Moral Decay in America!

[pholmann]

Nasty intersection at John Sevier Hwy right there. Could have hammered that little car.

Yes it is! I swerved to miss her and still got her in the far left lane. Stupid bitch was pregnant with a baby right behind her (same side I hit) and had no insurance.

 

[5BrothersFabrication]

Re:

I do agree and understand that "moral decay" is a broad term, with many different topics, factors and opinions involved. However morals are related to what is right or prudent based on a lesson or information from an experience. Regardless of the logical slippery slope the social construction view of marriage creates, reality reveals that marriage is a fixed, natural institution, incapable of being redefined. As a rule, as a group, and by nature, a man and woman in a long-term committed relationship bring forth the next generation. Society is built upon this unique institution. Therefore, when we look at the union of a man and woman and the critical role it plays in society, we call this marriage. We did not create marriage or define it, but rather give a name to something that already exists.

So the truth is, it is not culture that constructs marriages or the families that marriages begin. Rather, it is the other way around: marriage and family construct culture. As the building blocks of civilization, families are logically prior to society as the parts are prior to the whole. Bricks aren't the result of the building because the building is made up of bricks. You must have the first before you can get the second.

Our society has attempted to redefine the cultural meaning of marriage, but whatever additions they included will not be marriage, indeed they cannot be marriage, for marriage is a natural institution uncreated by man. In the same way, paper and plastic can be eaten, but that does not make them food. People may observe and celebrate this wonderful institution; however, they have no right to redefine it the way they did.

Holy cripe! I had to read that 1 1/2 times because I'm just a dumb country boy, but man you hit the nail on the head! I'm copying that to my clipboard to use on facetube when some fag loving hippie starts spouting off at me again. Thanks!

 

[patooyee]

Re:

I do agree and understand that "moral decay" is a broad term, with many different topics, factors and opinions involved. However morals are related to what is right or prudent based on a lesson or information from an experience. Regardless of the logical slippery slope the social construction view of marriage creates, reality reveals that marriage is a fixed, natural institution, incapable of being redefined. As a rule, as a group, and by nature, a man and woman in a long-term committed relationship bring forth the next generation. Society is built upon this unique institution. Therefore, when we look at the union of a man and woman and the critical role it plays in society, we call this marriage. We did not create marriage or define it, but rather give a name to something that already exists.

So the truth is, it is not culture that constructs marriages or the families that marriages begin. Rather, it is the other way around: marriage and family construct culture. As the building blocks of civilization, families are logically prior to society as the parts are prior to the whole. Bricks aren't the result of the building because the building is made up of bricks. You must have the first before you can get the second.

Our society has attempted to redefine the cultural meaning of marriage, but whatever additions they included will not be marriage, indeed they cannot be marriage, for marriage is a natural institution uncreated by man. In the same way, paper and plastic can be eaten, but that does not make them food. People may observe and celebrate this wonderful institution; however, they have no right to redefine it the way they did.

That all sounds very intelligent but what everyone seems to be confused about is the legal definition of the term marriage vs. the biological / societal construct also known as marriage, the latter of which you have accurately described.

Essentially there are two marriages. Just as a car can be called a Mustang or a Bronco it does not mean that all horses are now cars. I would think this would be a simple concept.

The social construct of marriage which you refer to has not, and can never be changed. The biological union of two adults of opposite sex that can lead to procreation of the next generation can never and will never change. Two men can not bring forth offspring, neither can two women. The government can decree in as many legal documents as they wish that 2 + 2 = 5, and they may even convince some that it is true. Injustices may even be wrought as a result of the mistake. But 2 + 2 will always = 4 in reality and any attempt to change that by man is folly.

However, largely as a result of "moral decay," or possiblly more accurately stated, the result of less strict societal adherence to universal moral ideals, divorce has become so common that it is necessary for the government to step into the marriage game to regulate. To do so they must create a legal definition of marriage so that they can also define when a marriage is terminated and what to do once it is. In the past it has also been beneficial for the government to encourage societal marrige / family because they knew that it lead to a more stable and increasingly competent society. It is this legal definition of marriage that the Supreme Court recently ruled on. Thus, anywhere the legal definition is applied so to will all the legal privileges and constraints under marriage law. But nothing any government can do can currently change the societal convention known as marriage outside of legal proceedings. It will be really interesting when they are able to successfulyl achieve sex change operations that result in men being able to bear children and women being able to provide sperm!