XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns   
   XPost: alt.survival   
   From: fmhlaw@comcast.net   
      
   On 10/1/2014 2:38 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:   
   > Just Wondering  wrote in news:542c5f8d$0$1917$882e7ee2   
   > @usenet-news.net:   
   >   
   >> On 10/1/2014 11:01 AM, RD Sandman wrote:   
   >>> Mitchell Holman  wrote in   
   >>> news:XnsA3B8D3316F71Anoemailattnet@216.196.121.131:   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> It sounds like in his book, someone who points out a virtually   
   >>>>> universal historical truth as old as the institution of marriage   
   >>>>> itself, that contradicts what in his mind is "how things should be",   
   >>>>> is a bigot making silly claims.   
   >>>>      What is that "historical truth"?   
   >>>>      Arranged marriage?   
   >>>>      Forced marriage?   
   >>>>      Polygamous marriage?   
   >>>>      Child marriage?   
   >>> Among others.   
   >>>   
   >> Do y'all really lose track of a thread's subject so quickly?  I had   
   >> pointed out that marriage is between a man and a woman.   
   >   
   > Or a man and a girl. Or a widow and her   
   > brother in law. Or a man and many women.   
   >   
   All of which are just special cases of a man and a woman:   
   A man and a young woman.   
   A man and a widowed woman.   
   A man and a woman.  The same man and a (second) woman.   
   Never a man and a man.  Never a woman and a woman.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)