B
Big Tone
OK out of context man, I'll let you have that one
Gay Marriage
- Thread starter LastMagicBean
- Start date
Sponsored Links
R
RogueHanger
Assuming that these Biblical scholars are correct,
A trio of Iowa-based religious scholars penned an op-ed in a local paper this week, reminding readers that despite popular opinion, the Bible does not simply define marriage as between one man and one woman.
The joint editorial was written by Hector Avalos, Robert R. Cargill and Kenneth Atkinson and published in the Des Moines Register on Sunday. The men teach at Iowa State University, University of Iowa and University of Northern Iowa, respectively.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...ge-iowa-scholars-op-ed_n_3397304.html[/QUOTE]
then the concept of marriage is simply a legal definition. As such, it can be re-defined, as have other legal definitons been re-defined and refined down the centuries.
I appreciate some may have religious concepts that they need to reconcile, but apart from such as JWs, who I believe refuse to accept the authority of government, isn't it a problem for biblical scholars to wrestle with? In which case, haven't the UK government taken a pragmatic approach by allowing the church (and perhaps others) to decide on its own actions? Liberalism in action?
Interestingly, the article mentioned, above seems to suggest, that JBR can continue to take his second (and third, etc) wife without religious persecution. Or, indeed, his first wfe may take a second husband.
Not personal abuse, JBR, just a joke. I hope you can take it in the spirit which it is given.
Most?
I blame straight couples for the whole gay marriage thing. If they'd stop breeding gay babies, we wouldn't need these ceremonies.
There are around 21.2 million married people in the UK.
There are around 5.9 million people currently cohabiting in the UK.
Even accounting for those who are not straight shows that you are incorrect.
I don't know everything but I know a lot more than you ajstonservices.
Sponsored Links
Fair do nosey perhaps I should have made it clearer for you. At a time when gay people want to marry more straight couples are cohabiting than there are choosing to marry.
perhaps I should have made it clearer for you. At a time when gay people want to marry more straight couples are cohabiting than there are choosing to marry.
Wrong.Fair do nosey
You are getting confused.
Whilst the popularity of marriage is decreasing and the popularity of cohabiting is increasing, marriage is still the most popular form of partnership in the uk.
I don't believe those figures.
Married people are registered.
It's impossible to accurately calculate the number of people 'living as married'.
Might as well just guess.
Wrong.Fair do nosey
You are getting confused.
Whilst the popularity of marriage is decreasing and the popularity of cohabiting is increasing, marriage is still the most popular form of partnership in the uk.
So whose confused
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/mro/n...since-1996/familiesandhouseholdsnr011112.html
Perhaps you need someone to read it to you
It is almost certainly true that an increasing proportion of people are choosing to live over the brush rather than marry (I'm not talking about homos - I'm really not interested in them).
Perhaps one reason is that there used to be tax breaks for married men (yes, it was a 'married man's tax allowance'!)
I think that's a shame, as marriage has always been seen as a traditionally effective way of providing a secure environment for offspring. Now, many people marry just because they (she?) wants a church wedding, and then think nothing of petitioning for divorce a short while afterward!
Perhaps one reason is that there used to be tax breaks for married men (yes, it was a 'married man's tax allowance'!)
I think that's a shame, as marriage has always been seen as a traditionally effective way of providing a secure environment for offspring. Now, many people marry just because they (she?) wants a church wedding, and then think nothing of petitioning for divorce a short while afterward!
Are you a bit thick or what? Even your figures show marriage is the most popular form of partnership i.e. 12.2 million v's 2.9 million.So whose confused
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/mro/n...since-1996/familiesandhouseholdsnr011112.html
Perhaps you need someone to read it to you
Take into account also that your 12.2 million figure specifically states families.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/dec/11/census-2011-marriage-single-adults
You really are dumb aren't you.
If you accept that the number of registered married couples is correct, then all you need do is subtract that figure from the population of those (eligible) that remain. Even if you were to combine the cohabiting figures with those living single, married couples would probably still trump.
Are you a bit thick or what? Even your figures show marriage is the most popular form of partnership i.e. 12.2 million v's 2.9 million.So whose confused
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/mro/n...since-1996/familiesandhouseholdsnr011112.html
Perhaps you need someone to read it to you
Take into account also that your 12.2 million figure specifically states families.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/dec/11/census-2011-marriage-single-adults[/QUOTE]
Well its obvious I'm not as thick as you isn't it nosey. You daft **** if you look at the figure for all couples they cover partnerships over the last four decades. So of course there will be a higher number of married couples as it was the 'right thing' to do until recently when more couples chose to cohabit than marry each year. You got it yet. The records from the ons show 235000 marrying while 285000 were choosing to cohabit in 2011. That's most that is. And that trend is going to continue.
You really are dumb aren't you.
If you accept that the number of registered married couples is correct, then all you need do is subtract that figure from the population of those (eligible) that remain. Even if you were to combine the cohabiting figures with those living single, married couples would probably still trump.
Hang on fatboy, I didn't say the overall result would necessarily alter, merely pointing out that it's pointless trying to gauge the difference between the two, if one set of figures are nothing more than a guess.
:Even putting up a far more relevant set of results to gauge current trends on marriage, ie. people under 30, would still be pointless for the same reason.
R
RogueHanger
This statement, highlighted, is absolutely categorical, taken from the ONS:
This would leave something like 12.14 million married couples, and 2.95 million co-habiting couples, and a total of 18.2 million families, (the rest made up of single parent, etc.) assuming that the number of families remains reasonably constant, which is not a fair assumption because we also know that there are more single person households.
So, I think one can assume, without doubt that there are more married families than co-habiting families.
But, what has this to do with the OP, apart from the fact that the OP seems to have no purpose whatsoever.
Other claims about people choosing to co-habit, rather than marry, assumes that they do not go on to marry at some later date.
Which makes the rate of decrease in popularity a mere 28,000 per annum, (457,000/16), so a straight line extrapolation of the same amount can be assumed for the last two years and added to the increase in popularity of co-habiting couples, (2.9 million + 56,000 =2.95million)
This would leave something like 12.14 million married couples, and 2.95 million co-habiting couples, and a total of 18.2 million families, (the rest made up of single parent, etc.) assuming that the number of families remains reasonably constant, which is not a fair assumption because we also know that there are more single person households.
So, I think one can assume, without doubt that there are more married families than co-habiting families.
But, what has this to do with the OP, apart from the fact that the OP seems to have no purpose whatsoever.
Other claims about people choosing to co-habit, rather than marry, assumes that they do not go on to marry at some later date.
R
RogueHanger
OK out of context man, I'll let you have that one
As the OP seems to have no purpose whatsoever, unless it's just an excuse for homophobes to use homophobic diatribe, and it's deteriorated into an absurd claim that there are less married couples than co-habiting couples, it would be appropriate to continue this change of tack. So:
Cyclists! Why do they ride in the middle of the road?
http://www.motoring.co.uk/car-news/...wsletter&utm_campaign=newsletter&src=motoring
Sponsored Links
