"Why Monogamy Matters"

That's what I've been trying to say.

I don't care if Mike Huckabee's ideas about marriage are secretly influenced by Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Budhism, Hare Krishna, Paganism, or Hindu.

I only care if he can articulate a non-religion-based reason that happens to be scientifically supportable.

 

I gave away my V card in high school. So did my wife. We're currently in a stable and happy marriage.

Douthat, though? Dude has problems. Do a Google search for "Chunky Reese Witherspoon" if you want to know whether or not you deserve to be lectured by this scold.

 

Then as long as its an agnostic reason, you're happy, right? See, here we go again. One speaks from his experience of life lessons, which may happen to make common sense, I don't care who brings it...an athiest whose daughter didn't want to overpopulate the earth or a Christian who believes in abstinence as being a biblical teaching. I don't care either way.

 

We need to quit fearing the other side and work together on common ground or we're headed nowhere good.

 

Huh?

 

You don't want to buy any argument or position that someone bases on religion, right? Then if it's agnostic - one that keeps religion out of the equation, then it just continues the divide. I said I don't care who brings the idea if it's a good idea no matter whether he is agnostic, athiest, Muslim or Christian, as long as it makes good common sense. Your comment sweeps any speckle of religion laced or based ideas out..throwing the baby out with the bathwater. That's how I took your post.

 

If it's a good idea, there will be proof to be found of that other than the pages of a 2,000-year-old work of creative nonfiction.

I'm not understanding your objection.

 

If a person supports abstinence on the notion of his faith, yet abstinence for sake of procreation is good, then what's wrong with him basing his support in that way?

 

Because then he is pushing his faith on others, which is a no-no in this country, as it should be.

 

I don't care what he bases it on. But the Constitution does. If it's "good," then there should be real world evidence outside of religion to support that. Isn't the whole point of morality that following it leads to socially beneficial real-world results?

 

I'm talking about your motivation for supporting something.

Murder. The Bible is against it.
Whoa! We can't have it!

OK, that's too obvious.

Abortion? The Bible is against it.
Whoa, we can't have that!
Wait, there's some evidence that women who have abortions suffer post-traumatic stress or depression or heavy guilt.

Or how about..
Congressional emphasis on diet.

The Bible shows that where Daniel ate vegetables instead of the King's menu, he and his men were healthier.
Oh, we can't have that!
Even if it limits our freedom of choice, healthy diets make sense.

Or maybe...
Women should wear head coverings in public because the Bible says so.
Oh wait, we can't have that!
You're probably right. Silly law.
But then Islam says you're discriminating against them and suddenly, all bets are off because after all, we can't rule against minority rights of any kind.

 

Thank you for proving my point.