My marriage is a sham!

[pgwenthold]

Well, according to Pat Boone, that is.

Last night on MSNBC, in a discussion of gay marriage, Pat Boone claimed that God created marriage for the purpose of raising children in a stable environment. Well, I have been married for 11.5 years, and we don't have any children, nor are there any on the horizon. Have these 11.5 years just been a sham?

He was asked, "What about married couples who can't have children?" "They can adopt" he said. What a putz.

I thought it was embarassing. He says "God created man and then gave him a partner. It wasn't another man, it was a woman." Jeez, why not just say "He created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve"? Is that all the better argument he could come up with?

[WildCat]

You unholy spawn of Satan!! Don't you know the Earth is dangerously underpopulated? :eek:

[zenith-nadir]

I am always amazed when people run the "morality flag" up thier religious flag poles and use that to openly discriminate and demonize other human beings based of their sexual preference.

Then, on top of that, they have the gall to tell you what makes "your" marriage valid or invalid.

Crazy stuff.

[Suddenly]

I guess Pat Boone is out of his "Metal Mood," but he's still "No More Mr. Nice Guy." (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000005KOE/ref%3Dpd%5Fsl%5Faw%5Falx-jeb-7-1%5Fmusic%5F2202241%5F3/104-5481904-9370365)

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
I am always amazed when people run the "morality flag" up thier religious flag poles and use that to openly discriminate and demonize other human beings based of their sexual preference.

Then, on top of that, they have the gall to tell you what makes "your" marriage valid or invalid.

Crazy stuff.

In the Ohio gay marriage ban thread, I saw a commentary by some adoptive parents who took objection to the governor's statements about how two biological parents are best for the children. The comment was something like, "I realize from the context of the bill that it really is not talking about adoptive parents, but it still hurts to hear it. I can only imagine how it feels for those who it is actually directed to."

This is kind of the way I feel about it now. In the zealousness against gay marriage, he has now included _my marriage_ as one that does not meet with his approval. While I doubt he intentionally meant to do it, it obviously bothers me (mainly that he has any business at all commenting on my marriage). It really helps to understand the outrage for the folks that he is intentionally slighting.

[subgenius]

You have to keep in mind that Pat Boone is one of the great thinkers of our day.
That's why they asked him for an opinion.
Ignore his wisdom at your peril.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by subgenius
You have to keep in mind that Pat Boone is one of the great thinkers of our day.
That's why they asked him for an opinion.
Ignore his wisdom at your peril.

A-ha, but I can prove that he is not such a great thinker. If you had seen what he was wearing, you would know that he apparently wasn't thinking too clearly.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by pgwenthold
In the zealousness against gay marriage, he has now included _my marriage_ as one that does not meet with his approval. While I doubt he intentionally meant to do it, it obviously bothers me (mainly that he has any business at all commenting on my marriage). It really helps to understand the outrage for the folks that he is intentionally slighting.


It's not just you.

Jews, Buhddists, Muslims, gays, athiests, etc... are all going to hell! :teacher:

What a philosophy to base your moral superiority on huh?

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir



It's not just you.

Jews, Buhddists, Muslims, gays, athiests, etc... are all going to hell! :teacher:

What a philosophy to base your moral superiority on huh?

But it's not the going to hell part that I worry about. It's the legislating the "go to hell" activities that bother me.

My marriage isn't bothering Pat Boone in the least. So why should he worry about it? If he thinks a married couple has to pop out babies, he should do it. Although after seeing his daughter Debbie, there's pretty good grounds for birth control...

[Brian the Snail]

Originally posted by pgwenthold
He was asked, "What about married couples who can't have children?" "They can adopt" he said. What a putz.

So, what about a gay couple who adopt a child? Wouldn't that satisfy Pat Boone's criterion for a legitimate marriage?

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Brian the Snail


So, what about a gay couple who adopt a child? Wouldn't that satisfy Pat Boone's criterion for a legitimate marriage?

Ultimately, as you note, his argument is really against gay _adoption_, not gay marriage (I suppose we could say it is anti-AI and surrogacy for gay couples, too). Of course, gay couples are already able to adopt, so I don't see how it is relevent. In fact, wouldn't a _married_ gay couple be better for raising children than non-married gay couples?

In the end, from a "raising a family" standpoint, a married gay couple who does not have kids is no different from my wife and me. Thus, really a non-sequitor.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Brian the Snail


So, what about a gay couple who adopt a child? Wouldn't that satisfy Pat Boone's criterion for a legitimate marriage?
He shoots, he scores!

[toddjh]

Originally posted by pgwenthold
He says "God created man and then gave him a partner. It wasn't another man, it was a woman."

Actually, it was an animal. It was only after Adam had "gotten to know" all the animals and found them unsatisfying that God created Eve.

But you won't hear Pat Boone tell that story I bet.

Jeremy

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Suddenly
I guess Pat Boone is out of his "Metal Mood," but he's still "No More Mr. Nice Guy." (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000005KOE/ref%3Dpd%5Fsl%5Faw%5Falx-jeb-7-1%5Fmusic%5F2202241%5F3/104-5481904-9370365)

http://mysmilies.ipbfree.com/s/contrib/ed/retardboom.gif

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by toddjh


Actually, it was an animal. It was only after Adam had "gotten to know" all the animals and found them unsatisfying that God created Eve.

But you won't hear Pat Boone tell that story I bet.



The part I never really understood about that claim is that, apparently God had already created male and female animals, no? How else would they reproduce?

So knowing that he needed male and female animals, why did he try out beastiality with Adam before deciding to make a female partner?

This is of course separate from the whole lunacy of an omnipotent good having to try out partners for one of his creations.

[UserGoogol]

Well that's easy to apologize for. You just say that God didn't intend for humans to reproduce until after he kicked them out of Eden. In Eden, after all, they were immortal, and only an idiot has immortal creatures which reproduce.

Thusly, he was merely looking for someone who would keep Adam with something to do.