 | | Re: Family values? —Dave Schuler
| | | | (...) The fact that you suggest the self-evidence of marriage indicates that you and I have two fundamentally divergent worldviews. That's fine, of course, but we need to recognize that certain issues are therefore insoluble between us, and this may (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —James Simpson
| | | | | (...) Granted, but i'd be suprised if anything is ever solved in debate. Personally, I prow around here because I enjoy a gentlemanly clash of arms and because I think that it's fundamentally important to speak up about certain things. For instance, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Christopher L. Weeks
| | | | | (...) to (...) faithfullness, (...) It sounds like you are saying that the crux of the moral status of marriage comes from: fidelity, duty, and commitment. How does fidelity work in a culture which accepts polygamous marriage as the norm? Is the (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —James Simpson
| | | | | (...) The crux of marriage is indeed fidelity, duty, and commitment...but fidelity, duty and commitment are not owed by the betrothed merely to oneanother, but also to the moral absolutes which have pressing claim on their conduct. If you do not (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | |
