"Yes, not everyone thanks a deity for their survival and nobody should thank their god for a vicious tornado that wiped out so much of what people owned and even took lives, especially the lives of innocent children.
Brandi Amari Williams"
 |
The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!
Marriage is religious and mysogynystic.
Religion is so influential that even atheists talk about marriage as though it was normal. I've added some more details to the main page of AtheistInsurgency.com and in the process began to think about why government has such a strong hand in marriage.
Marriage is a religious institution, is not congruent with nature, allows the government to apply privileges and penalties to married couples that unmarried individuals would not experience, forces women into the beds of men they don't like, allows men to maintain authority and leverage over women, and reinforces a false sense of inferiority and sublimation in women.
Think about it. Just like there are many degrees of attraction between homosexuality, bi-sexuality, and heterosexuality, there are degrees of behavior between polygamy and monogamy. One could make an X-Y axis chart with the two sets of the aforementioned data sources and find the majority of intersecting points in the range of polygamous heterosexuals (if they only practiced unprotected sex). That would only make it cultural norm purely because of successful procreation.
The survival of our species depends on the willingness to raise the children we produce together. There was an advantage in numbers and large families once had a better chance at surviving when they were completely on their own, hunting and gathering.
Now there are social programs that appear to accommodate unprotected polygamy because religious institutions prefer abstinence only education, denial of access to contraceptives, and insurance coverage of Viagra but not birth control.
If we apply the logic of scientific findings in nature between procreating species, and extrapolate it toward human behavior, the value of marriage becomes obvious.
If we as atheists were to add to our platform the idea that marriage serves no real beneficial purpose, we would definitely be a threat to a multi-billion dollar business.
Marriage is a religious institution, is not congruent with nature, allows the government to apply privileges and penalties to married couples that unmarried individuals would not experience, forces women into the beds of men they don't like, allows men to maintain authority and leverage over women, and reinforces a false sense of inferiority and sublimation in women.
Think about it. Just like there are many degrees of attraction between homosexuality, bi-sexuality, and heterosexuality, there are degrees of behavior between polygamy and monogamy. One could make an X-Y axis chart with the two sets of the aforementioned data sources and find the majority of intersecting points in the range of polygamous heterosexuals (if they only practiced unprotected sex). That would only make it cultural norm purely because of successful procreation.
The survival of our species depends on the willingness to raise the children we produce together. There was an advantage in numbers and large families once had a better chance at surviving when they were completely on their own, hunting and gathering.
Now there are social programs that appear to accommodate unprotected polygamy because religious institutions prefer abstinence only education, denial of access to contraceptives, and insurance coverage of Viagra but not birth control.
If we apply the logic of scientific findings in nature between procreating species, and extrapolate it toward human behavior, the value of marriage becomes obvious.
If we as atheists were to add to our platform the idea that marriage serves no real beneficial purpose, we would definitely be a threat to a multi-billion dollar business.
Comment
-
Comment by Dallas the Phallus on November 29, 2008 at 6:48pm -
You need to read the shorty story "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin. See if your library has a copy.
-
Comment by Фелч Гроган on October 25, 2008 at 11:09pm -
Atheist Insurgency: Religion is so influential that even atheists talk about marriage as though it was normal. [...]
This is what perplexes me about gay marriage. Gays openly reject historical cultural "norms", yet want to become a part of what is a stupid, and EXTREMELY expensive tradition. Why ?
Pre-nups and de-facto laws are already here. Why is marriage so critical to them ?
I married once for an immigration racket. But I will never get married again for the sake of tradition. You don't trust me to be your partner ? Fine, take a hike missy.
-
Comment by funk Q on October 25, 2008 at 7:15pm -
I am in agreement. Marriage is totally unnecessary in a secular society. I have previously posted the following in another forum.
With the same sex union argument I have developed an opinion that marriage is not necessary at all in secular society. It exists only for tax advantages. Therefore if people choose to form a legal partnership for tax purposes all that is necessary is a register. Following on from this people should be able to register with as many as they choose of whatever sexuality to form a union. Going even further unions need not even be sexually based but could comprise of any persons who wish to be a legal unit for tax benefits – this would apply to shared households. As a side effect of the state abolishing marriage legal legitimacy of children would disappear. Those who for religious reasons wish to be married can freely do so within their faith.
I have also written in my blog about the subject. Here
We have to start somewhere and I think an atheist forum is appropriate to talk about ending a religion based ritual which has no relevance to nonbelievers.
-
Comment by NH Baritone on October 25, 2008 at 6:08pm -
I think you've defined marriage in an incredibly rigid way that most folks would not recognize. I am a gay atheist who supports same-sex marriage because stability in relationships is beneficial to those involved and to society in general. Rather than being an establishment of religion, religion instead sucked marriage (that already existed in the culture) into the religious institution, interlaced it with dogma, and applied its stamp of respectability on it. You have minimized the strong, inherent desire of people who are neither religious nor even heterosexual to commit publicly to long-term relationships, ones that allow business and family entanglements that are beneficial to both parties.
I am not opposed to people eschewing marriage if that's their choice, but entirely discarding marriage is NOT an atheist issue, any more than civil marriage is a religious one.
CONNECT WITH ATHEIST NEXUS
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
sk8eycat commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Tony, I love that clip! "Wolf Gets Blitzed"...tee-hee.
Did anyone read the comments below the You Tube version? they were almost all like, "Yeah, thank the lard for sending a ghastly tornado to kill more than 50…"
The Flying Atheist commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Great clip, Tony. People need to realize that not everybody superfluously and automatically thanks god in a time of crisis. Maybe he's learned a lesson and become a smarter man. "
Natalie A Sera commented on Dallas the Phallus's group LINGUAPHILES & SESQUIPEDALIANS"And then, just to confuse things, there's polymath, which is from the Greek poly = much and manthanein = to learn. So, someone who knows a lot. Or at least enough to know that you can get a second crop from that field! Sorry, couldn't…"
Patricia commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Yaaaay Joan!!!
Yaaaay here too.....our exterior renos start Wednesday!!!!"
Tony Carroll commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"
Wolf Blitzer. Open mouth, insert foot. LOL!!!"
Photos
© 2013 Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.
You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!
Join Atheist Nexus