cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Religion
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-09-2007, 05:58 AM   #61
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burning Bright View Post
Thanks...I think.
I hope you stick around too. Sorry I said I didn't like you. I already changed my mind.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 05:58 AM   #62
Indy Coug
Senior Member
 
Indy Coug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
Indy Coug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoonerCoug View Post
It's OK. Brother Brigham didn't believe in immaculate conceptions either.
Irrelevant. She was already betrothed to Joseph.

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=027...D%3E2.0.CO;2-D
Indy Coug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:00 AM   #63
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy Coug View Post

Let it be known that IndyCoug doesn't see anything inherently immoral in people marrying 14 year olds, because that was the average age of marriage 2000 years ago in the Roman Empire.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:01 AM   #64
Indy Coug
Senior Member
 
Indy Coug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
Indy Coug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoonerCoug View Post
Let it be known that IndyCoug doesn't seen anything inherently immoral in people marrying 14 year olds, because that was the average age of marriage 2000 years ago in the Roman Empire.
This isn't what I think. This is what was commonly held as acceptable back then. What my opinion is now (I'M AGAINST IT) is completely and utterly irrelevant as to what society as a whole back then thought about it.

http://www.kingtutshop.com/freeinfo/...ient-Egypt.htm
Indy Coug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:02 AM   #65
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy Coug View Post
This isn't what I think. This is what was commonly held as acceptable back then. What my opinion is now (I'M AGAINST IT) is completely and utterly irrelevant as to what society as a whole back then thought about it.

http://www.kingtutshop.com/freeinfo/...ient-Egypt.htm
I just want to understand your point.

Your point is that marrying 14 year olds 150 years ago was OK?
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:02 AM   #66
Burning Bright
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 183
Burning Bright is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoonerCoug View Post
Here is my logic: If it's wrong to marry 14 year old girls in 2007, then it was wrong 150 years ago.

Now you explain your logic in defense of marrying 14 year old girls 150 years ago.
I didn't say it wasn't wrong. I said I'm not sure. The culture was different back then. People got married young. I'm not defending or supporting it 150 years ago. I'm saying that I'm not sure.

On one hand, God made us and in many societies when a girl menustrates she's considered a woman and is eligble. On the other hand, in 2007, that just seems kinda icky.

So that's my final answer: At this time I'm note sure.
Burning Bright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:03 AM   #67
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burning Bright View Post
I didn't say it wasn't wrong. I said I'm not sure. The culture was different back then. People got married young. I'm not defending or supporting it 150 years ago. I'm saying that I'm not sure.

On one hand, God made us and in many societies when a girl menustrates she's considered a woman and is eligble. On the other hand, in 2007, that just seems kinda icky.

So that's my final answer: At this time I'm note sure.
Sorry I didn't phrase my question properly.

Why do you feel like it's OK to leave the door open? I guess you sort of answered that, but I disagree with you.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:03 AM   #68
Indy Coug
Senior Member
 
Indy Coug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
Indy Coug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoonerCoug View Post
I just want to understand your point.

Your point is that marrying 14 year olds 150 years ago was OK?
I haven't been making reference to events 150 years ago. I'm saying that at some point in the past essentially EVERYONE thought it was OK. What I think is irrelevant as far as that goes.
Indy Coug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:06 AM   #69
Burning Bright
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 183
Burning Bright is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy Coug View Post
LOL! This is a defense???
It's not a defense. It's me saying that I don't know the answer to that question. Want me to make up an answer so you have some closure? Too bad. I'll think about it. Maybe I'll arrive at a conclusion, maybe I won't.
Burning Bright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 06:06 AM   #70
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy Coug View Post
I haven't been making reference to events 150 years ago. I'm saying that at some point in the past essentially EVERYONE thought it was OK. What I think is irrelevant as far as that goes.
I want to know what you think about 150 years ago.

I know what you think about 2007, and I know what you think about 1 AD.

Why is your opinion irrelevant? Does it become moral if society accepts it? Does that mean slavery was moral because it was accepted by almost everyone in the Americas for so long?
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.