Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MortMan

No “modern invention” to it.

What IS “modern” is that marriage has been separated from the function of procreating and raising children. And it is not even a NEW “modern” take on marriage. The Romans of the Imperial Age were well into the various forms of “non-traditional marriage” arrangements, all without the benefit of divine blessing. It was not uncommon for, say, a patrician Roman to marry his horse, or take multiple wives, or even an exclusive homosexual relationship. For the lower levels of society, trying to emulate these fanciful versions of “marriage” was just too expensive and rarely indulged in.

The pagan tribes within the Roman Empire, as a matter of course, did pair off as man and woman, as this was the most efficient economic unit that could be formed below the clan and tribal level. Had just about nothing to do with “divine” or “moral” standards. Or even “love”, for that matter.


42 posted on 05/13/2015 11:17:25 AM PDT by alloysteel ("Before I refuse to take your questions, I have an opening statement..." Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: alloysteel
"It was not uncommon for, say, a patrician Roman to marry his horse"

Though not as common as marrying a figment of one's imagination.

It's amusing how many of these arguments for same-sex marriage are so, ….uh...twisted.

66 posted on 05/13/2015 12:55:46 PM PDT by cookcounty ("I was a Democrat until I learned to count" --Maine Gov. Paul LePage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson