I would like to start by apologizing for this off topic post.

If I have known that me calling you a pixie or cute hurt your feelings, I would have stopped it long ago. In case you haven't noticed, I don't throw out compliments that often. And I guess you also haven't noticed that I don't tailor my arguments to the physical appearance of the person that I'm addressing.

But now that I know you harbor those feelings, I will refrain from trying to show you that I feel no ill will toward you and just stick with the topic at hand. And as we have discussed before, my debating exchanges are gonna be different from talking to someone at a bar about sports. I am sorry you disagree with that approach, but I don't see this any different than any other venue where you have opposing sides. I'm sure football players from opposing teams can have a beer after a tough game, but during the game, somebody might get their head taken off.

So, again, I am sorry that you are offended by me referring to you in that way, it won't happen again, but honestly you have had plenty of opportunities to tell me to STFU. I thought we saw eye to eye on how I approach these threads and subjects vs. how I feel about "you" Cynthia the person. All it woulda taken is a one line PM.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

Apology accepted. Thank you.

I'm not the one stuck on continuing to belabor natural childbirth with nothing but nuh huh's. I've given a clear definition and links to what I mean. I have yet to see anything that says my idea of it is wrong. Even your post doesn't attempt to clear up this issue...But I guess that's par for the course.

"Some people" might think that one race is better than others. And in some cases some races have a clear advantage or disadvantage in some aspects of life. So really it'll depend on the topic at hand. But really, as you like to point out, I don't see what that has to do with this.

Traditional marriage, for most of the world in the last few hundred years has involved man and woman. It's pretty much universal. Now among differing individual cultures, they may have other social norms that go along with it, but "man and woman" is pretty much constant. Is EVERY marriage optimum? No. But every "mother" isn't optimum either, but as we have discussed in "natural childbirth" women are always gonna have the children and that child's "traditional mother" is the best way to raise a child. Optimally in a "Traditional Marriage" with it's "Traditional father" who provided the child's genetic material.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

Then I am happy to withdraw my warning but it still does nothing to change the fact that you are on very thin ice and always will be with me. I'm waiting for the opportunity to roll up a newspaper and smack you across the nose.

I am not inclined to deal with you at al via PM until I have the pleasure of writing the PM that tells you to go on your merry way. Push me with little snipes like Garbage Man again and that PM may come much sooner than you think.

Oh my bad. I was under the assumption that that was what you wanted to be referred to after your cheerful introduction to me.
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/say....html#post8596
I like to take out the trash.

Now I know some garbage men don't like to be called "garbage man" so how about "sanitation engineer"? But then again, maybe you meant just that you "take out the trash", so that could be anywhere from someone's son to maybe a janitor...Tell ya what, I just won't call you anything at all. Doesn't really seem to be that we'll ever really have to speak to each other anyway. Good friends like us are like that.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

I'm not excluding those that don't fit my picture, the excluded individuals are just that individuals. And including all the weirdness that individual humans can contrive creates and unrealistic picture as well. A porn star isn't the epitome of "womanhood" in the "traditional" sense. And I wouldn't include her when making a point about "womanhood".


That arguement doesn't even make sense.
Individuals make up the institution. You cannot define the institution without considering the individuals.

I guess you WOULD include the porn star in your example of womanhood then. Well I see right there that we differ. Because in my opinion "Traditional Marriage" is man and woman in a committed, monogamous relationship. After that it gets a bit murky.

Just as woman means a female, but after that, it can get a bit murky.

The vows represent the institution? Is that what you are saying?
Please clarify.

The words in the vows say a lot about what is expected...I don't recall anyone saying, I'm gonna beat the crap out of you and ruin your life when they made that promise to their significant other.

You are most certainly welcome to explain yourself. How does one lead without another (or others) following?

Being responsible for the decision making but still allowing and respecting input. It's not that hard a concept. Follow doesn't mean subservient. It just means one person takes the lead in the relationship.

I don't judge the institution at all. I think that it is different for different people. What the institution implies is different for different people.

And for some people what they have wouldn't necessarily conform to "traditional".

Personally, I would hope that a woman would marry someone that respects her, but that is not an established/required part of Traditional marriage.

I do believe respect is established as a way to treat any human...Marriage doesn't change that.

I am aware of this, and no one has questioned it.
You said that natural childbirth is thought of primarily one way, and I reminded you that babies that are born breech are also born through natural childbirth. 'Natural Childbirth' by that standard automatically includes both.
What is the point that you make here?

OOOHHHH!!! The breech part is the part that threw you off, I just mentioned that as something that can go wrong during childbirth, but people still say that method is best for the baby.. My bad...We coulda cut that off long ago.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

You're funny, but not in a "ha-ha" sort of way...
I point out that you have derailed this thread from its actual topic, and you turn around and complain that others aren't talking about the subject you have derailed this too to your satisfaction?
Simple solution. Start another thread in the appropriate section.


I thought I made that abundantly clear. Evidently you couldn't comprehend, or you don't want to address the point.
People can "claim" a lot of things. But "claims" are often meaningless.
Nobody is saying that you can't like or favor traditional marriage. Nobody is saying that you are not legally allowed to have an opinion on traditional marriage.
Just like with racists, people have "opinions" all the time.

But the more interesting thing comes to the GOVERNMENTAL work / application. Is there justification for the government to treat them differently?


So you have basically boiled it down to a bare bones approach, ignoring the fallacies with trying to incorporate other concerns?
Interesting, but not really poignant.
Just because a "tradition" exists doesn't mean it should continue. This planet has a long history of ignoring female rights and placing them as inferior. Doesn't mean the "tradition" is justified, or that it shouldn't change.


And that gets into the real meat of the problem.
Should our government be involved in the social engineering of trying to make marriage "optimum"?
I thought conservatives were supposed to be against social engineering, but I guess that's not an absolute when it comes to groups they want to discriminate against.


Ignoring the substantiation of the claim for now, what does that mean?
Does that mean that a mother who adopts the child should have fewer legal rights? Does the child that is adopted get fewer legal rights?
We can talk about "best" all we want, with the differing evidence that proves or disproves, but in the end game not only is your concern over "childbirth" rating completely non-topical to this thread, it's also pointless.

I brought up natural childbirth as a comparison just as you brought up the white/black superior thing. Unless you were trying to derail the thread yourself, you have done the same thing you accuse me. Not to mention he several requests for detailed analysis of my ideas....Maybe I should call you Conrail for your several derail attempts.



I thought I made that abundantly clear. Evidently you couldn't comprehend, or you don't want to address the point.
People can "claim" a lot of things. But "claims" are often meaningless.
Nobody is saying that you can't like or favor traditional marriage. Nobody is saying that you are not legally allowed to have an opinion on traditional marriage.
Just like with racists, people have "opinions" all the time.

And some things have a basis and are much stronger than "claims". Traditional Marriage has a biologic basis in that man and woman are an obvious basis for life on the planet. That's not a claim, that's a fact. Every complex life form requires male and female genetic material to reproduce. Nothing at all meaningless about that fact, unless your brain is clouded by some genetic or hormonal malady that seems to effect some people.

But the more interesting thing comes to the GOVERNMENTAL work / application. Is there justification for the government to treat them differently?

There's no justification for the government to ban processing dog meat for human consumption, but it does. Our society forbids it. The obvious significance of the male female bond should be just as protected.


So you have basically boiled it down to a bare bones approach, ignoring the fallacies with trying to incorporate other concerns?
Interesting, but not really poignant.
Just because a "tradition" exists doesn't mean it should continue. This planet has a long history of ignoring female rights and placing them as inferior. Doesn't mean the "tradition" is justified, or that it shouldn't change.

I can't justify ignoring female rights. Can you? That's not my argument. But I CAN identify why marriage should remain between man and woman. But you want to talk about derailing a thread? This one is about "Traditional Marriage" but you continue to try to make it about "gay marriage". Why don't you take a bit of your own advice?

And that gets into the real meat of the problem.
Should our government be involved in the social engineering of trying to make marriage "optimum"?

Yes.

I thought conservatives were supposed to be against social engineering, but I guess that's not an absolute when it comes to groups they want to discriminate against.

Not a conservative. I'm moderate.

Ignoring the substantiation of the claim for now, what does that mean?
Does that mean that a mother who adopts the child should have fewer legal rights?

In some cases and adoptive parent is always at risk of the birth parents taking the baby back. Obviously some rights are compromised in an adoption.

Does the child that is adopted get fewer legal rights?
We can talk about "best" all we want, with the differing evidence that proves or disproves, but in the end game not only is your concern over "childbirth" rating completely non-topical to this thread, it's also pointless.

Again it wasn't my concern, it was just as much a comparison as the above paragraph. And to that paragraph I say to you...

Siince you seem to be a stickler for that kinda thing "derailing" a thread.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

I'm talking about enitre cultures. Not individuals.

Certainly one could include the porn star as an example, but that is not what I was considering. Your concept of a committed monogamous relationship has not held true over the course of time. THAT was the point that I was bringing up.

One must separate 'expected' from the reality of the time. Sadly, monogamy was only truly expected in a man in the last 40 years or so. Even then, the monogamy rates are not that high. It would be wonderful if they were, but there you have it. I suspect that the lack of monogamy on the part of women was not recorded as closely until recently.

Okay. I can respect that. At the same time, does she get the final word on things?

Hey, you brought up the gender issue. I'll bypass that for now.

You have been insistent about what such an institution implies. I have said that the institution implies different things for different people. How is this in conflict?


QUOTE]Personally, I would hope that a woman would marry someone that respects her, but that is not an established/required part of Traditional marriage.

I do believe respect is established as a way to treat any human...Marriage doesn't change that. [/quote]

And the institution of marriage does not outright establish this.

You are assigning a breech birth as a 'wrong' when it is just a variation. As I understand it, it is not uncommon. Both are the result of a natural childbirth.

So am I.

Certainly one could include the porn star as an example, but that is not what I was considering. Your concept of a committed monogamous relationship has not held true over the course of time. THAT was the point that I was bringing up.

It's predominately been the case in the U.S. though..Or are we on a worldwide view again? We need some parameters. Greeks, Romans, other species blah blah

One must separate 'expected' from the reality of the time. Sadly, monogamy was only truly expected in a man in the last 40 years or so. Even then, the monogamy rates are not that high. It would be wonderful if they were, but there you have it. I suspect that the lack of monogamy on the part of women was not recorded as closely until recently.

So we abandon it because people can't abide by it? I don't subscribe to that. What is the alternative? Anything goes? Polygamy? I don't understand where you are going.

Okay. I can respect that. At the same time, does she get the final word on things?

She has. It depends on the subject. Our last two houses were her idea.

I would hope that a woman would marry someone that respects her, but that is not an established/required part of Traditional marriage.

And I think it is...
When you love someone, and love should be somewhere in the equation, respect is implied. I guess you feel differently.

And the institution of marriage does not outright establish this.

See above.

You are assigning a breech birth as a 'wrong' when it is just a variation. As I understand it, it is not uncommon. Both are the result of a natural childbirth.

Breech is not uncommon, and can turn out fine, but it is not the way birth is supposed to happen. Something has gone wrong. In a hospital setting "C" is recommended.
Breech birth risks difficulties

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)