Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Calling "hogwash" on Rick Warren (and Obama's?) concept of marriage

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 08:53 AM
Original message
Calling "hogwash" on Rick Warren (and Obama's?) concept of marriage
Edited on Mon Aug-23-10 08:59 AM by grahamhgreen
"Rick Warren, the controversial evangelist Obama invited to speak at his inauguration, told Ann Curry in an NBC interview that, "For five thousand years, every single culture and every single religion has defined marriage as a man and a woman."

Hogwash.

In fact, the world is teeming with innumerable examples of “marriage” that would be unrecognizable to Warren and other so-called traditionalists.

Two-spirited ones (formerly known as berdache) were commonly found in many Amerindian cultures. They were either biological males who felt the presence of a female soul so strongly that they chose to live their lives as women or vice-versa, females who chose to live as men. Pedro de Magalhães de Gandovo described such people—whom he called Amazons—in 1576: "The wear their hair cut in the same way as the men, and go to war with bows and arrows and pursue game, always in company with men; each has a woman to serve her, to whom she says she is married, and they treat each other and speak with each other as man and wife."

The Mosuo people of China practice a form of courtship and sexual interaction anthropologists have called “walking marriage,” which consists of women and men being completely free to sleep with whomever they like, children being cared for by the woman's family—her brothers assuming all paternal responsibility. Biological paternity is a non-issue. Every night is seen as an independent event, with no expectation of permanence or even continuity in amorous relationships.
Among the Canela people of Brazil, "Virginity loss is only the first step into full marriage for a woman." There are several other steps needed before the Canela society considers a couple to by truly married, including the young woman's gaining social acceptance through her service in a "festival men's society," which includes sequential sex with fifteen to twenty members (no pun intended) and "the mother in law's receipt of meat earned by the bride through extramarital sex" on a festival day.

Got that? Part of the marrying process is group sex followed by a gift to the mother-in-law-to-be of meat gained in exchange for gang-banging with men other than the husband-to-be.

Paging Pastor Warren!

For many societies, virginity is so unimportant there isn't even a word for the concept in their language."

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201008/the-prehistory-prop-8


It's high time Obama got behind gay marriage - let's face it, if gays hadn't been persecuted by Bible and Koran thumpers for a millennia or two - they would have been getting married eons ago....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. Over the years, the definition of marriage has changed as much
as Imelda Marcos changed shoes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. I fail to understand why anyone is giving "marriage definitionists" the time of day.
Edited on Mon Aug-23-10 09:00 AM by cleanhippie
We are talking about the legal contract that joins two parties, thats it. I still do not understand why we are trying to fight with the wing nuts that feel compelled to "define" marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
3. Warren and Obama speak falsehoods to prop up their
personal and very petty prejudices. They do not even bother to speak the truth, which is the overriding directive of their faith, honest speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. The thing about Obama is that he even has a personal and petty prejudice..
Against behavior that he himself freely acknowledged that he engaged in as a young man.

I'm sorry for those who really like Obama and believe in him but I see him as a world class hypocrite on a number of subjects including but not limited to gay marriage.

And the sad part is that these hypocritical stands certainly appear really all about sheer political calculation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gil_Kerlikowske

Richard Gil Kerlikowske (born November 23, 1949) is the current Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, a position generally referred to as the United States "Drug Czar". He assumed office on May 7, 2009.

In a May 22, 2009 interview on KUOW radio, he said any drug 'legalization' would be "waving the white flag" and that "legalization is off the the charts when it comes to discussion, from my viewpoint" and that "legalization vocabulary doesn't exist for me and it was made clear that it doesn't exist in President Obama's vocabulary." Specifically about marijuana, he said, "It's a dangerous drug" and about the medical use of marijuana, he said, "we will wait for evidence on whether smoked marijuana has any medicinal benefits - those aren't in."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
5. Exactly! These statements from Warren are absolutely hogwash. I also trusted
Obama at one time, but now his creditably on many things is diminishing with me. I find that sad, at one time I was a fan of Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
6. Warren (and Obama?) ?
Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-24-10 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. For the unrec crew... nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-24-10 04:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. K & r!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 01:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC