가입쿠폰지급

Not about who is better

??It’s not about who is better, it’s about what we can do together.??
— NeoWayland
Comments

?Covington Catholic CLOSES: Lawsuits, Lies & Threats? by Roaming Millennial

Comments

Utopian ideas

??Many utopian ideas aren't based in reality and require unwilling sacrifice (otherwise called theft). The utopian definition of injustice is always how society is just evil, without considering that society mostly works. So rather than correcting the injustice, society must be corrected.??
— NeoWayland
Comments

?Stossel: Exposing Students to Free Markets? by ReasonTV

Comments

?The Truth - Nathan Philips / Covington Catholic Kids?

tip of the hat to Reason Hit & Run Blog
Comments

Racial segregation came from Washington

Washington Forced Segregation on the Nation

In 1940, the federal government required a Detroit builder to construct a six-foot-high, half-mile-long, north-south concrete wall. The express purpose was to separate an all-white housing development he was constructing from an African-American neighborhood to its east. The builder would be approved for a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan guarantee he needed only if he complied with the government's demand.

Today, most African Americans in every metropolitan area remain residentially concentrated or entirely separate. That fact underlies or exacerbates many of the nation's most serious social and economic problems, from relatively low intergenerational mobility to the disproportionate prevalence of hostile encounters between police and disadvantaged black youths in neighborhoods without access to good jobs. The Detroit wall offers a striking illustration of an underappreciated truth about this shameful situation: Racial segregation in America was, to a large degree, engineered by policy makers in Washington.

Beginning in the 1930s, civil rights litigators won court victories that desegregated law and graduate schools, then colleges and, with 1954's Brown v. Board of Education ruling, elementary and secondary schools. These legal victories helped to spur a civil rights movement that, in the 1960s, forced an end to racial segregation in public transportation, in public accommodations, in employment, and in voting.

     — Richard Rothstein
Comments

?What is a man? A response to Gillette?

tip of the hat to Longrider
Comments

Rite to right

??*sighs*

I'd argue that the writing was on the wall when marriage was legally defined and moved away from being a religious rite to being a secular right.

That being said, I agree with Mrs. Bookworm.

The idea of what is "permissible" is flawed.

Mala in se means bad in and of itself. Something is mala in se if and only if it threatens or results in measurable damage to life, liberty, and property. Murder, violent attacks, rape, kidnapping, and theft are included. The key concept here is "measurable damage.”
Mala prohibita means bad because it is prohibited. Something is mala prohibita if and only if the state has forbidden it. I would add regulation as well. Driving without a license or insurance, unusual sex, public nudity, profanity, recreational drug use, opening a small business without the "proper" permit, all these are included. The key concept here is "forbidden." Mala prohibita means that the government will impose morality and ethics by force.

It's no secret that I believe most of the problems in American society are because of too much government and
mala prohibita laws.”



Not true. Marriage was originally a religious rite that was recognized on a secular level.

When marriage was legally defined, it was to keep undesirables from marrying. Historically, it's been used to prevent marriage between those with different faiths. In the U.S., the law was also used to prevent interracial marriages.

Just another example of why giving religion the force of law isn't a good idea.



The concept of marriage (although certainly not the word) predated the separation of secular law from religious law. Prior to that, marriage was recognized as spiritual manifestation of the temporal and the temporal manifestation of the spiritual. Sacred marriages between the king and the priestess to insure fertility were common practice.

As far as we know, the U.S. Constitution was the first time that people recognized government authority didn't derive from the Divine but the will of the people. Without that, it would have been impossible to separate any kind of marriage from it's religious aspects.

Handfasting was (and is) just another marriage rite. Most invoke the Divine. Ceremonies originated as religious rites.

Common law is the set of customs and precedents that comes mainly from previous judgements. Much of English common law was derived from Biblical principles and existing customs. Prior to the 20th Century, common law was fairly established and didn't change often.

As far as only between a man and a woman throughout history, well, no. Emperor Nero married males at least three times, one time as a bride. There are examples in Mesopotamia and China. John Boswell made some interesting (and unsubstantiated) claims about the early Orthodox Church. There are examples of same sex marriages among some Native American cultures, although technically those were special cases involving a third gender role.



Gods, you quote me and you still can't get it right.

I said that marriage was originally a religious rite. It was. Mating, living together, raising a family, that's different. Marriage rites join together the couple, the secular and spiritual, and humans and the Divine.

That's why it is called a rite.



"I'd argue that the writing was on the wall when marriage was legally defined and moved away from being a religious rite to being a secular right." That was the first thing I said on this thread about that topic.

"Marriage was originally a religious rite that was recognized on a secular level." That followed the "Not true," that you quoted.

I make the original typo or misspelling. I'm insomniac and sometimes I am more tired than I should be while typing. But I choose my words and phrases with care.

All of them.



Old Testament? That's the only source you're willing to consider?

"…but monogamous pairings are deeply biological." Nope.

Sex is only partially about offspring, it's other major purpose is bonding. If it were only about kids, women would get pregnant much more often and people wouldn't enjoy sex so much.

If you are going to trot out something about the biological basis for monogamy, I know you are overlooking the other great primates and several thousand years of human history.

And by the way, monogamy and marriage are two different things. You can have monogamy in marriage, but marriage isn't necessarily monogamous. I happen to think it should be, but that doesn't make it so.



Actually it didn't start as a discussion of historical standards. It started as a discussion of what was permissible. The historical justifications came later.

I think that with very very few exceptions, a free nation shouldn't have the power to tell people what is and is not allowed. That means that people are going to make choices that others, even a majority of others, don't like. Sometimes that means paintings of Elvis on black velvet. Sometimes that means peanut butter and sardine sandwiches. And sometimes that means red sports cars with no mufflers screaming down the street.

Traditionally religious based law has not worked well in the United States. Usually the bigger effort to push "value based" law has resulted in more and more people resisting. It probably has something to do with the attitude that Americans don't want a church they don't belong to telling them what they are allowed to do. That was a major reason why the Constitution doesn't mention Deity at all except in the date and the First Amendment gives defines individual religious freedom.

English common law did give special privileges and obligations to married people. But even then, the marriage rite was religious in origin. During the 19th Century, some decided to make marriage legal instead of religious. That's when the definition was handed off to judges and legislators. That's when it ceased being religious and that is when the religious aspects no longer had legal roots. At that point and even today, marriage is what the law says it is. Marriage could be between a goldfish, a goat, and a forty-three year old with bad toenails if that is what the law says it is. When marriage became a legal right for some, then under the Constitution it could not be denied to anyone. Regardless of it's religious origins (which I freely acknowledge), it was no longer religious and was legal.

Using the law to restrict marriage so it only occurs between a man and a woman based on OT precedent inflicts one religion on everyone else in society, whether they belong to that religion or not. What's worse, it inflicts an interpretation of religion on everyone else. Utah couldn't become a state until they banned polygamy, even though there was ample Biblical precedent.

Yes, there are examples of marriage that weren't just between a man and a woman. You wrote: "But throughout history, in every case marriage was a contract between a man and a women, regardless of how the event was solemnized." It's an argument for marriages only occurring between a man and a woman, which we know hasn't always been the case. If you had said mostly, I would have gone with it. Even then, it doesn't make the case that same sex couples should be denied the legal right to marriage. After all, until the 20th traditionally women were denied the right to vote and that got changed.

No, I don't think that the OT is a historical record, although that doesn't diminish it's meaning and relevance for those who have chosen one of the big three monotheisms. Treating the OT as a historical record pretty much demands that it's more fantastic elements be widely accepted, which again means imposing one religion on everyone else.??
NeoNotes are the selected comments that I made on other boards, in email, or in response to articles where I could not respond directly.

Comments

Massive roundup to clear my files

Headlines that don't merit their own entry


Renown Forensic Criminologist: California Is Becoming A ‘Third World Country’



Credit Card Companies Have No Business Playing Second Amendment Censors



Judge unseals trove of internal Facebook documents following our legal action

“A trove of hidden documents detailing how Facebook made money off children will be made public, a federal judge ruled late Monday in response to requests from Reveal.”

Tim Cook calls on FTC to let consumers track and delete their personal data



FISA shocker: DOJ official warned Steele dossier was connected to Clinton, might be biased



N.Y. Bill Would Violate Gun Rights, Free Speech Rights, and Privacy



Spain Has No Government For 10 Months - Economy Grows, Unemployment Falls To 18.9%



Worse than you thought: inside the secret Fitzgerald probe the Navy doesn’t want you to read



REAL ID Puts Personal and National Security At Risk: New at Reason



How the US Spent Billions to Change the Outcome of Elections Around the World: A Review



How an Experimental Billion-Dollar Privacy Lawsuit Could Clobber Facebook



France's Macron reeling as tough stance against 'yellow vests' backfires



Green Berets Targeted After Anonymous Email Exposed Lowered Standards



Counting Americans

Why do Democrats fear the citizenship question?

가입쿠폰지급Are Boycotts Protected by the First Amendment?

Only if you like the cause they serve, according to supporters of laws that target the anti-Israel BDS movement

'Traditional masculinity' deemed harmful, could lead to sexual harassment, medical group says



Watergate by Any Other Name



Employees at Amazon’s Ring have been spying on customers



The Decline And Fall Of The European Union



Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the voice of an ignorant generation



Trump Grounds All Congressional Travel on Govt Planes During Shutdown Without WH Approval



Rabbis Protest Omar Appointment To Foreign Relations



U.S. special counsel disputes report Trump told lawyer to lie



‘This is not a close decision’: Federal Judge Strikes Down Lame-Duck Changes to Wisconsin Voting Laws



Anti-Wall GOP Rep. Will Hurd: 'There's a Thing We Care About in Texas Called Private Property Rights'



Judge Rules Against Syracuse University Students' Free Speech Rights



Why are people cheering for no deal?


Comments

Era of woke capitalism

tsfpqlrztta21

Comments

Doubts

Doubts raced through my mind as I considered the feasibility of enforcing a law which the majority of honest citizens didn't seem to want.
— Eliot Ness

Read More...
Comments

Truth, liberty and the rule of law

??I honor truth, liberty, and the rule of law in that order.??
— NeoWayland
Comments

“Gillette SLAMS Toxic Masculinity: "Men, Do Better!"”

“A new Gillette commercial tackles toxic masculinity & metoo, but reactions say it's anti-male.”

Read More...
가입쿠폰지급Comments

“Stossel: Government Shutdown Shows Private Is Better”

“The government shutdown is now longer than any in history. The media say it's a "crisis."”

Read More...
Comments

The razor blade scam

Occupy Your Bathroom

Read More...
Comments

Oversized headline catchup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments

가입쿠폰지급NeoNotes — Looking good

Two video monitors of equal size. A dozen people, some of who were Democrats. Both videos played side by side with the volume turned down. All but one person thought that Trump came across stronger, more confident, better body language, and more convincingly. One guy said that Pelosi and Schumer looked like high school student council candidates.

Read More...
Comments

NeoNote — Unstable people (and not who you think)

Now, see, I was going to make nice here and just touch on the subject.

Read More...
Comments

Insults

Stop insulting Americans just because they vote for someone you don’t like.
— Dan Crenshaw
Comments

Forgot to measure the animals

“NAU researchers combine satellite data and modeling to predict climate change”

Read More...
Comments

Oversized year change roundup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments

You see, I've done this before.

??You see, I've done this before. When True Believer Christians told me I was damned and a mortal threat to their children. When conservatives told me that only one way could save the country and anything else threatened their children. When progressives told me that capitalism and individualism were dead and should stay that way for the sake of the children. When well-fed third wave feminists in designer clothes told me about how they were oppressed by the patriarchy and wouldn't have children. When pagans lectured me on the evils of monotheism and how love would save the world. Always, always, ALWAYS the pattern is exactly the same. In the absence of understanding, triviality dominates. The enlightened demand sacrifice from everyone else. "For the children" is for those living and in charge. Anyone who offers an absolute won't brook dissent. Experts are uniquely qualified to fuck the situation up beyond any hope of repair. Government is not your friend.

So you have a chance here to change your behavior, change your pattern and accept responsibility. Your choice.??
Comments

It's not love, it's passion

??Most importantly, it's not love. It's passion. We're not "wired" to seek out positive emotions over negative emotions. What our bodies want is the intensity, the peak, not the direction. What we choose to do with that passion, that's up to us. We can create or we can destroy. We can use it to rise above our fellow humans, we can use it as a means to cut ourselves off, or we can use it to give a hand up. Sometimes, each choice is necessary. There's no one answer that will serve in every situation or for every person. We have to trust that they will make a good choice.??
— NeoWayland, comments from Column: Come Darkness, Come Light
Comments

Justification for control

??Despite their poetry, many monotheists expect others to sublimate their faith to the monotheism. They aren't interested in what we share except as a justification for control.??
— NeoWayland, comments from Column: Come Darkness, Come Light
Comments

“Love is reciprocal.”

??Love is reciprocal. Without true sharing, love is just an excuse and invitation for abuse.??
Comments

Goldwater on religion and politics

There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.'
— Barry Goldwater, September 16, 1981

Comments

Holiday week roundup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments

Friday roundup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments

“DRAG QUEEN KIDS: The New Normal?”

“Drag Queen Kid Desmond is Amazing recently danced at a gay bar & Lactatia the 8 year old drag queen has been praised by progressives. Drag Queens are increasingly being invited to speak at schools, so is drag the normal for children?”

Read More...
Comments

Thursday roundup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments

“Stossel: Does Silicon Valley manipulate users?”

“The new film "The Creepy Line" argues that tech giants sometimes silence conservatives and try to steer America left.”

Read More...
Comments

Cloned giants

“Conservationists plant a 'super grove' of redwood trees cloned from ancient stumps”

Read More...
Comments

A Bush secret

“George H.W. Bush secretly sponsored a Filipino child for 10 years.”

Read More...
Comments

“Journalism is…”

Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.

Comments

Wednesday roundup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments

NeoNote — Politicos without sin

As long as you buy into the idea that one side is marginally better, the circus continues and you are cut out of the decisions.

Read More...
Comments

Tuesday roundup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments

“Media Hype Questionable Gun Control Study”

“Dozens of news outlets reported that America has the most mass shooters in the world. Many say that shows America needs more gun control.”

Read More...
Comments

Monday super-sized roundup

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Read More...
Comments
2019       2018       2017       2016       2015       2014       2011       2010       2009       2008       2007       2006       가입쿠폰지급