Message #1724

[clistensprechen]

That's nice for one religion, not practiced by everybody and never part of any secular law.

And if Leviticus in Christianity matches up with that same book in Jewish scripture, women had exactly half the value of men in the lord's eyes. Try again.

You are such an ideologue!  The point is that marriage as an institution existed long before the medieval era.  You can't change that.

King David begs to differ.

What do you mean, "King David begs to differ"?  Which of his sins do you think demonstrate that marriage as an institution didn't exist prior to the medieval era?

His many, many concubines, of course. And Gideon's. And...etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc. Admit it: polygamy, not monogamy, is Jewish tradition.

Ah, you're not talking about marriage at all, you're talking about monogamy.  Is that it?

I'm talking about what cons define as being between one man and one woman.  That's not the definition which has been practiced by Judaism no matter how many extensive rules/regulations of Jewish scripture you throw at me.

OK, you're not talking about marriage at all, you're talking about monogamy.  Got it.

I'm talking about American marriage and its history. You're talking about a single religion which, apparently with your approval, recognizes polygamous marriage, as I've not seen you deny it as yet.