Where is it "defined" that marriage is between a man and a woman?

[LeftNYC]

just wondering...

[Avalux]

1. The bible!!!!!!

:eyes:

[Lerkfish]

7. actually, I'm fairly familiar with the bible, but don't recall that

spelled out precisely.

[Avalux]

8. It isn't.

Hence my "whatever" icon. ;-) Of course the fundies will insist Jesus said so.

[shain from kane]

9. How does that explain the many wives of King Solomon? They

shouldn't be able to pick and choose whatever portions of THe Bible that they want to believe. It's all or nothing with the inspired writings of God. More than one wife is not A MAN and A WOMAN, but a man and his women.

[TechBear_Seattle]

18. And then there is Paul, whose "one wife" clause applies only to clergy

"Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher (I Tim. 3:2)"

"Let deacons be the husband of one wife, and let them manage their children and their households well (I Tim. 3:12)"

"This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you, if any man is blameless, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of being profligate or insubordinate. (Titus 1:5-6)"

Bishop, deacon and elder (the Greek word is presbyteros, which can be translated in to English as elder, priest or minister.) They, and only they, are required to have only one wife. As far as all other believers, Paul has nothing to say. It is logical to conclude that Paul didn't care if male believers (other than clergy) had only one wife.

[papau]

2. I believe some southern GOP congressman says they include farm animals

At least in his part of the county.

:-)

[AzDar]

3. No place (officially) that I'm aware of; and the thought of letting this

Administration define ANYTHING legally is frightening.
Keep your filthy monkey paws off our Constitution, Chimpolini..

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. Probably, they're referencing DOMA

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/leg23.htm

"The second substantive section of the bill amends the U.S. Code to make
explicit what has been understood under federal law for over 200 years;
that a marriage is the legal union of a man and a woman as husband and
wife, and a spouse is a husband or wife of the opposite sex. The DOMA
definition of marriage is derived most immediately from a Washington
state case from 1974, Singer v. Hara, which is included in the 1990
edition of Black's Law Dictionary. More than a century ago, the U.S.
Supreme Court spoke of the "union for life of one man and one woman in
the holy estate of matrimony." Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15, 45
(1985)."

Just a guess. :shrug:

[shain from kane]

22. Ignores lots of relationships throughout history, many sanctioned

by rulers. Monogamy has a short history in the history of mankind, with wives and concubines being the normal state for almost 5,000 years. I am including concubines in the form of relationships with female slaves in the United States until after the Civil War. The faithfulness in marriage in the United States, with one man and one woman, has only existed since 1865, and with rampant divorce being permitted, I dare to say that it has never existed.

>>>"More than a century ago, the U.S. Supreme Court spoke of the 'union for life of one man and one woman in
the holy estate of matrimony.'">>> shouldn't carry much weight in the present society.

The Supreme Court hasn't really addressed the present state of marriage, divorce, re-marriage, divorce, etc. How can this be used as a precedent if the Court addressed the "...union for life of one man and one woman..." How laughable and unrealistic. If they can't protect their own institution of marriage under their own edicts, how can they protect it against the evolving nature of current history.

And how does the 200-year precedent address white men sleeping with black women in the slave quarters, where their marriage was a complete sham.

[bryant69]

5. Can you have a strawman question?

Or what is the equivelent.

It strikes me that any attempt to represent the worldview of those who feel that marriage should be defined as between a man or a woman isn't likely to go very well.

And i would guess you already know the answer, at least in broad terms. Those who oppose homosexual marriage oppose it because they believe that God has decreed marriage between a man and a woman. They will use other arguements (the slippery slope argument for example or protecting the family (whatever that means)), but that's the core of it.

But I have a hard time believing most people here aren't already well aware of that.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Duer 157099]

6. You know, I wouldn't be surprised if...

...if somewhere in the bible, there were also verses restricting marriage in other ways, perhaps only between people of the same faith, or from the same tribe, or such. I'll bet it's there, tucked somewhere in the Old Testament.

That could be a useful argument to know about, if the references could be found.

[LeftNYC]

10. I could probably find something in the bible that says it is ok

to eat other humans if i twist the words enough...

[Duer 157099]

15. Mmmmm. not sure about that one

but I wouldn't be surprised, either.

I'll bet no twisting at all would be needed to find something saying that Israelites could only marry Israelites, or some variations of that.

[LeftNYC]

16. i was being facetious, but you got my point...nt

[enlightenment]

21. There's quite a bit of inter-tribal stuff in the OT.

Can't quote one at the moment (not a specialist and no great interest in a rather poorly written novel), but I know there are some "you married outside the tribe and are banished/punished/condemned/etc." moments in there.

[shain from kane]

19. Believe it or not, Catholics believe that in communion, you are

actually eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus Christ. It is not symbolic to them. I challenge anyone to produce anything that contradicts it, because they know how ludicrous it sounds to others, but still insist that that is their belief.

[mainer]

11. The Bible doesn't restrict one man to one woman

The Old Testament has numerous examples of one man and several wives or concubines.

[MADem]

12. Well, shit, the folks who make that cream cheese and fruit spread

are in trouble!! Isn't that a marriage of sweet and savory, per their advertisements?

Marriage is a contract, nothing more. It astounds me how this supposedly secular society wants to slap a coat of their religion on everything. They actually think they can increase the man/woman marriage rate, which has been on the decline for some time, by denying the right to others.

Magical thinking...if you can even call it thinking.

[Duer 157099]

13. And what about trans-gender people?

I suppose under this law, they could never be married to anyone, except perhaps to another transgender person since all bases would be covered in that case.

What insanity.

[leftofthedial]

14. in the hearts of religiously insane bigots

all across Murka

[survivor999]

17. In the minds of the bigots? n/t

[Sinti]

20. Leave the definition of marriage in religious terms - no problem

We should simply have another word for two people entering into a contract that binds them to one another for the rest of their lives, to include all of the rights and responsibilities that go along with that (what is now known as marriage). The whole fear-mongering problem ends right there... unless they really don't want to see gay people in stable, long-term, officially recognized relationships... I thought they hated the "gay lifestyle".

[Dean Corso]

23. 1 Corinthians 7

This chapter in the bible seems to never get talked about.

It says that its better to remain single than to marry(ver.8,32-33,38).The only reason to marry is to avoid fornication,saying its better to marry than to burn.(ver.9)

Never heard this preached anywhere.

[newyawker99]

26. Hi Dean Corso!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[genie_weenie]

24. It is written in the Sky, in huge Flaming letters...

Maybe this is going to be used as a pretext to invade those lands which employ illegal and incorrect marriages, like Nepla where the paucity of farmable land leads brothers to share a wife (polyandry).

[Raine]

25. Bible

it's Adam and Eve, it's not Adam and Steve... :sarcasm:

[robcon]

27. It's defined in dictionary.com....

mar·riage Audio pronunciation of "marriage" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mrj)
n.

1.
1. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
2. The state of being married; wedlock.
3. A common-law marriage.
4. A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
2. A wedding.
3. A close union: “the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics” (Lloyd Rose).
4. Games. The combination of the king and queen of the same suit, as in pinochle.