Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Discussions about constructed worlds, cultures and any topics related to constructed societies.
User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5702
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Lao Kou » 04 Sep 2015 01:19

Salmoneus wrote:The word you are looking for is 'posthumous marriage', not 'necrophiliac marriage'.
How 'bout "necronuptials"?
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1655
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 18:37

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Salmoneus » 04 Sep 2015 01:35

elemtilas wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:Necrophilia is a sexual perversion.
That, sir, is an insult to Zombies everywhere! [}:D] It's also rather a matter of opinion as to whether it is a "perversion" or not. It may coincidentally be the prevailing opinion -- but prevailing opinions change, as we have seen with that other paraphilia, homosexuality.
I was using 'perversion' in the sense of any deviant, abnormal sexual behaviour, which would indeed cover both necrophilia and homosexuality (at least, homosexuality is certainly abnormal, and is still deviant in most cultural contexts in the west). No subjective or moral judgement was implied. However, I grant your point that political ideology is often prioritised over technical vocabulary in these sensitive areas.
Sex is only tangentially and circumstantially related to marriage, which is a way of regulating the transmission of property.
Actually, sex is pretty central to the Christian concept of marriage. Go forth and multiply, you see. Can't do that without some serious shagging. Shagging within the confines of marriage, of course!
Not really, no. Very few 'christian' cultures have had any sustained, regular objections to sex outside or prior to marriage; conversely, almost no 'christian' cultures have had any objection to marriages without sex. Changes in the structure of 'christian' marriage have not been related to changes in the cultural structure of sex; conversely, 'christian' marriage patterns have developed from non-'christian' marriage patterns, and I see no evidence to think anything different would have happened had the Bible not contained the line you reference - a line, I'd note, which almost no christian thinkers and virtually no 'christian' cultures have actually taken as a demand for unfettered population growth.
Perhaps more importantly: not everybody in the world is Christian. Marriage is not an exclusively christian institution.

Particular cultures and subcultures may associate all sorts of things with marriage, including (quite commonly) patterns of sexual behaviour. But this is not really what marriage 'is' or 'is about', and it's not a constant. The distinguishing feature of marriage is that it identifies the children of one woman as the legal offspring of a second person - it establishes rights of this legal parent over the children, and establishes rights of the children over the parent and their property. Other aspects generally spring from this: for instance, giving one partner rights to all or some of the property of the other, even in case of divorce, is a way to enforce the child's right to the property of the second parent (i.e. it means that the second parent can't easily run off and leave their legal children with nothing); restricting extra-marital sex on the part of wives helps ensure that her children are the biological children of their legal father, encouraging him to invest time and money into them. Etc.

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3506
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by elemtilas » 04 Sep 2015 01:43

Lao Kou wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:The word you are looking for is 'posthumous marriage', not 'necrophiliac marriage'.
How 'bout "necronuptials"?
Dearly beloved, pre and postthanetes, we are gathered here to join this cacothanatic deadfella and this dysthanasic lichelass in the bonds of posthumous necronuptuials...
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5702
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Lao Kou » 04 Sep 2015 02:05

elemtilas wrote:Dearly beloved, pre and postthanetes, we are gathered here to join this cacothanatic deadfella and this dysthanasic lichelass in the bonds of posthumous necronuptuials...
Bring lilies. Lots and lots of lilies.
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3506
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by elemtilas » 04 Sep 2015 02:12

Salmoneus wrote:
Actually, sex is pretty central to the Christian concept of marriage. Go forth and multiply, you see. Can't do that without some serious shagging. Shagging within the confines of marriage, of course!
Not really, no. Very few 'christian' cultures have had any sustained, regular objections to sex outside or prior to marriage; conversely, almost no 'christian' cultures have had any objection to marriages without sex. Changes in the structure of 'christian' marriage have not been related to changes in the cultural structure of sex; conversely, 'christian' marriage patterns have developed from non-'christian' marriage patterns, and I see no evidence to think anything different would have happened had the Bible not contained the line you reference - a line, I'd note, which almost no christian thinkers and virtually no 'christian' cultures have actually taken as a demand for unfettered population growth.
Perhaps more importantly: not everybody in the world is Christian. Marriage is not an exclusively christian institution.
Yes, indeed. Not everyone is Christian and marriage is not exclusive to Christianity. These things are not at issue. Whatever context you had originally meant I do not know (you did not specify). I specifically did nòt mention marriage in the context of a culture (even a Christian culture), but rather in the context of a faith community. Whether Catholics like it or not, whether they agree or not, whether they practice it or not, and whether any other kind of Christian group agrees or disagrees with them (but I'd bet, deep down, they do agree!), the faith community of a billion people proposes and defines marriage in exactly the way opposite of what you suggest.

To the point: "...sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses (i.e., shagging), is by no means something purely biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death (i.e., within marriage)." and "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring.” and "Marriage is the intimate, exclusive, indissoluble communion of life and love entered by man and woman at the design of the Creator for the purpose of their own good and the procreation and education of children; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament." It's (nearly) entirely about kids, and thus about sex. Notice that NOT ONE SINGLE WORD in this whole theology of marriage is geared towards the distribution of inheritable property.

Particular cultures and subcultures may associate all sorts of things with marriage, including (quite commonly) patterns of sexual behaviour. But this is not really what marriage 'is' or 'is about', and it's not a constant. The distinguishing feature of marriage is that it identifies the children of one woman as the legal offspring of a second person - it establishes rights of this legal parent over the children, and establishes rights of the children over the parent and their property. Other aspects generally spring from this: for instance, giving one partner rights to all or some of the property of the other, even in case of divorce, is a way to enforce the child's right to the property of the second parent (i.e. it means that the second parent can't easily run off and leave their legal children with nothing); restricting extra-marital sex on the part of wives helps ensure that her children are the biological children of their legal father, encouraging him to invest time and money into them. Etc.
I have no qualm with the legal aspects of marriage as you describe here. This is in fact one of the great pillars upon which marriage (in the West) is to be understood. There are fundamentals other than what the lawyers say. And what the priests have long said is the other great pillar upon which marriage (in the West) is based.
Last edited by elemtilas on 04 Sep 2015 03:14, edited 1 time in total.
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3506
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by elemtilas » 04 Sep 2015 02:20

Lao Kou wrote:
elemtilas wrote:Dearly beloved, pre and postthanetes, we are gathered here to join this cacothanatic deadfella and this dysthanasic lichelass in the bonds of posthumous necronuptuials...
Bring lilies. Lots and lots of lilies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtNKN0AE0nQ

A little overdone, perhaps. Normal zombies don't grunt and groan half so much!
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5702
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Lao Kou » 04 Sep 2015 02:36

Exploring the VPN option, but alas, cannot watch for now.
Normal zombies don't grunt and groan half so much!
They do if you've got your necrophiliac groove on and have a couple of moves. [B)]


(Oh wait, they're the Untoten, not the Toten.)
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3506
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by elemtilas » 04 Sep 2015 03:11

Lao Kou wrote:
Normal zombies don't grunt and groan half so much!
They do if you've got your necrophiliac groove on and have a couple of moves. [B)]


(Oh wait, they're the Untoten, not the Toten.)
:roll: I belíeve the term is Differently Alive!
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5702
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Lao Kou » 04 Sep 2015 03:22

elemtilas wrote: :roll: I belíeve the term is Differently Alive!
Mea culpa. How could I have been so insensitive?! [B)]

But we digress...
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

cntrational
roman
roman
Posts: 953
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 03:59

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by cntrational » 04 Sep 2015 04:26

I feel most of the recent association between between reproduction and marriage is a reaction by conservative Christians to the rise of LGBT relationships and sex education, rather than a strongly held and talked about belief. It was probably just a "fact of life" before then.

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3506
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by elemtilas » 04 Sep 2015 11:22

cntrational wrote:I feel most of the recent association between between reproduction and marriage is a reaction by conservative Christians to the rise of LGBT relationships and sex education, rather than a strongly held and talked about belief. It was probably just a "fact of life" before then.
This is certainly possible. As I understand it, a pretty good chunk of what has been written on the issue from the Catholic side anyway has been written since 1900. Twas probably just too obvious for words before that time. Even so, I don't see how what has been written the last century is really in any way novel. It's not like Christian thinkers just woke up one fine day in 1982 and said 'hey, what can we cook up about sex and marriage today?'
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1655
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 18:37

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Salmoneus » 04 Sep 2015 13:08

elemtilas wrote:
Whether Catholics like it or not, whether they agree or not, whether they practice it or not, and whether any other kind of Christian group agrees or disagrees with them (but I'd bet, deep down, they do agree!), the faith community of a billion people proposes and defines marriage in exactly the way opposite of what you suggest.
Many people also define the earth as flat. They are, however, wrong.
[screed snipped]
It's (nearly) entirely about kids, and thus about sex. Notice that NOT ONE SINGLE WORD in this whole theology of marriage is geared towards the distribution of inheritable property.
And when did the Pope become the world authority on sociology?
The Pope says all kinds of things, but that doesn't make them true. The Pope says that marriage is between a man and a woman - but he is empirically, demonstrably, incorrect in that assertion.

Charitably, this is because some content has been left to context: the words "as God sees it". Marriage as God sees it is only ever between a man and a woman, says the Pope. But we are not asking about God's opinion, or about how things ought to be to please God, but about what the actual facts are on the ground. And the belief that marriage is always and everywhere a way to regulate sex is simply erroneous.

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3506
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by elemtilas » 05 Sep 2015 01:29

Salmoneus wrote:...
You made an assertion that was shown to be false; and didn't actually address the counter. You don't need to keep stumbling.
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1655
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 18:37

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Salmoneus » 05 Sep 2015 01:38

elemtilas wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:...
You made an assertion that was shown to be false; and didn't actually address the counter. You don't need to keep stumbling.
What on earth are you talking about?
You say marriage is about sex because the Pope says it's about sex. But what the Pope says about things has no scientific authority. Quoting the catechism at me does not prove me wrong, unless I take the catechism as authoritative (and even the catechism only claims to be authoritative in matters of morality (should) not in matters of science (is)), which you may do but I do not.

I'm not sure why you're trying to save face by saying "I am rubber, you are glue"...

Squall
greek
greek
Posts: 583
Joined: 28 Nov 2013 14:47

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Squall » 05 Sep 2015 02:04

Same-sex marriage
Gays do not exist in the conworlds.

Polygamy
In most countries, it requires the permission of the other spouses. Consequently, the answer is 'no'.

There is an empire that supports polygamy. Most men and women are slaves. Most men are in wars or working at distant places and the female population is much more numerous. Men from the elite have many wives, who are bearer of children that will be used in wars.

Child marriage
In most countries, no.

In some countries the children get married when they are baby. They become childhood friends and the true relationship starts when they become adults.

Interspecies marriage
It is allowed as long as the species/races do not have a rift and their DNA are compatible for reproduction.

Necrophiliac marriage
Those who can travel to multiple planes can have a relationship there, but the other cannot visit the human world with their original form and it makes the marriage impossible in the human community. The marriage requires a physical body with a soul.

Possession is not an option because exorcism is performed during the wedding.

Marriage with an empty body is not possible, because the souls will not react during the wedding.
Other forms of necromancy are forbidden.

Vampires are not undead in the science of the conworld. They are a mutation of a living thing.

Intercaste marriage
The permission is given by the parents and it is not controlled by laws. Most parents do not want their children with inferior classes.
English is not my native language. Sorry for any mistakes or lack of knowledge when I discuss this language.
:bra: :mrgreen: | :uk: [:D] | :esp: [:)] | :epo: [:|] | :lat: [:S] | :jpn: [:'(]

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3506
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by elemtilas » 05 Sep 2015 02:42

Salmoneus wrote:
elemtilas wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:...
You made an assertion that was shown to be false; and didn't actually address the counter. You don't need to keep stumbling.
What on earth are you talking about?
Let's review:

You made a claim: "Sex is only tangentially and circumstantially related to marriage, which is a way of regulating the transmission of property."

I countered: "Actually, sex is pretty central to the Christian concept of marriage."

You replied: "Not really, no." And then went on about cultural perspectives on the matter, without ever addressing the counter per se.

I countered with evidence from standard sources demonstrating the falsehood of your claim.

You replied: "[screed snipped]" When all else fails, resort to insult, I suppose.
You say marriage is about sex because the Pope says it's about sex.
Don't be ridiculous. I backed up the counter to your assertion with evidence to the contrary. You provide no evidence to either back up your assertion or invalidate the counter to your assertion.
Quoting the catechism at me does not prove me wrong,
It most plainly does when it demonstrates the fallacy of your original claim, that sex "is only tangentially and circumstantially related to marriage". I really do not care if you agree with that Christian position on sex as being fundamental to marriage or not; you are certainly welcome to your opinion. Do not however presume that you can represent your opinions as universal fact without challenge.
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

cntrational
roman
roman
Posts: 953
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 03:59

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by cntrational » 05 Sep 2015 03:14

Squall wrote:Polygamy
In most countries, it requires the permission of the other spouses. Consequently, the answer is 'no'.
This is how real life polyamory works, you know. The partners don't freely have sex with anybody, they get permission from the others.

User avatar
Thrice Xandvii
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3829
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
Location: Carnassus

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Thrice Xandvii » 05 Sep 2015 04:06

Squall wrote:Same-sex marriage
Gays do not exist in the conworlds.
Gays!?

Really... That's the term you're going with?
Image

User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 6255
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 01:57
Location: Toma-ʾEzra lit Vṛḵaža

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Ahzoh » 05 Sep 2015 04:30

Thrice Xandvii wrote:
Squall wrote:Same-sex marriage
Gays do not exist in the conworlds.
Gays!?

Really... That's the term you're going with?
And what about lesbians?
Image Ӯсцӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Šat Vṛḵažaẇ (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]

Trailsend
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1622
Joined: 18 Aug 2010 04:22

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Trailsend » 05 Sep 2015 04:59

@elemtilas: Sal isn't arguing what you think he's arguing, hence the confusion. (Please correct me if I've misinterpreted you, Sal.)
elemtilas wrote:You made a claim: "Sex is only tangentially and circumstantially related to marriage, which is a way of regulating the transmission of property."

I countered: "Actually, sex is pretty central to the Christian concept of marriage."

You replied: "Not really, no."
What Sal replied with is that the Christian concept of marriage is not the same thing as Christians' marriages.

The pope and the Catechism are absolutely evidence for what (a particular) Christian concept of marriage is, but that's not what Sal is talking about.

(As a crude analogy, English speakers may have a conception that you shouldn't split infinitives, but the behavior of English infinitives is an entirely different thing. What people think or say about something and what they do with it are very different questions.)

Sal is arguing that what people actually do with marriage is very much about filial relationships and transmission of property. It certainly may be true that in Christian rhetoric/doctrine/teaching/whathaveyou, sex is central to the concept of marriage, but that fact alone says nothing about the concrete behavior of marriage relationships.
任何事物的发展都是物极必反,否极泰来。

Post Reply