par4dcourse Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Watching Boston Legal last night, and Shirley's heretofore unseen granddaughter (early college aged) shows up. Denny is beside himself imagining the (unlikely) possibilities. That got me thinking. Follow me here. If the infallible and unerring gawd gives the human species fully functioning sex organs and the hormones to drive them in early teen years, why then do most religions (except cultish ones) frown on any form of sexual behavior until much later? My own cog wouldn't let us date un-chaperoned until both parties were over 18. Did gawd make a four year (on average0 fuckup? I'm not a perv, have grown children of my own, and don't question that early teens shouldn't have sex yet. I'm only questioning the lards timing. Of course, some infidel scientist might postulate that since life expectancy a mere century ago was a brief 40 years or so, and reproduction must start early to perpetuate the species, and evolution hasn't caught up with progress in medicine yet. But that would be blasphemy. The perfect lard and slaver makes no mistakes! I use the same argument with the wife. The good lard put those leaves on that lawn. Who am I to question him? She still makes me rake 'em but I have the pleasure of being an ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outback Jack Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Keep in mind that delaying marriage until later in life (late teens/early 20s) is a fairly recent development in human culture, at least in most cases. I'm no historian or sociologist but I seem to remember seeing something that alleged most people got married in their mid teens for most of history. Also, women were considered "old maids" if they weren't married by their mid 20's. At any rate, I think that the last 100 years or so has seen a need to increase one's education in order to deal with the modern world. That need for more education meant less ability to go off and boink your new teen bride! (Damnit!) Of course the blasphemy of using modern medicine to defy gawd's divine purpose and extend one's life probably also plays a part. So perhaps you're right after all. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted December 14, 2007 Author Share Posted December 14, 2007 My own 60 yo grandfather married my then 16 yo grandmother. It was common, I'm told, in that era , early 1900's. His father was in the civil war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outback Jack Posted December 15, 2007 Share Posted December 15, 2007 Hi par. I'm not trying to pick on you (I do this same thing with almost everything I read. It makes some of my favorite books hard to enjoy when I keep checking their facts! ) but did you really mean "grandfather" and his father? Just doing the math, your grandfather would have been born around 1947. Assuming he was the same age as his bride, he would have been married in 1963. Fairly recently. Also, assuming that, his father (your great-grandfather) would have to have been almost 100 when your grandfather was born! The civil war ended in 1865. Assuming he was 15 during the last year of the war, I'd calculate a birth year of 1850. Like I said, I'm not trying to be an ass. Maybe you forgot a generation or 2 somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted December 15, 2007 Author Share Posted December 15, 2007 Hi par. I'm not trying to pick on you (I do this same thing with almost everything I read. It makes some of my favorite books hard to enjoy when I keep checking their facts! ) but did you really mean "grandfather" and his father? Just doing the math, your grandfather would have been born around 1947. Assuming he was the same age as his bride, he would have been married in 1963. Fairly recently. Also, assuming that, his father (your great-grandfather) would have to have been almost 100 when your grandfather was born! The civil war ended in 1865. Assuming he was 15 during the last year of the war, I'd calculate a birth year of 1850. Like I said, I'm not trying to be an ass. Maybe you forgot a generation or 2 somewhere? No, I really have a fucked up family. I'm 50, my dad is 85, born in 1922. My grandfather was born in 1854. He outlived hs first wife, and remarried my grandmother in 1920, when she was 16 (born 1904). He was 68 when my dad was born and had his last child at 76 (go gramps!) His father, my great grandfather, was a prisoner in the civil war and had his only brother killed. I'm a bit of a historian and have backup. I also have a blood link to a rev. war vet. I know its very unusual to have someone that few generations back in the big cw, but its true. My grandmother also remarried after grandpa died, so I have a very extensive half-family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outback Jack Posted December 16, 2007 Share Posted December 16, 2007 Ha! The joke's on me for sure then! I just re-read your post and I see what you were saying. It makes perfect sense now. And now I don't know which I feel more of, ickyness or hope. 60 and 16 together?! I need to build a time machine, go back a few hundred years, and find me a wife! (go gramps!) Yeah, I agree! Sounds like he was a real character! I envy your family history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted December 16, 2007 Share Posted December 16, 2007 The only reason a marriage license exists is to allow the govt access to your personal life. I'm not as crazy as I sound, well, if you don't read the fine print, I'm not crazy at all. A legal marriage is a tax. The govt. collects the tax and recognizes your marriage for legal applications. The govt. may also void your license in its best interests, or a divorce. Birth Certificates gives the govt. access to your children. Get the school POd at you and you get Family Services stomping through your house and the govt. can take your kids away. My point is, the govt. controls us through taxation and threats. If you have sex with someone under age you go to jail, never mind if you two are in love with each other but the law says it is rape, statutory, and a person is forever branded a child rapist. The law goes to too much extreme to protect 'children' by criminalizing an act of biology. Sure I think there is an age too young for sex but the activity is best controlled by parental influence and not govt. interference. KIDS HAVE SEX with or without an adult! Why should an adult take the fall for having sex with a 14 or 15 year old? If the govt. can determine to what extent a child under 18 acted as an adult in the commission of a crime--in order to try and convict them as an adult, then the court can also determine that same rule in statutory rape cases. The only reason is that the govt. went from regulating the population to regulation of morals and they can't do that without the help of the christian church. The church has to back the law or the law is demonized by christians who won't obey it. So, the church teaches christians to obey the law and it is they who enforce the propaganda against the rest of the world through the law of the country. The govt has no business telling us how to raise our families or who we can marry or when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts