Posts Tagged kim kardashian
Marriage is the consummation and whatever more most make of the rites to living till death with that one person who apparently has become the nucleus of your life… and nowadays it doesn’t matter from what side of gender your nucleus is from.
Sure human rights is paramount to ensure one type of man isn’t overly disadvantaged but then, I’d seriously question my way of life if I was ‘wooed’ by a homosexual male… the female ones need only say “Hello, I’m lesbian!!”
Then Barack Obama went ahead to endorse the idea of gay marriage couple weeks ago. Against his own belief for the sake of pooling votes for his reelection? I don’t know. It saddens me, whatever the case is. Worse still, Shawn Carter endorsed as well soon after.
And Jay (in case you didn’t realise he’s Shawn Carter before now) -Z was quoted as saying something about gays having as much rights to marriage as blacks have concerning racism. That quote had me utterly disheartened, why equate gay rights with the aluta against racism?
Manny Pacquaio then said good stuff about the idea of homosexuality being against God’s will, prompting Floyd Mayweather jr. to unnecessarily make a comment about the matter, “I’m behind President Obama” concerning gay marriage. Just (presumably) because Pacquiao, an archrival, is against the motion? Plain dumb!
Why not be concerned with the scarcity of longevity and/or happiness in morally upright marriages? Are the partners in love suitable for each other? Is marriage a must? And if it is, is it possible or not for an individual to not be fit for matrimony (based on certain factors ranging from persona to the economics et al)?
Your parents are happily married and have been so for two decades going on three or three going on four? We thank God for them. Then there are the marriages that last 72 days, the ones that end in the husband committing suicide because the wife did something contrary, some others in which a partner (the wife in most scenarios) remains married to a cheating partner and stays pained silently (“for the sake of the children”).
The Church, by doctrine, would ‘require’ one to be married, to “go out and multiply” being a major motivating factor there. Islam offers the option of being married to four at a time, on certain conditions; for the males.
Family, in some cases, have already decided on one’s life partner before one’s kindergarten/nursery schooling has begun… I’m curious to know what the Illuminati and Free Mason have to say about this.
Linguistics would have you believe matrimony isn’t quite an ideal idea based on the process of Coalescence which refers to the merger of two segments (husband and wife) in order to create a third, independent segment (child[ren]).
How does it not support the idea of marriage? Well, when those two segments merge, (1) each one loses certain properties peculiar to it thus (2) the new, third segment born is actually a weaker segment since the parent segments have lost properties of it that made it what it used to be.
Nonetheless, here’s wishing facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg a happy married life with long-time girlfriend Priscilla. This nerd stays winning!