Page 9 of 21
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:20 am
by TPRJones
It was part of the continued interview that I linked to. Not in that video but the one where they kept going.
There's more here as well, including links to some references.
From the 16th century onwards, homosexuality has been recorded in Africa by European missionaries, adventurers and officials who used it to reinforce ideas of African societies in need of Christian cleansing.
The Portuguese were among the first Europeans to explore the continent. They noted the range of gender relations in African societies and referred to the "unnatural damnation" of male-to-male sex in Congo. Andrew Battell, an English traveller in the 1590s, wrote this of the Imbangala of Angola: "They are beastly in their living, for they have men in women's apparel, whom they keep among their wives."
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:46 am
by Vince
Okay, I didn't watch much of the video once I saw it was a comedy show. Read the article and it seems it was definitely tolerated. I think it may be overselling it to say it was universally celebrated. I hope I don't have to point out that I in no way am okay with the draconian laws they are putting forth there.
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:07 am
by TPRJones
I wouldn't think anyone here would be, even those here opposed to gay marriage aren't in the same ballpark as the awful stuff going on over there.
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:36 am
by Leisher
<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/q1wwe9-be2Y?hl=en_US& ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/q1wwe9-be2Y?hl=en_US&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 12:24 pm
by Malcolm
Vince wrote:Just kind of surprised by that, as before I had read the historically there were only a couple of cultures that accepted gay marriages (wanting to say a couple of them were American Indian tribes).
Not necessarily marriage, but included two dudes fucking nonetheless.
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:15 pm
by TheCatt
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:46 pm
by GORDON
You and Thib can finally make it official.
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:13 am
by TheCatt
He's a little too grumpy for me.
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:23 am
by Vince
Yay!
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:33 am
by TheCatt
They got to Vince.
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:51 am
by TPRJones
Hard to get too excited about some government official announcing that he's going to follow the existing legal requirements of his job. I mean I know that's rare, but it shouldn't be.
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 1:50 pm
by Malcolm
5 more states legalize gay marriage because the Supreme Court rejects ban arguments without comment.
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 5:54 pm
by TheCatt
6 more may follow soon, including North Carolina
The Fourth Circuit considered and overturned Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage in July, and on Monday it reiterated that ruling. The Virginia case was one of those the Supreme Court left alone, which means the Fourth Circuit's ruling stands.
In North Carolina, a federal judge must first lift a stay put in place after that ruling, according to Chris Brook, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in North Carolina. The judge then would have to issue a written order declaring unconstitutional the amendment North Carolina voters passed in 2012 defining marriage in the state as being between one man and one woman, Brook said.
Federal Judge William Osteen, Jr., in Greensboro, said he wouldn't lift the stay until all parties in the state cases can file status reports. He has asked for that information within 10 days.
In his order, Osteen wrote that the Fourth Circuit mandate looks like it will require him to overturn the amendment.
...
Attorney General Roy Cooper, a Democrat, has said that he would no longer defend North Carolina’s law, and after Monday's decision, the ACLU pressed for change.
Edited By TheCatt on 1412632521
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 6:56 pm
by thibodeaux
Too lazy to review the thread: what's the over-under on legalized polygamy?
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 9:28 pm
by Leisher
thibodeaux wrote:Too lazy to review the thread: what's the over-under on legalized polygamy?
You mean the thing everyone in this country was screaming needed to be illegal 15(?) years ago?
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 7:43 am
by thibodeaux
Don't you know history began in 2000 when Bush stole the election? Racist. Anyway, polygamy. Think about it: there has never ever been "gay marriage" in any human society. Polygamy, however, has a pretty solid pedigree; Hell, it's even in the Bible!
Polygamy is in fact practiced in many places today, and many of those practitioners are, shall we say, very persuasive victim groups ::cough Muslims cough::
The only thing holding back legalization in this country, I believe, is that the poster children of polygamy are Mormons. Who are the most disgustingly WHITEST White People in the world. So naturally anything they like is icky. If not for the Mormons, the Left would be tripping over themselves to give Muslims polygamy.
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:00 am
by Vince
thibodeaux wrote:The only thing holding back legalization in this country, I believe, is that the poster children of polygamy are Mormons. Who are the most disgustingly WHITEST White People in the world. So naturally anything they like is icky. If not for the Mormons, the Left would be tripping over themselves to give Muslims polygamy.
I don't even think that's holding them back. I think what the left is aiming for is for marriage not to mean anything. Of course, they can't say that so they started with the rights for gays to marry. Next will be polygamy. Then marriage to your xbox.
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:32 am
by Malcolm
I think what the left is aiming for is for marriage not to mean anything.
It already is meaningless except for the legal entanglements.
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:47 am
by Vince
Malcolm wrote:I think what the left is aiming for is for marriage not to mean anything.
It already is meaningless except for the legal entanglements.
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
An what do all of your exhibits have in common OTHER than marriage?
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:16 am
by Malcolm
Vince wrote:Malcolm wrote:I think what the left is aiming for is for marriage not to mean anything.
It already is meaningless except for the legal entanglements.
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
An what do all of your exhibits have in common OTHER than marriage?
They reflect this country's increasingly secular attitude towards the ceremony as opposed to the varying definitions laid out in the world's holy books. Shall I link the UK and Aussie versions of Wipe Swap?
Edited By Malcolm on 1412694980