hurtloam wrote:
kdm1984 wrote:
I posted this on another autism forum, and it also got moved to the religion sub-forum in time. Good discussion, but ultimately the main point has gotten side-tracked. Just want to remind everyone that as much as my own belief system informs my defense of marriage here, the defense of marriage was the primary topic, and not religion. Again, my spouse is not theistic, and he nonetheless supports marriage for the right reasons as well. We have a good marriage. A couple of atheists on the other autism forum also defended marriage. I understand not everyone is designed to be married, and the Apostle Paul esteemed singleness as the highest calling (for those who can accept it). Still, in the day and age where people would want to tear down this institution, despite the benefits offered across numerous cultures and religions, I've found it very beneficial for me and mine, hence a defense of it.
That is all.
You brought religion into it though. It was the basis of your argument.
Yes, I brought religion to it, but again, the primary purpose is defending marriage. You do realize there can be sub-points to an argument, yes? I really don't know how many times I need to repeat this -- it's even in my original post -- but once again:
Just want to remind everyone that
as much as my own belief system informs my defense of marriage here, the defense of marriage was the primary topic, and not religion.
How much more clear can this be?
Also, everyone sure likes to ignore the fact that my husband is non-theistic. Sure is an inconvenience for some here trying to twist my argument, isn't it? Ignoring it doesn't cause the fact to cease to exist.
If you didn’t want us talking about the religious aspects of it, why did you mention it in your original post?
No one needs to defend marriage. People will continue to marry or not marry depending on their own preferences and tastes.
It’s certainly not something that one should take lightly, though (which was what Fnord was arguing).