If things were like they were when I was born I'd agree, but these days divorce is so easy that there's no real difference between marriage and cohabitation. There's no penalty whatever for adultery, no longer any social stigma to divorce, women no longer have the financial incentive to stay with her husband, etc.
Some people see gay marriage as a threat to marriage, I say hogwash; the threats to the institution of marriage are adultery and easy divorce. Outlaw adultery and make divorces harder to obtain and I'd agree with you completely.
Well, there are benefits of course, like privacy, arranging stuff like I want it and actually knowing where stuff is. Women had a bad habit of always putting things away but never in the same place. The latter is a relic of our ancient hunter-gatherer past -- men are wired for action, the movement in the bushes that signify game (food), while women are wired for looking for berries and nuts. So you ask your wife "where's the grabonifier" and she'll always answer "well look for it, not understanding that men aren't good at looking for things that are standing still. You always get to watch what you want to watch and listen to what you want to listen to. But there aren't any economic advantages at all unless your spouse is a spendthrift.
But then you have only one income with most of the same bills; the rent or mortgage is the same no matter how many people live there, the utilities are pretty much the same, and food is pretty cheap in the US. You have help with housework and yardwork, someone to call 911 if you fall down the stairs and break your hip and the phone that broke your hip, you shouldn't have to go trolling the bars looking for sex (or wanking), etc.
I guess the bottom line is none of the advantages are financial, even if there may be more nonfinancial benefits.
I thought Blockbuster was dead? The last one in my town closed down a long time ago. There's Redbox for a buck. Hell, I have a dozen movies I borrowed from a friend I haven't watched yet, and three more I checked out from the library today, all FREE.
Stupid pricing killed Blockbuster; they were across the street from Family Video renting $4 movies when FamVid had new releases for $3 and older titles (anything older than six months) for a buck.
I'm predicting NetFlix's demise. Gouging customers only works if you have a monopoly, for anyone else it's a sure path to bankrupcy.
Why do you need multi-device streaming to watch a damned movie? Are you part of NetFlix's marketing department? Sure sounds like it. In fact, you sound like the arrogant little NetFlix prick that said "it's only a couple of lattes".
Look, all you have to do is pop the movie in your computer and you can stream the damned thing to any wi-fi enabled device in your house. WTF? This ain't rocket surgery.
Why in the hell do they think folks are going for netflix, anyway? To supplement their over the air TV because a hundred bucks a month for cable is stupid to normal people (excluding stupid normal people who can't really afford it but pay it anyway). Normal people don't go to Starbucks. Normal people drink Folgers of Maxwell House. Poor people drink generic coffee with that nasty filler.
That probably would be cheaper. I know a single engine two seater is costly (or at least was around 1969-70, I knew a guy with a pilot's license. Only flew once with the crazy bastard).
The linked articles (with the exception of one statement) seem to only be referring to single parent households, and the one statement is "Married couples seem to build more wealth, on average, than singles or cohabiting couples". Of course a cohabitating couple will have less than a married couple -- they don't get the tax breaks.
It stands to reason that a girl who gets pregnant in high school isn't going to earn much, which is why (as they note in the linked text) they've been more agressive about child support than in the past. Both say "studies" but don't actually cite any. Not seeing the actual studies I can only guess that single mothers would greatly skew the numbers.
For someone earning $50k/yr (the US median income), from last year's tax forms:
head of household $7354 single $8688
Married jointly $6666 separately $8688
Plus, if I'm living alone and you're married, I only get one personal deduction and you get two. I never could understand people talking about the "marriage penalty". WHAT marriage penalty?
Don't know, those little Cessnas are pretty expensive for normal people to even rent, let alone fly. I wish I had one, would cut the time it tales to drive to St Louis in half.
Suppose you where doing something, that without your knowledge, would condemn you to hell -- like wearing shorts.
Not possible; a Christian's sins are forgiven. The only unforgivable sin is worshiping a different god or gods (like money, for example).
In that hypothetical case yes, I'd want to be told, but not in a hateful, accusatory tone. Screaming "YOU'RE GOING TO BURN IN HELL" is most decidedly not Christian behavior.
What about unmarried couples with children? What about married couples without children? It seems an unmarried couple is no different than a married couple. A childless couple has no bearing on child poverty whether married or not.
Also, the tax breaks that married couples get surely have something to do with their wealth or lack of wealth.
You want to know what is a REAL waste of taxpayer money? Having organized religion manipulate the government to pass legislation that favors their goals.
As opposed to corporations manipulating the government to pass legislation that favors their goals?
Using religion for rich and powerful men's goals, taking advantage of people's faith for their own private gain, has cost humanity far more in terms of lost lives, productivity, education, and money, than it will ever be able to repay
FTFY. Never trust a preacher who wears a necktie, the symbol of wealth and power, the symbol of all that is against Christ's teachings. And don't blame a Catholic for what their church does (although you might blame them for not becoming Protestant when they learned of the rapes).
But that's what I'm railing against here! When I got divorced, my then teenaged daughters lived with me. Why should someone who was married with one kid, making the same income as me, pay fewer taxes? It just isn't fair! IMO you shouldn't be allowed to file jointly. There are a lot of benefits to cohabitation, whether married or not, and few benefits to living alone. Why should being married confer special legal privileges? It makes no sense to me.
What if I don't want my wife (if I still had one) to speak for me in medical issues? My ex-wife is a moron, I'd far rather have had my youngest daughter (bright kid) do it. When my friend Linda was in the hospital dying of cancer, her estranged husband was barred from the hospital grounds. I'd hate for my dad's current wife or my mom's current husband to get the stuff that's been in the family for generations.
That's what wills are for. If you want your wife to have the house (and her name is probably on the title anyway so it's a moot point), leave it to her in your will. There are "living wills" for the medical (and etc.) issues.
Citation, please? Because that's interesting. I saw news of a study a few weeks ago that said that athiests and evangelical Christians had smaller hippocampuses than agnostics, Catholics, and Protestants. Is the hippocampus the part of the brain affected by schitzophrenia?
the nation in the article was Austria, not Australia
Are Christians required to be judgmental assholes?
That was part of what I was speaking about. Christians, in fact, are prohibited from being judgemental assholes! To the judgemental part, "judge not, lest you be judged yourself." as to the asshole part, "treat others as you would want to be treated." I'm sure those "Christian" relatives of yours wouldn't want anybody treating them like that.
My former girlfriend was a bible thumper, once in anger I told her she should stop thumping it and read the damned thing once in a while. The trouble with most Christians is they don't read their bibles and completely ignore what Christ taught.
No, you're one of the few who are doing it right. It's especially galling that the privileged class don't have to undergo the indignities; they just hop on their private jets and go.
What makes that joke so funny is that it's only a tiny bit of an exaggeration. My grandmother, a Southern Baptist, told me once that my great aunt was always hounding her, telling her she was going to hell because she wore pants. It's amazing that so few people who profess to be Christians miss the whole point of their own religion, which is you are forgiven! The only catch is, you have to forgive others as well. IMO those who preach fire and brimstone are sadly misguided.
I'm pleased that more and more Christians are ignoring denominations. The church I attend is nondenominational and has become one of the biggest churches in Springfield (although the fact that the head preacher could have been a stand-up comedian surely has something to do with it).
I just woke up and am only on my second cup of coffee, so I first read rge headline as "Rastafarian" rather than "Pastafarian" (and I missed the "in Australia), and the first thing that came to mind was, if I'm supposed to have freedom of religion, why can't I smoke pot as a sacrament? I agree with the Rastafarians that pot is indeed a sacrament; it does bring the religious person closer to God. Why do I not have the right to adopt a native religion and eat peyote or psilocybin? Why weren't Catholics and many other Christians allowed to drink real wine during prohibition when they performed communion?
As to the pastafarians, at first I thought since this "religion" is an athiest joke on the religious it isn't a real religion, but then I thought of L. Ron Hubbard. If Scientology can be a religion, surely Pastafarianism can be, too.
Someone above mentioned gay marriage, I wonder why government has anything to do with marriage at all? Why should a single parent of one child pay more in taxes than a childless married couple who earn the same amount of income? Marriage itself is a religious rite, and government should stay the hell out. I shouldn't have to get a license to get married, and a judge shouldn't have the authority to marry anyone.
To those Christians who bash gays, I'll quote someone they should be acquainted with: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". You sin enough yourself to worry about anybody else's sins. Fellow Christians, please mind your own fucking business. If God wants an athiest to find him, the athiest will find him.
I'd mod you up if I had half the mod points I had last week, but, why do you not protest these indignities? For that matter, why isn;t my generation (geezers) protesting this like we protested Vietnam?
Slashdot Mirror
If things were like they were when I was born I'd agree, but these days divorce is so easy that there's no real difference between marriage and cohabitation. There's no penalty whatever for adultery, no longer any social stigma to divorce, women no longer have the financial incentive to stay with her husband, etc.
Some people see gay marriage as a threat to marriage, I say hogwash; the threats to the institution of marriage are adultery and easy divorce. Outlaw adultery and make divorces harder to obtain and I'd agree with you completely.
Well, there are benefits of course, like privacy, arranging stuff like I want it and actually knowing where stuff is. Women had a bad habit of always putting things away but never in the same place. The latter is a relic of our ancient hunter-gatherer past -- men are wired for action, the movement in the bushes that signify game (food), while women are wired for looking for berries and nuts. So you ask your wife "where's the grabonifier" and she'll always answer "well look for it, not understanding that men aren't good at looking for things that are standing still. You always get to watch what you want to watch and listen to what you want to listen to. But there aren't any economic advantages at all unless your spouse is a spendthrift.
But then you have only one income with most of the same bills; the rent or mortgage is the same no matter how many people live there, the utilities are pretty much the same, and food is pretty cheap in the US. You have help with housework and yardwork, someone to call 911 if you fall down the stairs and break your hip and the phone that broke your hip, you shouldn't have to go trolling the bars looking for sex (or wanking), etc.
I guess the bottom line is none of the advantages are financial, even if there may be more nonfinancial benefits.
I thought Blockbuster was dead? The last one in my town closed down a long time ago. There's Redbox for a buck. Hell, I have a dozen movies I borrowed from a friend I haven't watched yet, and three more I checked out from the library today, all FREE.
Stupid pricing killed Blockbuster; they were across the street from Family Video renting $4 movies when FamVid had new releases for $3 and older titles (anything older than six months) for a buck.
I'm predicting NetFlix's demise. Gouging customers only works if you have a monopoly, for anyone else it's a sure path to bankrupcy.
Fuck that, we've got enough to deal with in life without adding more liars to the mix.
Welcome to the 21st century.
Why do you need multi-device streaming to watch a damned movie? Are you part of NetFlix's marketing department? Sure sounds like it. In fact, you sound like the arrogant little NetFlix prick that said "it's only a couple of lattes".
Look, all you have to do is pop the movie in your computer and you can stream the damned thing to any wi-fi enabled device in your house. WTF? This ain't rocket surgery.
The trouble with rich people is they don't know they're rich.
Why in the hell do they think folks are going for netflix, anyway? To supplement their over the air TV because a hundred bucks a month for cable is stupid to normal people (excluding stupid normal people who can't really afford it but pay it anyway). Normal people don't go to Starbucks. Normal people drink Folgers of Maxwell House. Poor people drink generic coffee with that nasty filler.
That probably would be cheaper. I know a single engine two seater is costly (or at least was around 1969-70, I knew a guy with a pilot's license. Only flew once with the crazy bastard).
The linked articles (with the exception of one statement) seem to only be referring to single parent households, and the one statement is "Married couples seem to build more wealth, on average, than singles or cohabiting couples". Of course a cohabitating couple will have less than a married couple -- they don't get the tax breaks.
It stands to reason that a girl who gets pregnant in high school isn't going to earn much, which is why (as they note in the linked text) they've been more agressive about child support than in the past. Both say "studies" but don't actually cite any. Not seeing the actual studies I can only guess that single mothers would greatly skew the numbers.
For someone earning $50k/yr (the US median income), from last year's tax forms:
head of household $7354
single $8688
Married jointly $6666
separately $8688
Plus, if I'm living alone and you're married, I only get one personal deduction and you get two. I never could understand people talking about the "marriage penalty". WHAT marriage penalty?
Don't know, those little Cessnas are pretty expensive for normal people to even rent, let alone fly. I wish I had one, would cut the time it tales to drive to St Louis in half.
Suppose you where doing something, that without your knowledge, would condemn you to hell -- like wearing shorts.
Not possible; a Christian's sins are forgiven. The only unforgivable sin is worshiping a different god or gods (like money, for example).
In that hypothetical case yes, I'd want to be told, but not in a hateful, accusatory tone. Screaming "YOU'RE GOING TO BURN IN HELL" is most decidedly not Christian behavior.
What about unmarried couples with children? What about married couples without children? It seems an unmarried couple is no different than a married couple. A childless couple has no bearing on child poverty whether married or not.
Also, the tax breaks that married couples get surely have something to do with their wealth or lack of wealth.
* Apologies to my mother-in-law who is actually a very nice lady.
I got a grin out of that! Is she armed?
Hmm, I don't see any difference at all. Marriage should not matter a bit to an athiest or agnostic.
You want to know what is a REAL waste of taxpayer money? Having organized religion manipulate the government to pass legislation that favors their goals.
As opposed to corporations manipulating the government to pass legislation that favors their goals?
Using religion for rich and powerful men's goals, taking advantage of people's faith for their own private gain, has cost humanity far more in terms of lost lives, productivity, education, and money, than it will ever be able to repay
FTFY. Never trust a preacher who wears a necktie, the symbol of wealth and power, the symbol of all that is against Christ's teachings. And don't blame a Catholic for what their church does (although you might blame them for not becoming Protestant when they learned of the rapes).
Beware of wolves in shepherd's clothing.
Interesting, thank you.
family structures that determine legal inheritance are largely built through marriage.
Not so much any more.
But that's what I'm railing against here! When I got divorced, my then teenaged daughters lived with me. Why should someone who was married with one kid, making the same income as me, pay fewer taxes? It just isn't fair! IMO you shouldn't be allowed to file jointly. There are a lot of benefits to cohabitation, whether married or not, and few benefits to living alone. Why should being married confer special legal privileges? It makes no sense to me.
What if I don't want my wife (if I still had one) to speak for me in medical issues? My ex-wife is a moron, I'd far rather have had my youngest daughter (bright kid) do it. When my friend Linda was in the hospital dying of cancer, her estranged husband was barred from the hospital grounds. I'd hate for my dad's current wife or my mom's current husband to get the stuff that's been in the family for generations.
That's what wills are for. If you want your wife to have the house (and her name is probably on the title anyway so it's a moot point), leave it to her in your will. There are "living wills" for the medical (and etc.) issues.
pot complicates schizophrenia
Citation, please? Because that's interesting. I saw news of a study a few weeks ago that said that athiests and evangelical Christians had smaller hippocampuses than agnostics, Catholics, and Protestants. Is the hippocampus the part of the brain affected by schitzophrenia?
the nation in the article was Austria, not Australia
Like I said, I hadn't had my caffeine fix yet.
Are Christians required to be judgmental assholes?
That was part of what I was speaking about. Christians, in fact, are prohibited from being judgemental assholes! To the judgemental part, "judge not, lest you be judged yourself." as to the asshole part, "treat others as you would want to be treated." I'm sure those "Christian" relatives of yours wouldn't want anybody treating them like that.
My former girlfriend was a bible thumper, once in anger I told her she should stop thumping it and read the damned thing once in a while. The trouble with most Christians is they don't read their bibles and completely ignore what Christ taught.
Q: Why won't Southern Baptists have sex standing up?
A: They're afraid someone will see them and think they're dancing.
No, you're one of the few who are doing it right. It's especially galling that the privileged class don't have to undergo the indignities; they just hop on their private jets and go.
What makes that joke so funny is that it's only a tiny bit of an exaggeration. My grandmother, a Southern Baptist, told me once that my great aunt was always hounding her, telling her she was going to hell because she wore pants. It's amazing that so few people who profess to be Christians miss the whole point of their own religion, which is you are forgiven! The only catch is, you have to forgive others as well. IMO those who preach fire and brimstone are sadly misguided.
I'm pleased that more and more Christians are ignoring denominations. The church I attend is nondenominational and has become one of the biggest churches in Springfield (although the fact that the head preacher could have been a stand-up comedian surely has something to do with it).
I just woke up and am only on my second cup of coffee, so I first read rge headline as "Rastafarian" rather than "Pastafarian" (and I missed the "in Australia), and the first thing that came to mind was, if I'm supposed to have freedom of religion, why can't I smoke pot as a sacrament? I agree with the Rastafarians that pot is indeed a sacrament; it does bring the religious person closer to God. Why do I not have the right to adopt a native religion and eat peyote or psilocybin? Why weren't Catholics and many other Christians allowed to drink real wine during prohibition when they performed communion?
As to the pastafarians, at first I thought since this "religion" is an athiest joke on the religious it isn't a real religion, but then I thought of L. Ron Hubbard. If Scientology can be a religion, surely Pastafarianism can be, too.
Someone above mentioned gay marriage, I wonder why government has anything to do with marriage at all? Why should a single parent of one child pay more in taxes than a childless married couple who earn the same amount of income? Marriage itself is a religious rite, and government should stay the hell out. I shouldn't have to get a license to get married, and a judge shouldn't have the authority to marry anyone.
To those Christians who bash gays, I'll quote someone they should be acquainted with: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". You sin enough yourself to worry about anybody else's sins. Fellow Christians, please mind your own fucking business. If God wants an athiest to find him, the athiest will find him.
And you Jehova's Witnesses, GET OFF MY LAWN!
I'd mod you up if I had half the mod points I had last week, but, why do you not protest these indignities? For that matter, why isn;t my generation (geezers) protesting this like we protested Vietnam?
Damn it,, this is depressing.