Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Rome does not equal Roman Empire; same with Greeks.

Those conquered territories maintained their own religions and customs. I don't know what their position was on homosexuality, but it's incorrect to assume that it was widely accepted throughout the empires just because it was accepted in Rome and Athens.

You know nothing about the Greeks and Romans. Homosexuality was widely accepted throughout the empires from the Celts, the Gauls, Germanic tribes, Dacians, Egyptians, etc. There were different 'flavors' to religion and customs but it was widespread and frequently depicted in art.

Don't overreach, actually I do: I grew up on the old continent and studied history there. Not surprised that sexual orientation was not included in school books. In any case, do you have any resources that back up your statement that it was depicted in Germanic, Celtic, Gaelic & Dacian art (or others)?

Ooooh, you studied history on the Continent. How.... continental of you. I'm not the pp, but over here in good old US of A it's not in the school books, either. But certainly not because it didn't exist.

Looks like you failed reading comprehension in school.

You have me confused with someone else. I was merely reacting to the ridiculous suggestion that your place of study gave you special insight into homosexuality in ancient history.

In bold for your convenience. I did not say it did not exist, or that I have special insight in the subject - just that you can't assume it was widely accepted. Rome's style of ruling involved administrative oversight while being careful not to impose their mores on the conquered people, who continued to practice their own customs and religions. I come to these boards to learn, not to argue, so I was genuinely interested in what the sources are (PP said homosexual rels were frequently depicted in art). And if those art pieces didn't make it to our era, perhaps Herodotus or other historians described them?

My background and place of study were relevant in response to PP who said I knew nothing about what is, in fact, my own people's history.

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I personally think that marriage should be between a man and a woman forming a bond before God.

All those wishing to marry outside of religious reasons (whether gay or straight) should be allowed civil unions. Both marriage and civil unions should be given the same rights under the law.

My husband and I got married by a judge (not in a church) but we don't say we're "civil unioned". We are able to say that we are married, and so should same sex couples. I don't necessarily think that churches should be required to perform same sex marriages, just that civil ceremonies (just like we had) be viewed as a marriage in the eyes of the law.

My point being is that same sex marriage represents a VERY radical shift on the meaning of marriage, an institution that has been the bed rock of civilization for thousands of years, and think of me what you will, but the notion makes me very apprehensive.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

If people were marching in the streets saying, "Outlaw hetero marriage! Outlaw traditional families! Only same sex marriages from now one!" THEN I would agree that this is a radical shift in the fabric of society and you might be right to be apprehensive. But seriously, I don't think that giving gays the right to marry is going to impact our society so negatively that any one needs to be apprehensive. People will still get married. Have babies. Be responsible for them. Some of those people will even STAY married.

Hetero divorce is a more serious cultural problem than gay marriage.

Just giving this minority the same rights all the rest of us have is not going to make the sky fall. Just like Civil rights and women voters - despite the hand-wringing at the time - didn't spell the doom of our civilization.

You should focus your energy on more important threats to our families. Can't safely raise your kids if it's 115 degrees outside, in a drought, no potable water, no food...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Rome does not equal Roman Empire; same with Greeks.

Those conquered territories maintained their own religions and customs. I don't know what their position was on homosexuality, but it's incorrect to assume that it was widely accepted throughout the empires just because it was accepted in Rome and Athens.

You know nothing about the Greeks and Romans. Homosexuality was widely accepted throughout the empires from the Celts, the Gauls, Germanic tribes, Dacians, Egyptians, etc. There were different 'flavors' to religion and customs but it was widespread and frequently depicted in art.

Don't overreach, actually I do: I grew up on the old continent and studied history there. Not surprised that sexual orientation was not included in school books. In any case, do you have any resources that back up your statement that it was depicted in Germanic, Celtic, Gaelic & Dacian art (or others)?

Ooooh, you studied history on the Continent. How.... continental of you. I'm not the pp, but over here in good old US of A it's not in the school books, either. But certainly not because it didn't exist.

Looks like you failed reading comprehension in school.

You have me confused with someone else. I was merely reacting to the ridiculous suggestion that your place of study gave you special insight into homosexuality in ancient history.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Rome does not equal Roman Empire; same with Greeks.

Those conquered territories maintained their own religions and customs. I don't know what their position was on homosexuality, but it's incorrect to assume that it was widely accepted throughout the empires just because it was accepted in Rome and Athens.

You know nothing about the Greeks and Romans. Homosexuality was widely accepted throughout the empires from the Celts, the Gauls, Germanic tribes, Dacians, Egyptians, etc. There were different 'flavors' to religion and customs but it was widespread and frequently depicted in art.

Don't overreach, actually I do: I grew up on the old continent and studied history there. Not surprised that sexual orientation was not included in school books. In any case, do you have any resources that back up your statement that it was depicted in Germanic, Celtic, Gaelic & Dacian art (or others)?

Ooooh, you studied history on the Continent. How.... continental of you. I'm not the pp, but over here in good old US of A it's not in the school books, either. But certainly not because it didn't exist.

Looks like you failed reading comprehension in school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I should add that between them the Celts, Romans, Greeks and Persians covered most of the known world, and all tolerated homosexuality.

Yes, but she would stil lose the argument. Tolerating homosexuality is not the same thing as sanctioning homosexual marriage. None of them did. Homosexual marriage is a very new development in human society.

Capitalism is actually a comparatively new development as well when you think about it. We lived without capitalism for thousands of years.

Sodom and gomorrah is the best known and most tolerant.

Anonymous wrote:I should add that between them the Celts, Romans, Greeks and Persians covered most of the known world, and all tolerated homosexuality.

Yes, but she would stil lose the argument. Tolerating homosexuality is not the same thing as sanctioning homosexual marriage. None of them did. Homosexual marriage is a very new development in human society.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Rome does not equal Roman Empire; same with Greeks.

Those conquered territories maintained their own religions and customs. I don't know what their position was on homosexuality, but it's incorrect to assume that it was widely accepted throughout the empires just because it was accepted in Rome and Athens.

You know nothing about the Greeks and Romans. Homosexuality was widely accepted throughout the empires from the Celts, the Gauls, Germanic tribes, Dacians, Egyptians, etc. There were different 'flavors' to religion and customs but it was widespread and frequently depicted in art.

Don't overreach, actually I do: I grew up on the old continent and studied history there. Not surprised that sexual orientation was not included in school books. In any case, do you have any resources that back up your statement that it was depicted in Germanic, Celtic, Gaelic & Dacian art (or others)?

Ooooh, you studied history on the Continent. How.... continental of you. I'm not the pp, but over here in good old US of A it's not in the school books, either. But certainly not because it didn't exist.