# What is your definition of marriage?



## Ralphy1 (Jan 26, 2015)

With the Supreme Court taking on the issue it made me think of my own definition.  Methinks that it is simply between two humans over the age of eighteen.  Your opinion will be tolerated but don't expect agreement, at least from me...


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 26, 2015)

Marriage is a relationship in which one person is always right....................the other is the husband.






couldn't resist... saw it on FB.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 26, 2015)

A  Legal union blessed by a registrar or minister between 2 adults..nothing more than that IMO..


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 26, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Marriage is a relationship in which one person is always right....................the other is the husband.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




LOL...that's a Given...


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 26, 2015)

Actually that is correct...  Marriage is a legal contract.  period..   BUT as most things humans do... it's been made into some mystical magical religous preordained hoopla ordered by God and created for the purpose of manufacturing other humans.  It's also a HUGE cash cow for the Church and the ecconomy..


----------



## Ken N Tx (Jan 26, 2015)

If gays can not reproduce, why are there so many of them


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 26, 2015)

Hmmm, but how about between several humans?  I would have had several wives but I couldn't have handled the nagging...  nthego:


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 26, 2015)

When I was teaching in the catholic school I taught the standard three definitions of marriage

1. A civil contract between two people that has three essential elements. 
The contract is legally recognised and is registered. This is "de jure" marriage.
a) both parties must be free to marry - legally old enough and not already married
b) both parties must consent  to the marriage contract free from duress
c) the commitment is a solemn one, made before witnesses and binding on both parties. It confers rights and responsibilities on both partners.

2. An informal union that has the same characteristics of a "de jure" marriage to an outside observer.
Lacking a formal ceremony or any registration, the union may still be regarded as marriage. It is considered "de facto" marriage.

3. Sacramental marriage is a religious concept. It has additional layers to the secular definitions.
For Christians it means a monogamous union of a man and a woman and is, for the most part, considered to be indissoluble. This relationship, between husband and wife, is considered to be the most fundamental of all relations, including the parent/child bond because it is for life. Children grow up and leave the family home. This is a very high standard and marriages don't always last the distance which is the reason why most churches are prepared to sanction divorce.

Faiths other than Christianity have different theologies regarding marriage but if they want to have the unions recognised in law they must meet the requirements of #1 above. Catholics regard marriage as a sacrament, protestants on the whole do not and are more relaxed about remarriage after divorce.

For myself, my personal view of marriage is in line with the traditional teachings of St Paul. 
That's why I've survived nearly 52 years married to the same man.


----------



## Ken N Tx (Jan 26, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> Hmmm, but how about between several humans?  I would have had several wives but I couldn't have handled the nagging...  nthego:



Move to Utah..


----------



## Ken N Tx (Jan 26, 2015)

https://www.seniorforums.com/showthread.php/11718-Headlines-from-2059


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 26, 2015)

Fifty-two years of marriage?  St.Paul should give you a pension!  :love_heart:


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 26, 2015)

Ralphy, it is very special when the husband of your old age is the same as the husband of your youth.
Growing old together has its advantages.

We don't hold hands these days like we used to. 
It's more like we're stopping each other from falling flat on our faces.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 26, 2015)

52 years married?...you got married when I was just a tot...wow!! That's a loooong time...


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 26, 2015)

Hmmm, well, I'll have to use a walker to keep from falling on mine...


----------



## Ken N Tx (Jan 26, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Ralphy, it is very special when the husband of your old age is the same as the husband of your youth.
> Growing old together has its advantages.
> 
> We don't hold hands these days like we used to.
> It's more like we're stopping each other from falling flat on our faces.



I have 51 years of marriage in I hold her hand while outside so she don't go shopping!!


----------



## BobF (Jan 26, 2015)

I am 81 the wife is 84.    We have been married for over 50 years.    We should have known better by our 30's, but we did not.   It has actually been a good 50 years.


----------



## Debby (Jan 26, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> ......
> We don't hold hands these days like we used to.
> It's more like we're stopping each other from falling flat on our faces.




Aah, the tender moments in old age!


----------



## Ameriscot (Jan 26, 2015)

Marriage is a union between two adults.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 26, 2015)

I remember when those opposed to same sex marriage were convinced that people would want to marry their livestock next..  SO perhaps "union between two adults of the same species" is more specific..  lol!!


----------



## Ken N Tx (Jan 26, 2015)

What if it is your son or daughter?? Would you support them??


----------



## ClassicRockr (Jan 26, 2015)

My definition of marriage is between a man and a woman. *Before* bashing me, REMEMBER, you are entitled to your beliefs and I am entitled to mine. 

I've been married for 15 years now and absolutely *LOVE* it!! Was married before, as was my wife. Anyway, we have so much in common it's almost scary. Except for when she is at work, during the weekdays, we do almost everything together.


----------



## Sunny (Jan 26, 2015)

I have absolutely no problem with gay marriage, and think it's about time. The only issue I have a slight problem with is the use of the words husband and wife. Somehow, when I hear a man talking about his "husband," I kind of do a double take. 

Actually, those words are archaic and should probably be relegated to Olde English, both for gays and for straights. Why not have everybody refer to their "spouse?"


----------



## SifuPhil (Jan 26, 2015)

I think I should probably marry my laptop.

I'm always putting my hands on it, poking it and stroking it, looking at it and asking it to do things for me. In return I keep it clean, well-maintained and happy. 

I will call it my "lapspouse".


----------



## oakapple (Jan 26, 2015)

Ah, but can it make you a cup of tea Phil?


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 26, 2015)

Ken N Tx said:


> What if it is your son or daughter?? Would you support them??



are you talking to me?


----------



## SifuPhil (Jan 26, 2015)

oakapple said:


> Ah, but can it make you a cup of tea Phil?



Actually ...



A tea kettle that is powered by a USB port on your computer! 

Expect to receive an invitation next fall ...


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jan 26, 2015)

Marriage is a loving friendship, 38 years for us now, and we still hold hands sometimes and do romantic things often.  I agree with QS, it's just a legal contract between two consenting adults.


----------



## oakapple (Jan 26, 2015)

Hmmmn, alright, well, can it make you an apple cake [to go with the cup of tea?]


----------



## jujube (Jan 26, 2015)

An old couple toddled into the lawyers office.

Old man: "Sonny, we're here to get one of them divorces."

Lawyer: "Well, I can certainly arrange that, but are you sure?"

Old man:  "Yep, we're sure."

Lawyer: "OK, let's start with some basic facts.  How long have you been married?"

Old man: "We been married 75 years come March."

Lawyer:  "And is this something that has just cropped up?  Can I help you reconcile?"

Old man: "Well, thanks, sonny, but we been thinkin' and plannin' on this for about...uh....73, 74 years now."

Lawyer:  "What made you wait so long?"

Old man:  "We was just waitin' for the kids to die."


----------



## Falcon (Jan 26, 2015)

A licensed agreement that prevents your offspring from being called bastards.


----------



## ClassicRockr (Jan 26, 2015)

Funny, but you've got a real point here! A lot of people support gay marriage of people they don't know, but if it were their own daughter or son.......now *THAT* would be a tough call. I mean, could any of you here go to a wedding and see your own daughter or son give the traditional "marital kiss" to their own sex. Gives me the creeps even thinking about it. One word description for that.......YUK!! 



Ken N Tx said:


> What if it is your son or daughter?? Would you support them??


----------



## oakapple (Jan 26, 2015)

I must admit, Classic Rockr, it would make me feel very uncomfortable too.I do think that marriage should be between a man and a woman, and would have liked the  civil union to continue for gays , but instead we have legalised marriage here now.We are all, as you say, entitled to our own views on this matter.


----------



## darroll (Jan 26, 2015)

Now some guy is going to marry his daughter.
Next someone will want to marry their pet rock.
We have lost our sanity.


----------



## Ken N Tx (Jan 26, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> are you talking to me?


Anyone..


----------



## jujube (Jan 26, 2015)

I'm thinking of marrying my gingerbread man that I got for Christmas.  He's sweet, he's dark and handsome, he's quiet and if he pisses me off, I can bite his head off.


----------



## Debby (Jan 26, 2015)

Ken N Tx said:


> What if it is your son or daughter?? Would you support them??




I'd most definitely support my girls if she/they were lesbians.  I would figure that is the way they were born, no blame to be attached and they deserve to have someone to love and share life with from both a spiritual and a legal perspective just like I do.

Personally, I can't see the importance of the word 'marriage/married' and suspect that to a degree it's symbolic as an indicator that they've 'arrived' if you know what I mean.  But then maybe it isn't important to me because I'm not living with the discrimination that they've endured.  Look at it this way folks, now they have at least as much aggravation to look forward to if things don't work out, in the same way as every other couple who divorces does.  Or maybe they'll be the ones on this seniors forum in 30 years and will be talking about their spouses of 40,50 years.  Who knows eh?  And we'll all be archived!


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 26, 2015)

ClassicRockr said:


> Funny, but you've got a real point here! A lot of people support gay marriage of people they don't know, but if it were their own daughter or son.......now *THAT* would be a tough call. I mean, could any of you here go to a wedding and see your own daughter or son give the traditional "marital kiss" to their own sex. Gives me the creeps even thinking about it. One word description for that.......YUK!!




I most certainly could.   My child is my child... nothing changes that.   If my son were happy.. in love... a good and productive person, I would have no problem witnessing his marriage to a same sex partner.  Sexuality is only a very small part of a person.  We are a whole lot more than sex organs.  I prefer to see the whole person and not obscess on what or who they do in bed.  I'm not sure why some people put so much importance on that.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jan 26, 2015)

Debby said:


> I'd most definitely support my girls if she/they were lesbians.  I would figure that is the way they were born, no blame to be attached and they deserve to have someone to love and share life with from both a spiritual and a legal perspective just like I do.
> 
> Personally, I can't see the importance of the word 'marriage/married' and suspect that to a degree it's symbolic as an indicator that they've 'arrived' if you know what I mean.  But then maybe it isn't important to me because I'm not living with the discrimination that they've endured.  Look at it this way folks, now they have at least as much aggravation to look forward to if things don't work out, in the same way as every other couple who divorces does.  Or maybe they'll be the ones on this seniors forum in 30 years and will be talking about their spouses of 40,50 years.  Who knows eh?  And we'll all be archived!



Well said, Debby and QS, I totally agree.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jan 26, 2015)

oakapple said:


> Hmmmn, alright, well, can it make you an apple cake [to go with the cup of tea?]



I doubt it - er, _she_ - could. 

But then, I can't do 10,000 mathematical calculations per second in my head.

Our strengths and weaknesses will balance each other out and see us through. :love_heart:


----------



## Ameriscot (Jan 26, 2015)

Ken N Tx said:


> What if it is your son or daughter?? Would you support them??



Yes, I would.


----------



## Ameriscot (Jan 26, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I remember when those opposed to same sex marriage were convinced that people would want to marry their livestock next..  SO perhaps "union between two adults of the same species" is more specific..  lol!!



OMG I know. Totally stupid! Some suggested that would open the door to marrying kids or siblings etc. Idiots.


----------



## Butterfly (Jan 27, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> Yes, I would.



I would, too.


----------



## Kadee (Jan 27, 2015)

I don't normally get into this type of posts and I do believe in live and let live. Most of you may remember me mentioning about being involved in Social Ballroom dancing. 
We attended a ball, and also attending that ball as its open to anyone, was gay male and female couples and it really gave me a sick feeling watching the male couples doing a close contact rumba dance, only ever seen them once


----------



## rkunsaw (Jan 27, 2015)

Marriage is a union between a man and a woman.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 27, 2015)

Kadee46 said:


> I don't normally get into this type of posts and I do believe in live and let live. Most of you may remember me mentioning about being involved in Social Ballroom dancing.
> We attended a ball, and also attending that ball as its open to anyone, was gay male and female couples and it really gave me a sick feeling watching the male couples doing a close contact rumba dance, only ever seen them once



I have a question..  Did it give you the same "sick feeling" watching two females do the rumba dance?   Probably not.   I'm convinced that seeing two females in close contact dancing does not elicit the same viseral response as watching two males.  Women have always been allowed to dance together, hold hands,  show affection to one another that men are not allowed to.  This, I believe is less to do about the males' sexuality than it is cultural standards... Particularly Western.   Men in other cultures have more freedom to express emotion to one another.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 27, 2015)

Straight men like watching lesbian scenes in movies but not gay men getting it on...


----------



## Ameriscot (Jan 27, 2015)

rkunsaw said:


> Marriage is a union between a man and a woman.



Well legally in many places it also includes gay couples.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 27, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> Straight men like watching lesbian scenes in movies but not gay men getting it on...



Yes... that is exactly my point..  Both sexes seem to enjoy some girl on girl action in pornos...I don't expect many people here, who are avidly opposed to gay marriage to admit it,  but I would venture to guess a few of those pornos have been watched and enjoyed.     YET the thought of two men together turns their stomachs. Why the difference?


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 27, 2015)

Men are more stimulated visually than women when it comes to sex.  Straight men love to see attractive naked women no matter who they are doing, but we have no interest in men's bodies.  BTW, you don't have to watch porno anymore to get your titillation as movies and cable shows are loaded with all kinds of sex...


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 27, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> Men are more stimulated visually than women when it comes to sex.  Straight men love to see attractive naked women no matter who they are doing, but we have no interest in men's bodies.  BTW, you don't have to watch porno anymore to get your titillation as movies and cable shows are loaded with all kinds of sex...



I don't think it's just men...  Women don't seem to have the aversion to seeing women touch as they do to men..  I contend that it's more culturally acceptable. Women have always been freer to express affection than men.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 27, 2015)

Affection maybe, but when it comes to ****** touching men definitely do more thinking and acting on it if they can...


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 27, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> Affection maybe, but when it comes to ****** touching men definitely do more thinking and acting on it if they can...



I don't even believe women are as adverse to two women in porn films as they are to two men.  I believe more would have a problem seeing two men.    THAT by the way is just my guess... not being a fan of such things.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 27, 2015)

Never would have thought that you are a fan...:love_heart:


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 27, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> Never would have thought that you are a fan...:love_heart:



I'm not.... but thanks anyway


----------



## Kadee (Jan 27, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I have a question..  Did it give you the same "sick feeling" watching two females do the rumba dance?   Probably not.   I'm convinced that seeing two females in close contact dancing does not elicit the same viseral response as watching two males.  Women have always been allowed to dance together, hold hands,  show affection to one another that men are not allowed to.  This, I believe is less to do about the males' sexuality than it is cultural standards... Particularly Western.   Men in other cultures have more freedom to express emotion to one another.


To answer your question it was yes and no as they didn't go to the same extent in the dance as the males
I have always wondered why we frown when we see males dancing together, as it's quite common to see women dancing together at most dances we attend ( not parteners) many older women have lost their husbands and still enjoy going out to a dance and often that's the only way they get to dance, sadly ballroom dancing is dying out


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 27, 2015)

I know people are going to do what they want, pick their mates, I don't even see anything wrong with two guys or two gals getting married.  But there is always the same question in my head about how do you explain to little ones growing up when they ask things like "how come I have an inni, and he has an outi".  I guess you have to go through the whole song and dance of "well, when boys marry boys, or girls marry girls, they can adopt children, or get artificially inseminated".  I guess I answered my own question.

I know from my religious roots that it's a no no, but if two people are kind and loving to each other (in this day and age) children are better off there then in some home where there's drinking and abuse lets' say. imo

PS I know better then to bring up the physical act, in my opinion, not being very healthy, but then, I don't want to know, exactly, how they work that out.  I guess with Lesbians it's different.  I don't know, gads, who started this thread and why am I here


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 27, 2015)

Under my three definitions of marriage the first two, "de jure" and "de facto" could apply equally to hetero and homo sex couples. It is only in sacramental marriages that the stipulation is for one man and one woman.

Same sex couples yearn for legal recognition of their unions just like anyone else. Many have children and want them to know that society sanctions their families too. I can understand these desires.

Our minister reckons the solution is to remove the power to perform marriages from the clergy. All marriages should then become civil unions for the purpose of registration. For couple who seek the blessing of the church, a second religious service could be held according to the rites of that particular religion but it would have no legal status.

As I mentioned earlier, I've been married for 52 years in a month's time and whether a same sex couple chooses to marry or not does not affect my marriage in the slightest. Why should I object to them trying to find happiness by entering a lifetime commitment to someone they love ?


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 27, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> OMG I know. Totally stupid! Some suggested that would open the door to marrying kids or siblings etc. Idiots.



It seems every time I look, the definition of moral (what is, what isn't) so why anybody should be shocked by anything that may develop I think is foolish.   It seems logical that one thing does lead to another, one person opens a door, and then someone out there says, hey, so why can't mine ways work out.  The snow-ball effect, or the "hey, you can't stop me, since you didn't stop them"  Will anyone in a position to do so, draw the line?  Who knows.


----------

