A Timeline of Marriage

CinnamonGirl wrote: RT, your queer thing is offensive to me. Kind of sick of it actually. So, I am sure you will continue to use it since that is your purpose it seems, to just make fun of all discussion on the matter. Real discussion anywhere in our future with you?

Just because you feel sick because you can't keep your nose out of others business does not mean the world should abide to your whims. In my view anyway.

I think the history of marriage is fascinating.

Take it up with Queer Nation. Their slogan "We're here! We're queer". Or are you in your usual liberal way going to claim they can use the word but no one else can. Like the n........s calling each other n.......

The new N word...nappy.

Science Chic wrote: Yes, it's so awful that women aren't treated as property anymore. :Loco: :faint:

:Censored :Censored RT :Censored :Whatever:

I love information like this - gives a nice big picture of how people used to think and behave, and shows that what we practice now will be radically different than what our descendants think and do. Well, except for RT's family - they'll live in a compound desperately trying to bring back the good 'ole days where they drag their women by the hair back to the cave!

I am sorry to inform you but Muslims still treat their women as property to this day. Polically correct Americans want to fawn all over quaint religions and cultures but then give lip service to "women aren't treated as property anymore".

MB you are trying to reason with irrational liberal bimbos. You might as well try lasso the moon.

I know a couple Indian (dot, not feather) married couples who didn't pick their own spouses, but they quietly defend the practice noting the divorce rates aren't any different than American couples that marry due to love and passion.

Baileyboy wrote: MB you are trying to reason with irrational liberal bimbos. You might as well try lasso the moon.

So, you are saying liberal women are bimbos why? I am not putting myself in your liberal box by asking this but actually wondering why you choose to call women derogatory, slutty names when you don't agree with them.

CinnamonGirl wrote:

Baileyboy wrote: MB you are trying to reason with irrational liberal bimbos. You might as well try lasso the moon.

So, you are saying liberal women are bimbos why? I am not putting myself in your liberal box by asking this but actually wondering why you choose to call women derogatory, slutty names when you don't agree with them.

It is easier to explain to a two year old why he is considered badly behaved than it is to explain to a liberal adult the flaws in their reality. The fact that they are adult and haven't figured it out pretty much makes the case for the term, a lost cause. And why is it liberals have no problem with libs using the same terminology to denigrate conservative women but get tweaked when it is directed at their own camp. Can dish but can't..........

So is there any study which shows what the divorce rate is among EHarmony and Match.com couples as contrasted to the national numbers?

Baileyboy wrote:

CinnamonGirl wrote:

Baileyboy wrote: MB you are trying to reason with irrational liberal bimbos. You might as well try lasso the moon.

So, you are saying liberal women are bimbos why? I am not putting myself in your liberal box by asking this but actually wondering why you choose to call women derogatory, slutty names when you don't agree with them.

It is easier to explain to a two year old why he is considered badly behaved than it is to explain to a liberal adult the flaws in their reality. The fact that they are adult and haven't figured it out pretty much makes the case for the term, a lost cause. And why is it liberals have no problem with libs using the same terminology to denigrate conservative women but get tweaked when it is directed at their own camp. Can dish but can't..........

Do you ever have facts to back up your claims? Sorry I don't just go by your word on this stuff.

And the point that I offered has been totally lost in the muck.