God Hates You.......

@old europe,

I have said that my definition of TRADITIONAL marriage spans at least 4000 to 6000 years and it has. The laws governing marriage have certainly changed over all that time, but the definition of marriage has not. The laws ordering the civil contract are not the definition.

2 Replies

@old europe,

the Greeks were a couple thousand years ago, the Samurai were a small fringe group of a small society, hardly evidence of your claim that formal gay unions have been the norm in history.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

I have said that my definition of TRADITIONAL marriage spans at least 4000 to 6000 years and it has.

So? You've made a claim, and you have so far failed to support it with any kind of evidence.

Is that all you base your argument upon?

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

I have said that my definition of TRADITIONAL marriage spans at least 4000 to 6000 years and it has.

By the way, here's what you actually posted:

Foxfyre wrote:

My definition of marriage is the same definition that spans at least 4000 to 6000 years. I suppose you could consider that an unacceptably small sampling, but in my tiny world, I choose to think that is rather significant.

Just saying.

1 Reply

@old europe,

there is no mention of homosexual marriage in history, the homosexual unions were usually in addition too and always outside of marriage. Considering the consistency of the history books that marriage has always been between men and women, that homosexual unions don't count, Foxfyre has no need to prove her statement. If you want to prove that history as written is wrong have at it, document your argument and then let us look at your work.

2 Replies

Recent historical examples of so-called "True Christians" doing "god's work".

In 1957, producers of the Ed Sullivan Show instruct cameramen to show Elvis Presley only from the waist up. Fearing the effects of the "hedonistic, tribal rhythms" of rock and roll music, Chicago's Cardinal Stritch bans all popular music from all Catholic-run schools.

Congress considers legislation that would require song lyrics to be screened and altered by a review committee before being broadcast or offered for sale. In 1958 the Mutual Broadcasting System refuses to play all rock and roll records on its network music programs, calling it "distorted, monotonous, noisy music."

Now "True Christians" are hassling fags for wanting to marry like in the more civilized Canada.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

there is no mention of homosexual marriage in history, the homosexual unions were usually in addition too and always outside of marriage.

You think that someone falsified the Theodosian Code? All the books about historiae iuris antiqui have to be rewritten?

But perhaps someone made the Code 9.8.3 only because he wanted to write something ...

1 Reply

Supplicium Fustuarium.

1 Reply

@Chumly,

Chumly wrote:

Recent historical examples of so-called "True Christians" doing "god's work".

In 1957, producers of the Ed Sullivan Show instruct cameramen to show Elvis Presley only from the waist up. Fearing the effects of the "hedonistic, tribal rhythms" of rock and roll music, Chicago's Cardinal Stritch bans all popular music from all Catholic-run schools.

Congress considers legislation that would require song lyrics to be screened and altered by a review committee before being broadcast or offered for sale. In 1958 the Mutual Broadcasting System refuses to play all rock and roll records on its network music programs, calling it "distorted, monotonous, noisy music."

Now "True Christians" are hassling fags for wanting to marry like in the more civilized Canada.

What do you consider a "true" Christian. Where is the documentation that those who refused these things were Christians at all and especially what you call "true" Christians. The fact that Catholics are mentioned does not cover all Chrisitians by any means. One cardinal from Chicago does not represent Christianity as a whole.

As usual, all pomp and no ceremony.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

I am not an historian, I don't know to what degree homosexual history has been expunged or altered by the heterosexual majority that had an interest in degrading the validity of homosexual unions. I do know that history has it that homosexuals have not been allowed marriage, the historical record is consistent on this, so if the gay rights proponents want to claim that history supports their claim of rights then they must get their version of history entered into the record. This will require evidence. Till then there is no need to argue about history supporting homosexual marriage, the evidence is all on on the side of "no, it does not".

The Theodosian Code seems to outlaw homosexual marriage, thus implying that it at some point took place, but this is not clear to me at this point. There is too much dispute about the translation.
http://books.google.com/books?id=5qQaInUxSfwC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=Theodosian+Code+homosexual&source=bl&ots=63BDQ6op-N&sig=GrvLDy1cH5SU3-H8lXCsOqVh4ko&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA26,M1
page 26
http://books.google.com/books?id=rR84DKdC4pEC&pg=PA229&lpg=PA229&dq=Theodosian+Code+homosexual&source=web&ots=7snsUwM0q5&sig=TpnjXeltc88bijgCp6O-UIltMZE&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result
page 229

1 Reply

@Chumly,

Chumly wrote:

Supplicium Fustuarium.

That's more about sexual behaviour in general ... some could argue.

The Theodosian Code 9.8.3 expressis verbis refers to marriage, marriage between men.

-------------------------------

In the Hadrian exhibition last year in London (which I visited), it was questioned if Hadrian and his lover Antinuous really were officially married. (See: Hadrian: Empire and Conflict, exclusive exhibition catalogue, British Museum Press, London, 2008)

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Chumly wrote:

Supplicium Fustuarium.

That's more about sexual behaviour in general ... some could argue.

Or between free born men, rather than between a Roman citizen and a slave or a non-Roman... and again, we're only talking about the passive role in a homosexual encounter...

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

The Theodosian Code seems to outlaw homosexual marriage, thus implying that it at some point took place, but this is not clear to me at this point.

Well, it not only seems but it does outlaw homosexual marriage.

I've somewhere a copy of an papyrus with the text. I will try to find it - but any good law library should have it as well.

In Roman Law - be it 200 years ago or today - laws are made (at least generally) to prevend something happening ... again, not in a kind of "anticipatory obedience" (like: "let's try to imagine what bad stuff all the bad boys and girls can think of and make laws to prohibit it").

hawkeye10 wrote:

There is too much dispute about the translation.

I sincerely doubt that someone has difficulties with the translation. Those two quotes dispute Boswell's conclusions - but Boswell was and is discussed generally by many, from the first days onwards Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality was published.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

there is no mention of homosexual marriage in history

There certainly is. Marcus Valerius Martialis. Nero's marriage with two male lovers.

And, as Walter points out, the Theodosian Code refers to marriage between two men expressis verbis: quum vir nubit in feminam viris porrecturam...

Would have been kind of pointless to outlaw a practice that didn't exist, eh?

0 Replies

There is actually ample evidence of same sex 'marriage' existing, sometimes even celebrated, in many ancient cultures including the Roman Empire, Asia, and Africa. These were the reasonably rare exception, however, and not the norm nor were they commonly practiced among the populations as a whole. None bore any resemblance to traditional marriage.

However, if we stipulate that evidence of such 'marriages' existing in the ancient world is an argument for making that the norm today, then surely such people defending same sex marriage on that basis won't object if we adopt other unusual marriage practices from those ancient times either? Fair is fair.

Let's start with such marriages in ancient China that were performed between a man and a boy, for the man's pleasure of course, and then after a few years this union was dissolved the the parties were married off to women in a traditional ceremoney so that they could begin having kids and raising a family.

3 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Further we don't have all the Theodosian code but what I remember of what we do have seemed to focus on wills and final testaments and inheritances. It would be pretty difficult to use it to sanction 'gay marriage' as the norm for that era.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

There is actually ample evidence of same sex 'marriage' existing, sometimes even celebrated, in many ancient cultures including the Roman Empire, Asia, and Africa. These were the reasonably rare exception, however, and not the norm nor were they commonly practiced among the populations as a whole. None bore any resemblance to traditional marriage.

Really any resembalnce? You think those sources quoted in law history literature are false? Any proof for that?

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Not you too Walter. I didn't say they were false. I simply stipulated my understanding of what they actually were. Now if you have something authoritative to use to educate me in a different point of view, bring it out here and let's look at it.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Well, and how should I understand your: "None bore any resemblance to traditional marriage."?

1 Reply

Surely references to the Theodosian Code are an argument against the proposal to officially sanction same sex unions.

It was a nightmare society to live in that had it and it all ended in tears and rubble after centuries of pain and suffering of an unimaginable order.

1 Reply

God Hates You.......

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know