RELIGION ITS HER. IF YOU LOVE ANOTHER THEN BE WITH THEM AND TO HELL WITH OTHERS ITS THE COUPLE THAT ARE IMPORTANT.

 

[Andem]

Interesting topic. I didn't actually read it before, but I'm probably going against the general consensus of this thread.. but I am very protective of my European roots (English/German/Canadian -- all equally important) and our culture. I wouldn't want anyone in my family to change that really. I have pride in my history and my roots, and I wouldn't all of a sudden want my child or my nephew to be not part of that and share that with say, Asian or African.

I know some people who are mixed. I have to say that, with maybe sounding racist, Asian and European mixtures have been very nice and stable people. The people that I know who are mixed European and African -- (or African-American, Caribbean-African-American, whatever -- lets just use the word black) -- have a lot of troubles with their life. They may have been raised by a white mother or father, but they are usually part of a black community that doesn't even fully accept them; with respect to the gist I get is that black urban community -- which is reaching into the non-urban black youth -- are pretty racist towards whites. As reflected in their popular music lyrics.

Anyways, my opinion is its best to stick to your own race unless you are prepared to face problems with the upbringing of your child.

You can't just forget about your roots and dramatically change millenia of separate evolution.



On that note: I have a 'mixed' friend who's had a strange life so far when it comes to self-identity. His appearance is not exactly of either race. Another friend I have looks 100% European and has never had any problems.

 

[fuzzylogix]

What racial profiling that is, Andem.
It works between Asian and Caucasian, but not African and Caucasian????

Marriages fall apart because people cant get along. Society just likes to attribute it to visible differences like religion or colour.
What about all the marriages within ones cultural/colour/religious group that fall apart??? Anyway, one is just as likely to have religious differences WITHIN one's own religion. To say that one shouldnt marry outside ones own race or religion is similar to saying one shouldnt marry a golfer if you dont play golf. All marriages have significant differences between the partners in thought and ideology and looks. The foolish people are only those who dont discuss their differences and come to certain understandings and acceptances about them prior to marriage. Most couples who intermarry have come to their own acceptance and recognition of those differences all ready, and in fact delight in the spice and interest the differences bring to a marriage. They also have come to the recognition that some people in society will shun them, and they have learned to just avoid those pathetic people.

Most marriages break down over financial differences or stress from jobs etc, not from a couple suddenly realizing "Hey- you're black and Im white- what was I thinking!!!!" or "Holy Smokes! I never realized that you're being Muslim meant we cant celebrate Christmas!!"

As for children of mixed marriage- lucky them. Nature likes races to mix because it adds to gene pool selection and helps avoid pairing recessive bad traits, and the reward that Nature gives us for this mixing is that the children are usually incredibly good looking and healthy.
How lucky for children to also learn more about the world by being exposed to two religions, two cultures, two sets of ideas.

Bravo to intermarriage.

 

[fuzzylogix]

1003 views and:
1. Not on the main list of topic discussions
2. Noone with any more views?

 

[Graeme]

My cousin is marrying a muslim, she is christian. Now both of them are of the most liberal of denominations in their respective religions (united for her, and he is Indian-muslim I am not sure which denom. but it is pretty liberal)

Anyway he's a great guy, and his family is good, the two sides got along very well, all of the less "liberal" folk including myself had no problems, in fact even the more conservative christians who were very worried before the engagement party, were very accepting once everyone met each other.

I must say the excellent Indian food probably helped the situation a lot!

 

[fuzzylogix]

Well, now THAT could be the downfall of their marriage!!!!
The way to a man's heart is through his stomach, so she had better learn how to make those yummy biryanis and curries and nan bread just like his momma!!!

I love Indian food- yet another advantage of a mixed marriage- someone brings to the table things other than hot dogs and hamburgers!!!!

 

[Graeme]

Re: RE: Do you support Inter-marriage??

are you trying to say that you want to be forced to give half your savings and things away when you break up with a girlfrend you dated and lived with for a couple years and had no children with, when you decide that she is to much of a lazy bum and not good enough for you???

Well, in no way, shape, or form do I imply that I want this (I don't think so, anyhow)...

I can have an explicit commitment without the government-enforced social contract. If anything, what you've said here justifies my feelings even more about how it's bunk: that the government decides what group of people gets the "right" of marriage, and decides how they shall benefit or be penalized when taking or breaking this contract.

If anything, I am saying that I do not want to be forced, period...

Well you aren't forced, but if you want to make the commitment legal than you are given certain tax breaks like income sharing tax benefits, but if you break that commitment which you had legalized then you are stuck possibly still with income sharing (if you were making significantly more than the other person) and everything you made while together is split down the middle (or at some precentage the judge deems fit).

Why shouldn't people be able to enter in to a standardized legal contract like marriage. (I am only dealing with one aspect there are obviously more)

What I said is a family unit mainly two parents praticularily biological parents who raise children, benefit society.

Agreed. Just like if a single parent or two gay people raise children, they can benefit society.

But that raising of the child has to be through-out the childs entire adolecent life.

To maximize this, perhaps the next logical move for the gov't is that they should ban other forms of the "not-so-optimal" child rearing, such as single parent families, homosexual parenting, et cetera...

And have they made a law yet to keep people happy during their wrecked marriages? Y'know, so the next generation benefits.

I'm not implying that you implied this. But it's something to think about!

Well a single parent does receive help from the government (if they need it) but that doesn't really enter in to an argument about giving benefits to married people who are likely to bare children.

Two gay people can't bare children well at least not among themselves, yes they can raise children, but (and this may be a social thing) children raised by gay parents are not as well adjusted as children with both a mother and a father.) cite: this is from studies which have been published in child psychology and cognitive science texts/journals, I do not have them with me right now so I can not give you the specific study notes. All of the studies admit significant methodological challenges. No study prior to 1978 is of any significance and nothing was published in a major journal prior to 1978.



"not-so-optimal" child rearing I think should be contorlled by law (and it is in many places) Not to the extent where we remove children from their biological parent - I think that would be wrong, but maybe to disallow "not-so-optimal"'s to adopt, or at minimum to put them at the bottom of the list.

I certainly believe there is a good argument that it may be better for a child grow up in a homosexual home than an orphanage, but children don't grow up in orphanages in Canada anymore.

My suggestion (and this may already be the case) is that the "not-so-optimal" parents be at the end of the list, and ONLY if there is no optimal parental placement available should they be allowed to adopt.

 

[Graeme]

Re: RE: Do you support Inter-marriage??

Well, now THAT could be the downfall of their marriage!!!!
The way to a man's heart is through his stomach, so she had better learn how to make those yummy biryanis and curries and nan bread just like his momma!!!

I love Indian food- yet another advantage of a mixed marriage- someone brings to the table things other than hot dogs and hamburgers!!!!

lol, that's what I told her!