VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 18:22:47 08/27/11 Sat
Author: George
Subject: Re: General Denominational (Dis)Information
In reply to: Lois 's message, "Re: General Denominational (Dis)Information" on 10:16:30 08/27/11 Sat

>>>>Lois wrote:
>
>This could be the c-not-of-c's version
>reinterpreted.
>
>Marriage should be celebrated with prayer and
>thanksgiving; and at the solemnization, the persons to
>be married, standing together, the mannish one
>on the right, and the effeminate one on the
>left, shall be addressed, by the ordained person who
>has paid his/her tithing, as he shall be directed by
>the "the one"; and if there be no objections, he
>shall say, calling each by their names:
>
>[Sec 111:2b] "You both mutually agree to be each
>other's companion, mannish one and effeminate one,
>observing the legal rights belonging to this
>condition; that is, benefiting from insurance plans
>and tax laws for married couples."

Lois, this is one reason why gay activists wanted to muscle in on marriage. So many homosexuals came down with HIV that they wanted to access their boyfriend's insurance plan to pay for the treatment. Of course, since most insurance plans of that type are group plans, introducing a new group of very sick people into the group would drive premiums through the roof. That's a good way to punish straight people for being straight -- drive the cost of health insurance up so high that they can't afford to insure their children any more.

Secondly, homosexuality flourishes in areas where socialistic style politicians roam. In New York, politicians have extended emergency rent control from WWII into the 21st century. If you have a 22 year old male living with a 55 year old male, the older male is likely to die. The younger one can keep the apartment, but he will have to pay the going rate. After all, the landlord has been taking a loss on it over a period longer than the younger man's lifespan. How does a city maintain affordable housing if the owners of the building are having to do maintenance on a budget from 1942? What is needed is not same-sex marriage, but an end to rent control.

>
>Inasmuch as this Church has been reproached with the
>crime of fornication, and polygamy: we also freely
>declare that we believe that anyone or anything may
>marry, practicing monogamy for a few months or years,
>except of course in case of bi-sexuality,
>remain together until one of both adjust their sexual
>identity, when either is at liberty to marry again.
>-------
>
>Submitted by Lois

Lois, your proviso for bisexuality is no good. It won't work. There are now, by my count, six sexes. Homosexual male, homosexual female, heterosexual male, heterosexual female, transgendered male to female, transgendered female to male, and "Q," which so far, I haven't been able to identify. Just as with the periodic table, there are also possible "elements" yet to be discovered, such as various pairings of three (with one partner "bisexual,") various partners of four (with one partner "trisexual,") various combinations of partners of five, (with one partner "quadrosexual," and so forth, Then each individual grouping can have the specific sexes in each switched, offering almost as many different selections of cohabitation arrangements as General Motors does upholstery.

A heterosexual male like Charlie Sheen might find cohabitation with a male to female transgendered exciting. After all, it's like designer drugs and/or cigarettes. Once you get hooked on a particular brand, you can't settle for anything else. But if he got bored, he might want to switch to the opposite transgender. Of course, he would continue to feel deep, tender, and loving emotions for his male to female transgendered spouse, but his physiological and psychological discoveries might render the sexual attraction for him/her moot.

So a straight man married to a Q might be told by the Q that the Q is no longer physically and emotionally satisfied by the straight man, and that the Q now has discovered an inborn attraction to a female to male transgender, or a lesbian.

I suppose the ultimate same-sex relationship would be between a Q and a Q, but that may not be stable, since, as you know, I haven't been able to find out what a Q is.

It is entirely possible that some people may conveniently discover that they are heptasexual, and insist on the law providing for them completely open "marriages" for the simple reason that no single individual has all the sexual attributes, skills, and psychological triggers necessary to activate the heptasexual's jolly button over a long term.

I know that John will treat this as a joke, but as I have said before: Be careful what you laugh at.

Authors from Shakespeare to the writer of "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum" (Circa 1964) have concocted jokes about same-sex relationships. Now they aren't a joke anymore.

Circa 1969, Laugh-in had a joke about a defense contractor who proposed to remain in business postVietnam by continuing to manufacture military vehicles -- and sell them to civilians! Now we have to be careful not to be run over by people in Hummers.

And circa 1974, the National Lampoon had a comic strip about "The Planet With 23 Different Sexes." And we are way past this one being a joke, as you can see.

It is very sad and regretable that humankind, being sinful by nature, has some many sexual problems. But the idea that these problems can be solved with no change on the part of the sufferer, by simply making everybody else change is not just impractical, it's impossible, not to mention grossly unjust for everyone else. What about the small businessman who is told by the federal government that he has to build six different bathrooms to accomodate all different sexes. Some businesses would have more bathrooms than work space.

That is why uninhibited exploration of sex eventually wrecks a civilization.

George

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.