Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Yes, my point was that it doesn't earn you anything you didn't have previously, or need. Do you not see that?Marriage, when legality isn't a factor, like with tribes and people like that, is even more illogical. Them having reasons for doing it does not make it any more logical.
You ARE NOT GAINING ANYTHING necessary, so objectively...marrying for love is illogical.
-AC
Actually, there is a gain legally through marriage. Here are a few:
That's just a few.
Originally posted by RocasAtoll😐
Actually, there is a gain legally through marriage. Here are a few:That's just a few.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What reason is there for a legal contract with no emotional connection, to have any bearing on your love? Absolutely none whatsoever.Can't say for certain? I believe you just won't say.
-AC
We've done a full circle as I have said, marriage or "legal contract" as you call it, can (not 'has to' or 'will'😉 act as a physical symbol for someones emotional love.
I've explained why I can't say for certain, I can't see alternate time-lines of what may or may-not have happened. Why do you think I know and just "won't say"?
Originally posted by RocasAtoll
Actually, there is a gain legally through marriage. Here are a few:That's just a few.
Two things:
1) Legal gains are a fact of marriage, that's not an issue. (see my 1st post on page 4)
2) Your "Wiki" link doesn't work
Originally posted by Robtard
We've done a full circle as I have said, marriage or "legal contract" as you call it, can (not 'has to' or 'will'😉 act as a physical symbol for someones emotional love.
I'm not disputing that, but that is just people connecting the two. It does not mean the two are inherently connected. Just associated with.
I've said it so many times now. Love and marriage are associated, not inherent.
Originally posted by Robtard
I've explained why I can't say for certain, I can't see alternate time-lines of what may or may-not have happened. Why do you think I know and just "won't say"?
I get the impression that you just don't want to accept that your marriage (as in the act, not the relationship) is pointless, aside from legal gains.
This could, of course, not be the case, just my opinion. If you don't feel that way, then I'm wrong. Just a perception.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not disputing that, but that is just people connecting the two. It does not mean the two are inherently connected. Just associated with.I've said it so many times now. Love and marriage are associated, not inherent.
I get the impression that you just don't want to accept that your marriage (as in the act, not the relationship) is pointless, aside from legal gains.
This could, of course, not be the case, just my opinion. If you don't feel that way, then I'm wrong. Just a perception.
-AC
If marriage acts as a physical symbol for someones emotions [love], I do not see how they cannot be connected as a fact.
And I have agreed with you, I just don't agree that they can't be as stone hard fact regardless of peoples individual relationships.
I have no problem with the marriage act itself being pointless; personally my marriage ceremony was a little too extravagant for my personal taste. But I honestly do believe that expressing my love physically through marriage and vice-versa with my wife did act as a catalyst, maybe a minute one, but still something.
Even if I were to get divorced in the future, I wouldn't see my marriage as "pointless' in reference to what I have gained.
I have to leave, I'll be back much later if you wish to continue the debate.
Originally posted by Robtard
If marriage acts as a physical symbol for someones emotions [love], I do not see how they cannot be connected as a fact.
Because someone is simply saying "This is how I feel, and I will show it by doing this.". It's association, not intrinsic linking.
Originally posted by Robtard
And I have agreed with you, I just don't agree that they can't be as stone hard fact regardless of peoples individual relationships.
Because of the nature of the two elements involved.
Originally posted by Robtard
I have no problem with the marriage act itself being pointless; personally my marriage ceremony was a little too extravagant for my personal taste. But I honestly do believe that expressing my love physically through marriage and vice-versa with my wife did act as a catalyst, maybe a minute one, but still something.
So we're settling for "Maybe a minute."? Funny really.
You expressed love with marriage. Nothing more, nothing less. Marriage didn't make it better.
Originally posted by Robtard
Even if I were to get divorced in the future, I wouldn't see my marriage as "pointless' in reference to what I have gained.
But objectively, aside from monetary gain, it is. Not just yours.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"I'm gay so you don't have to say it.", as one way or another, you can't seem to post without somehow reminding us that you are homosexual. If we discuss music; you bring up Elton John, if we discuss discrimination; homosexuality. Even your avatar is one of the world's most famous gay actors.
-AC
You raise three points:
1) "I'm gay, so why bring it up" -I didn't. You did. I pointed out that marriage is NOT an institution that was at all founded on love. You're the one who turned it into a gay comment. Not I.
2) Music. If the topic is favorite artists or musical relevance for the person making a post, then why would I not bring up Elton John? Look at my screen name. Everyone with as much musical knowledge as you profess to have would know that is a reference to Elton John. However, when I start posting pictures of myself in a TOOL costume, you can address my perspective as though you are more relevant than I am. But you won't find any pictures of myself in feather boas or crazy sunglasses. Can you say the same for your presence in the members picture thread, with tool-inspired decorative head gear? My opinion in music is no different from yours, despite the fact that you think being able to play the piano makes you an expert. I play the piano as well. But you don't see me speaking over people who want to voice their opinions in ANY music forum thread. I leave that kind of fanatacism to you people who have been pounding the ivory for far less years than I have. You have the most to say, so you say it. And, you feel the most gratified for doing so. I'm past that. You're young and full of piss and vinegar. So I have no issues with you playing the part.
3)My Avatar. I didn't make Ian McKellen gay. Nor did you. Neither did we choose him to portray my favorite comic book character. But he did. And he is gay. My avatar has nothing to do with the actor who played him, and everything to do with the character he portrays.
Grow the **** up. I can understand being young and pissed off at a world that doesn't understand you. But, the real point is that it DOES understand you. And it has a number of years on your "I'm right and the world is wrong because it's stupid" attitude. You think you're great. And you might be. But the fact that no one else sees it or gives a shit isn't the worlds fault.
I was trying to agree with you, and because you think you're smarter than everyone, you failed to pick up on that. So I hope your sense of self importance serves you as well as you think it will. But it won't.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
You raise three points:1) "I'm gay, so why bring it up" -I didn't. You did. I pointed out that marriage is [B]NOT
an institution that was at all founded on love. You're the one who turned it into a gay comment. Not I.2) Music. If the topic is favorite artists or musical relevance for the person making a post, then why would I not bring up Elton John? Look at my screen name. Everyone with as much musical knowledge as you profess to have would know that is a reference to Elton John. However, when I start posting pictures of myself in a TOOL costume, you can address my perspective as though you are more relevant than I am. But you won't find any pictures of myself in feather boas or crazy sunglasses. Can you say the same for your presence in the members picture thread, with tool-inspired decorative head gear? My opinion in music is no different from yours, despite the fact that you think being able to play the piano makes you an expert. I play the piano as well. But you don't see me speaking over people who want to voice their opinions in ANY music forum thread. I leave that kind of fanatacism to you people who have been pounding the ivory for far less years than I have. You have the most to say, so you say it. And, you feel the most gratified for doing so. I'm past that. You're young and full of piss and vinegar. So I have no issues with you playing the part.
3)My Avatar. I didn't make Ian McKellen gay. Nor did you. Neither did we choose him to portray my favorite comic book character. But he did. And he is gay. My avatar has nothing to do with the actor who played him, and everything to do with the character he portrays.
Grow the **** up. I can understand being young and pissed off at a world that doesn't understand you. But, the real point is that it DOES understand you. And it has a number of years on your "I'm right and the world is wrong because it's stupid" attitude. You think you're great. And you might be. But the fact that no one else sees it or gives a shit isn't the worlds fault.
I was trying to agree with you, and because you think you're smarter than everyone, you failed to pick up on that. So I hope your sense of self importance serves you as well as you think it will. But it won't. [/B]
1) You're the one who took offense, not I.
2) Tool inspired decorated headgear? It's called a beanie hat and I think you'll find the world's populace enjoying said garment as much as me. The fact that the style of the picture was similar has nothing to do with the clothing and/or sexuality. Besides all that, don't get your panties in a bunch by telling me I'm full of piss and vinegar when you're the one sitting there, posting to me in a flurry of hilarious annoyance because I made a humour-tinged homosexual remark. You know I don't have a problem with homosexuality, but if you feel you're exempt from homosexual jokes, you're mistaken.
Your post stinks of insecurity. Maybe that's why you don't come into the music forum anymore. Since your opinion isn't actually equal, in terms of knowledge. You tried speaking about things you didn't know about and myself and a few others send you packing. For someone who isn't trying to be like Elton John, you sure throw a hell of a lot of tantrums too.
3) Does that change the fact that he is gay, and he is in your avatar? No. You said I shouldn't remind people you are gay. My point being that you do so more than I did in the single post.
So I propose that you take your over-reactive, knee-jerk view of me and what I believe or what my attitude is (Which is hilariously off-point and ridiculous), and grow up yourself, because you're acting like an angry little kid who has had his rattle taken away, which is precisely what you're popping off at me for.
If you wish to discuss me or my attitude further, my PM box is open. Until then, don't address me nor my attitude until you can either A) Back up yours or B) Take down mine.
Ta ta.
-AC
I can see good points in both side of this argument. I have to say when I got married that the financial benefits didn't even cross my mind. It's not necessary by any means to show your love but it is a wonderful way of expressing it and it really proves commitment - let's face it, divorce is no walk in the park if it turns out you're not committed! So even though all the points being made here are good, in answer to this threads question, Yes it is still worth getting married! 😄
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Because someone is simply saying "This is how I feel, and I will show it by doing this.". It's association, not intrinsic linking.Because of the nature of the two elements involved.
So we're settling for "Maybe a minute."? Funny really.
You expressed love with marriage. Nothing more, nothing less. Marriage didn't make it better.
But objectively, aside from monetary gain, it is. Not just yours.
-AC
No settling needed... I meant didn't mean the noun "minute", I meant the adjective "minute", as in 'very small' [prn: mI-'nüt]
Yes, I did express love with marriage, that isn't in question as only I know what I felt and my feelings... I was asking you how you can irrevocably say "No, marriage didn't have an emotional affect."
Again, that is subjective, you have no idea what I gained or didn't gain emotionally speaking. I can't even say for absolute certainty and I am married.
Originally posted by ShoLeigh84
I can see good points in both side of this argument. I have to say when I got married that the financial benefits didn't even cross my mind. It's not necessary by any means to show your love but it is a wonderful way of expressing it and it really proves commitment - let's face it, divorce is no walk in the park if it turns out you're not committed! So even though all the points being made here are good, in answer to this threads question, Yes it is still worth getting married! 😄
It proves commitment to those who have been conditioned to think marriage = commitment. A 10 year non-married couple are no less committed.
Originally posted by Robtard
Yes, I did express love with marriage, that isn't in question as only I know what I felt and my feelings... I was asking you how you can irrevocably say "No, marriage didn't have an emotional affect."Again, that is subjective, you have no idea what I gained or didn't gain emotionally speaking. I can't even say for absolute certainty and I am married.
For crying out loud...
I'm saying it irrevocably because given the nature of what marriage LITERALLY is, it is impossible for the actual marriage to give anything. Whether or not you took something from it is irrelevant. Saying Marriage + Love = Gained emotional happiness only implies that you took something from the experience, it doesn't suggest marriage put anything there.
Marriage doesn't add emotionally because it simply can't. It might, as a result, make you feel as though you've gained something, but that's you making the leap, that's YOU creating it, not marriage.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
For crying out loud...I'm saying it irrevocably because given the nature of what marriage LITERALLY is, it is impossible for the actual marriage to give anything. Whether or not you took something from it is irrelevant. Saying Marriage + Love = Gained emotional happiness only implies that you took something from the experience, it doesn't suggest marriage put anything there.
Marriage doesn't add emotionally because it simply can't. It might, as a result, make you feel as though you've gained something, but that's you making the leap, that's YOU creating it, not marriage.
-AC
If you don't want to discuss further, just say so, no need for whining... It's completely your call.
You say that I took something from the experience [marriage], but then you say as fact that the experience didn't put anything there. If I took something, then by default the "experience" had at the very least some direct affect... causality.
Let me break it down this way... do you think physical acts can have a direct affect on ones emotions?
Originally posted by Robtard
If you don't want to discuss further, just say so, no need for whining... It's completely your call.You say that I took something from the experience [marriage], but then you say as fact that the experience didn't put anything there. If I took something, then by default the "experience" had at the very least some direct affect.
Let me break it down this way... do you think physical acts can have a direct affect on ones emotions?
I'm not whining. I just have a distaste for constant misunderstanding for no reason.
To answer your question; Yes, but let ME break it down.
Let's say A is marriage, B is emotion and C is you.
A happens, B happens also. C experiences B. B happened alongside A, it doesn't mean A caused B. It means C associated B with A. Marriage itself didn't give you anything, you simply took something from the general experience of getting married.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not whining. I just have a distaste for constant misunderstanding for no reason.To answer your question; Yes, but let ME break it down.
Let's say A is marriage, B is emotion and C is you.
A happens, B happens also. C experiences B. B happened alongside A, it doesn't mean A caused B. It means C associated B with A. Marriage itself didn't give you anything, you simply took something from the general experience of getting married.
-AC
You're saying I created emotion out of nothing essentially, and I get that and it may very well be true. But simply answering "yes" that physical acts can have a direct affect on emotion in of itself stands that a possibility exist, that the physical experience of marriage had a direct (not imagined) affect on emotion(s).
The EXPERIENCE OF marriage had an EFFECT on emotion.
That's not the same of the actual legality of it putting something there that wasn't there. You aren't still feeling the effects of the ceremony are you? It was all the excitement of the day, not the contract. If it was, you'd still feel the same.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The EXPERIENCE OF marriage had an EFFECT on emotion.That's not the same of the actual legality of it putting something there that wasn't there. You aren't still feeling the effects of the ceremony are you? It was all the excitement of the day, not the contract. If it was, you'd still feel the same.
-AC
That's irrelevant, just because it isn't constantly affecting; doesn't mean an affect wasn't had.
If I eat a steak; it affects my hunger, after the steak has been broken down, passed through my intestinal track and finally been shat out; it no longer affects my hunger; that doesn't mean it didn't have a direct affect at some time.
As a note, marriage is an experience; experiences can affect emotion.
Originally posted by Robtard
That's irrelevant, just because it isn't constantly affecting; doesn't mean an affect wasn't had.If I eat a steak; it affects my hunger, after the steak has been broken down, passed through my intestinal track and finally been shat out; it no longer affects my hunger; that doesn't mean it didn't have a direct affect at some time.
As a note, marriage is an experience; experiences can affect emotion.
If you and your wife said "We're getting married.", and it was a simple as a man simply saying "You're man and wife.", or less, this would have an effect equal to the day that most weddings are seen as? No, why? Because it's the ceremony, the pomp and pageantry of it all that creates the emotion, the emotional connection that YOU make with the events.
It's not the contract nor legality adding anything. That's what you fail to understand. If you could go into a store and buy legal marriage, it wouldn't be the same as having a ceremony, because the act itself doesn't cause the emotion. You don't stand there thinking; "This is beautiful! I'm being legally binded, by contract, to a loved one!". Legality doesn't enter into why you're happy.
-AC