If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Gay marriage is going to lead to an influx of Jedi Knights in goat leggings, and you'll only have yourselves to blame   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 68
    More: Amusing, jedis, civil marriages, marriages, same-sex marriages, pagan, Humanist associations, Unitarians, British Humanist Association  
•       •       •

6059 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 May 2013 at 11:53 AM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-15 10:42:12 AM
Jedi don't marry, dumbass.
 
2013-05-15 11:41:01 AM
I can't wait for the first Jedi divorce. That shiat will make someone go dark side in a heartbeat.
 
2013-05-15 11:53:39 AM

Mugato: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.


Some do (at least 1).
 
2013-05-15 11:56:14 AM
Not to worry, they're already on the case:
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-05-15 11:58:16 AM
Came to see example of Ritualistic Goat Dance.

/leaving satisfied
 
2013-05-15 11:58:48 AM
farm3.staticflickr.com

and Jedi too.
 
2013-05-15 11:58:55 AM
I don't see the problem, what they believe in is just as real as what other religions teach.
 
2013-05-15 11:59:45 AM

ristst: Came to see example of Ritualistic Goat Dance.

/leaving satisfied


A small surprise before the ceremony?
 
2013-05-15 12:00:50 PM
So...it's OK to have a bonding ritual with one kind of funny clothes made/purchased/rented especially for the occasion...
but anything else is unacceptable.

Gotcha.
 
2013-05-15 12:01:14 PM

wildsnowllama: I don't see the problem, what they believe in is just as real as what other religions teach.


Possibly more real, seeing as how the author is still alive and can be directly asked about the meaning of certain passages.
 
2013-05-15 12:01:53 PM

Magorn: Not to worry, they're already on the case:
[24.media.tumblr.com image 500x281]


www.xboxhornet.com
 
2013-05-15 12:02:55 PM
Religious radicals' fear of "humanism" is really telling.  What they actually hate is humans.  Sagan forbid we help each other struggle through our own sins and virtues, without prostrating ourselves like worms before a supposedly superior power who is conveniently silent and does nothing to help or guide us.
 
2013-05-15 12:03:03 PM
[OBVIOUS] UK conservatives terrified that some people might do things differently than they do
 
2013-05-15 12:03:11 PM
What about gaybots?
crisiscreativa.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-05-15 12:03:59 PM
Oh boy. Jedi Divorces.

/popcorn
 
2013-05-15 12:05:46 PM
But Tories say such an amendment would 'dilute' the institution of marriage by allowing other 'ridiculous' sects to marry couples

The only ridiculous sect is the "christian" conservative fundies.......
 
2013-05-15 12:06:02 PM

Jacob_Roberson: What about gaybots?


What about them?

/I wanna take you to a gay bot
 
2013-05-15 12:06:33 PM

Jacob_Roberson: What about gaybots?
[crisiscreativa.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-05-15 12:09:53 PM

No Such Agency: Religious radicals' fear of "humanism" is really telling.  What they actually hate is humans.  Sagan forbid we help each other struggle through our own sins and virtues, without prostrating ourselves like worms before a supposedly superior power who is conveniently silent and does nothing to help or guide us.


Agreed, my favorite part if the article is where they mention that humanist weddings outnumbered catholic weddings in Scotland. Makes me proud to be 1/4 Scottish.
 
2013-05-15 12:09:59 PM
I want to party with those guys!


Actually I want to party with da vimen!!!
 
2013-05-15 12:10:31 PM

Mugato: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.


i453.photobucket.com
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-05-15 12:13:25 PM
encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com

Let people do as they please so long as nobody is getting hurt/coerced/forced, etc....
 
2013-05-15 12:13:26 PM
Oh no, not a themed wedding!! What about the children?!
In other news, rich, spoiled whore themed quickie weddings still A-OK.
 
2013-05-15 12:13:59 PM

Gunny Walker: Mugato: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.

[i453.photobucket.com image 298x398]



The nerd is strong with this one . . .

/ seriously, had to look up who this was and why it was relevant!
// kudos!
 
2013-05-15 12:15:28 PM

Weaver95: I can't wait for the first Jedi divorce. That shiat will make someone go dark side in a heartbeat.


Don't they all?


/yesss....yesss....let the hate flow inside you
 
2013-05-15 12:18:56 PM
Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

/not having a legal structure doesn't count, I said FOR, not against
//do it for the turtles!!
///slashies
 
2013-05-15 12:20:06 PM
I'm not sure why anyone can object to a Pagan wedding. Modern paganism might be a random mishmash of all sorts of mystical hoohaa especially the 1960s....but then so are most religions. The Catholic Church rejigs itself all the time throughout history.

Paganism in some form has more of ma right to call itself a religion than most. It's been around, by definition, since humans first bowed to the sky.
 
2013-05-15 12:21:21 PM
Who cares.

"Rediculous sects" marriage won't make my marriage any less weak.

Its like the idiots saying gays getting married will weaken marriage. What? Because some dude is taking it up the arse from his husband its going to make my marriage less... how exactly?


To each their own... in the end marriage is a personal thing between two people... how they got there... and how they stay there (as long as consensual) is their business.

I even don't care if more than two people get married as long as all members of union are OK with it. Why should it worry me... of course have to make sure benefits don't carry over to more than two or it could easily be abused as a tax avoidance scheme.
 
2013-05-15 12:24:26 PM

dittybopper: Mugato: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.

Some do (at least 1).


Yeah and look how well THAT ended!
 
2013-05-15 12:26:27 PM

Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

/not having a legal structure doesn't count, I said FOR, not against
//do it for the turtles!!
///slashies


So basically, you poisoned the question by eliminating the main reason why it's not done.

Gay marriage is a reprinting of the forms.  Poly is deciding how thousands of rights and benefits and legal proceedings should be altered to account for 3+ parties instead of just two.

And frankly, it's an entirely seperate discussion with unique issues all to itself.  there is nothing currently about Straight marriage that doesn't also lead to arguments for poly, and people have been pushing for it for thousands of years in one way or another.
 
2013-05-15 12:28:03 PM

leonel: dittybopper: Mugato: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.

Some do (at least 1).

Yeah and look how well THAT ended!


You can't assume that just because one Jedi who got married turned to the dark side they all would.

Anakin was already on the path.

If he hadn't got married and had kids there would be no one to destroy the German dams... uh...
I mean the death star.
 
2013-05-15 12:38:37 PM
img203.imageshack.us

Mugato
: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.


too bad
 
2013-05-15 12:43:29 PM
I thought Druidry was already legally a religion in the UK. If so why wouldn't they already be allowed to officiate weddings?
...and who cares?
 
2013-05-15 12:45:57 PM

Now I Is!: I thought Druidry was already legally a religion in the UK. If so why wouldn't they already be allowed to officiate weddings?
...and who cares?


They can even get the Archbishop of Canterbury to come along from time to time.

www.biblebasedministries.co.uk
 
2013-05-15 12:49:58 PM

Gunny Walker: Mugato: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.

[i453.photobucket.com image 298x398]


images.wikia.com

What a Jedi wedding may look like.
 
2013-05-15 12:52:34 PM

Bungles: Now I Is!: I thought Druidry was already legally a religion in the UK. If so why wouldn't they already be allowed to officiate weddings?
...and who cares?

They can even get the Archbishop of Canterbury to come along from time to time.


Looks more like a klan rally... which isn't surprising if he is a Christian.
 
2013-05-15 12:54:08 PM

CleanAndPure: Bungles: Now I Is!: I thought Druidry was already legally a religion in the UK. If so why wouldn't they already be allowed to officiate weddings?
...and who cares?

They can even get the Archbishop of Canterbury to come along from time to time.

Looks more like a klan rally... which isn't surprising if he is a Christian.


He's a lovely tea-and-crumpets CoE Christian, which bare little relation to the American version.
 
2013-05-15 01:07:53 PM
For the last farking time : "Jedi" is not a religion.

A "Jedi" is a high level practitioner of an unnamed religion, likely "Forcism".

It's like someone asking "what's your religion" and responding "Rabbi".
 
2013-05-15 01:09:48 PM

Silverstaff: Gunny Walker: Mugato: Jedi don't marry, dumbass.

[i453.photobucket.com image 298x398]

[images.wikia.com image 850x627]

What a Jedi wedding may look like.


Mara Jade wore red?! How scandalous!
 
2013-05-15 01:14:01 PM

havocmike: For the last farking time : "Jedi" is not a religion.

A "Jedi" is a high level practitioner of an unnamed religion, likely "Forcism".

It's like someone asking "what's your religion" and responding "Rabbi".


But when asked by the Census, they say "I am a Jedi Knight."
Also, we believe in The Force, not "Forcism". Don't force your farce of an "ism" on us.
 
2013-05-15 01:16:59 PM

Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

/not having a legal structure doesn't count, I said FOR, not against
//do it for the turtles!!
///slashies


How many arguments do you hear that don't invoke the [Christian] Bible?  How many want to make Abraham, David, Solomon's and most other Hebrew patriarchs' marriages invalid (to say nothing of that special incestual triangle of Joseph, Mary, and their little motherfarker (the holy ghost is the son, amiright))?  Arguments for granting equal rights tend to argue for granting more rights.   Arguments for special treatment for the privileged tend to cover other cases as well (notice how often miscegenation arguments get reused for gay marriage).
 
2013-05-15 01:18:32 PM

Bungles: I'm not sure why anyone can object to a Pagan wedding. Modern paganism might be a random mishmash of all sorts of mystical hoohaa especially the 1960s....but then so are most religions. The Catholic Church rejigs itself all the time throughout history.

Paganism in some form has more of ma right to call itself a religion than most. It's been around, by definition, since humans first bowed to the sky.


Yeah this kinda confused me:
Jedi, druid and pagan weddings

/your distinction
//it needs a difference
 
2013-05-15 01:22:55 PM

Jacob_Roberson: Bungles: I'm not sure why anyone can object to a Pagan wedding. Modern paganism might be a random mishmash of all sorts of mystical hoohaa especially the 1960s....but then so are most religions. The Catholic Church rejigs itself all the time throughout history.

Paganism in some form has more of ma right to call itself a religion than most. It's been around, by definition, since humans first bowed to the sky.

Yeah this kinda confused me:
Jedi, druid and pagan weddings

/your distinction
//it needs a difference


I suggest you look up both those words. Druids may be classed among pagans, but not all pagans are Druids.
 
2013-05-15 01:29:16 PM

Antimatter: Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

/not having a legal structure doesn't count, I said FOR, not against
//do it for the turtles!!
///slashies

So basically, you poisoned the question by eliminating the main reason why it's not done.

Gay marriage is a reprinting of the forms.  Poly is deciding how thousands of rights and benefits and legal proceedings should be altered to account for 3+ parties instead of just two.

And frankly, it's an entirely seperate discussion with unique issues all to itself.  there is nothing currently about Straight marriage that doesn't also lead to arguments for poly, and people have been pushing for it for thousands of years in one way or another.


I apologize if you felt I "poisoned the question".
I was trying to avoid arguments "against", so I didn't want anyone saying "because it is illegal (think marijuana), or we don't have the legal structure for it (think back to the time we didn't have corporation, limited liability or bankruptcy laws).

I was wondering of all the points FOR gay marriage, don't they all apply to polygamy?

/feel silly not knowing how to bold and/or underline
//on the phone too
///slashies within slashies
////slashies inception
 
2013-05-15 01:37:40 PM

Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

/not having a legal structure doesn't count, I said FOR, not against
//do it for the turtles!!
///slashies


Polygamy specifically or Polyandry generally?  There is a bit of a difference.  The major problem with Polygamy specifically (defined as one husband with multiple wives), as currently practiced in America, mostly by FLDS groups, is precisely the idea of "consent".  Most of the women are under-educated and under-aged when wed and have no real say in the process, essentially making it a form of child sexual exploitation.   Now, if you are asking should more than two people be allowed to be legally wed under the same legal logic that allows gay marriage?  Yes. Absolutely.  Marriage, in a legal sense, is nearly indistinguishable from a a business partnership.  All of the issues in a multiple marriage, with the exception of some custody rights, have pretty much been dealt with in partnership law.   Now the idea of married people voting on a "managing partner" might seem a little weird, but it certainly could be done
 
2013-05-15 02:06:50 PM
That headline looks suspiciously like a mad lib.
 
2013-05-15 02:07:51 PM
So, throwing the gheys under the bus would mean no more pagan weddings?  It might be worth it.

/sorry guys.
 
2013-05-15 02:13:07 PM

yet_another_wumpus: Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

/not having a legal structure doesn't count, I said FOR, not against
//do it for the turtles!!
///slashies

How many arguments do you hear that don't invoke the [Christian] Bible?  How many want to make Abraham, David, Solomon's and most other Hebrew patriarchs' marriages invalid (to say nothing of that special incestual triangle of Joseph, Mary, and their little motherfarker (the holy ghost is the son, amiright))?  Arguments for granting equal rights tend to argue for granting more rights.   Arguments for special treatment for the privileged tend to cover other cases as well (notice how often miscegenation arguments get reused for gay marriage).


So, turtles?

:)

/actually learned a new word today. Thanks for that too.
 
2013-05-15 02:19:26 PM

Magorn: Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

/not having a legal structure doesn't count, I said FOR, not against
//do it for the turtles!!
///slashies

Polygamy specifically or Polyandry generally?  There is a bit of a difference.  The major problem with Polygamy specifically (defined as one husband with multiple wives), as currently practiced in America, mostly by FLDS groups, is precisely the idea of "consent".  Most of the women are under-educated and under-aged when wed and have no real say in the process, essentially making it a form of child sexual exploitation.   Now, if you are asking should more than two people be allowed to be legally wed under the same legal logic that allows gay marriage?  Yes. Absolutely.  Marriage, in a legal sense, is nearly indistinguishable from a a business partnership.  All of the issues in a multiple marriage, with the exception of some custody rights, have pretty much been dealt with in partnership law.   Now the idea of married people voting on a "managing partner" might seem a little weird, but it certainly could be done


Thanks for the interesting answer.

Interesting concept and paradigm.
I also want to make the distinction if I may in your example of the relationship of a group compared to the relationship of "one to many". I think those would totally be different beasts.


/any way on the iPhone to quote multiple comments? This getting ridiculous.
 
2013-05-15 02:25:21 PM
Anybody who would follow a religion that's wholly owned by Disney deserves what they get.

/And the cult of the mouse grows......
 
2013-05-15 02:25:53 PM
And what the hell this pecker head got against Jedi ?
 
2013-05-15 02:34:53 PM

stuffy: And what the hell this pecker head got against Jedi ?


Well perhaps it is a bit unfair to tar all Jedi with the same brush, but its very hard to forget that the terrorist who flew his aircraft into the Imperial Peace Enhancement Center on 9/11/5673 was a radical militant Jedi, who, despite growing up as a peaceful and productive member of the Empire was radicalized by a Jedi Sleeper agent who had quietly infiltrated that peaceful rural community almost two decades earlier
 
2013-05-15 03:12:18 PM
Well if you Christians would quit bashing on gays and forcing them away they would probably go for the old fashioned church wedding with a real preacher like everyone else. The point of wanting a marriage is a desire to be more normal. You can't kick them out of your club then biatch when they start their own with weird rules you don't like
 
2013-05-15 03:23:43 PM

tlars699: havocmike: For the last farking time : "Jedi" is not a religion.

A "Jedi" is a high level practitioner of an unnamed religion, likely "Forcism".

It's like someone asking "what's your religion" and responding "Rabbi".

But when asked by the Census, they say "I am a Jedi Knight."
Also, we believe in The Force, not "Forcism". Don't force your farce of an "ism" on us.


Give it up; You are a Transcendentalist.
 
2013-05-15 05:19:51 PM

CleanAndPure: Bungles: Now I Is!: I thought Druidry was already legally a religion in the UK. If so why wouldn't they already be allowed to officiate weddings?
...and who cares?

They can even get the Archbishop of Canterbury to come along from time to time.

Looks more like a klan rally... which isn't surprising if he is a Christian.


The Archbishop of Canterbury is a practicing Druid.  Druidic robes may bear some superficial resemblance to Klan robes, but the two belief systems are completely different.
 
2013-05-15 06:33:12 PM

anfrind: The Archbishop of Canterbury is a practicing Druid.


Wait. . .what?

Isn't druidism a completely different, and incompatible belief system from Christianity?  How could somebody be an ordained Anglican clergy of any rank, much less the Archbishop of Canterbury, and be a practicing member of a religion which contradicts his other religion?

It would be like saying that one of the Cardinals in the Vatican was also a Buddhist, or that the preacher down the corner at Local Baptist Church was also Hindu.  Just doesn't seem to make any dang sense.
 
2013-05-15 07:00:26 PM

Theaetetus: Jacob_Roberson: What about gaybots?
[crisiscreativa.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x375]


I can't feel my legs!
 
2013-05-15 07:03:17 PM

DontMakeMeShushYou: No Such Agency: Religious radicals' fear of "humanism" is really telling.  What they actually hate is humans.  Sagan forbid we help each other struggle through our own sins and virtues, without prostrating ourselves like worms before a supposedly superior power who is conveniently silent and does nothing to help or guide us.

Agreed, my favorite part if the article is where they mention that humanist weddings outnumbered catholic weddings in Scotland. Makes me proud to be 1/4 Scottish.


interiorsforfamilies.files.wordpress.com
So you're only 3/4 crap, then?
 
2013-05-15 07:16:47 PM

Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?


It kinda depends on whether, by "polygamy", you mean "polygyny" (one man, more than one wife) or "group marriage" (any combination of men and women married together, so long as there are at least three in total).
 
2013-05-15 07:19:44 PM

havocmike: For the last farking time : "Jedi" is not a religion.

A "Jedi" is a high level practitioner of an unnamed religion, likely "Forcism".

It's like someone asking "what's your religion" and responding "Rabbi".


Until we get a name for the religion, we'll continue to call it "Jedi."  You can think of it as shorthand for "the Jedi religion" if that untwists your knickers a bit.  If you're still hot and bothered about it, then write a letter to Lucas asking what the official name of the religion is.
 
2013-05-15 08:20:51 PM

Theaetetus: wildsnowllama: I don't see the problem, what they believe in is just as real as what other religions teach.

Possibly more real, seeing as how the author is still alive and can be directly asked about the meaning of certain passages.


Nice.
 
2013-05-15 11:53:20 PM

ciberido: Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

It kinda depends on whether, by "polygamy", you mean "polygyny" (one man, more than one wife) or "group marriage" (any combination of men and women married together, so long as there are at least three in total).


And??
Don't leave me hanging! How about you explain on both cases?
Also, why limit to three?
 
2013-05-16 01:45:02 AM
FTFA: Amendment would allow 'ridiculous' sects to marry couples.

Don't they already? Isn't there this weird middle eastern death cult which worships an undead Jew on a stick who is his own father who sacrificed himself to himself to nullify a sin that was created when a woman made out of a rib was convinced by a talking snake to eat a magical fruit and then feed it to her husband who was made out of dirt? And hasn't that ridiculous sect been performing marriages for almost 2000 years?
 
2013-05-16 01:52:34 AM

ciberido: havocmike: For the last farking time : "Jedi" is not a religion.

A "Jedi" is a high level practitioner of an unnamed religion, likely "Forcism".

It's like someone asking "what's your religion" and responding "Rabbi".

Until we get a name for the religion, we'll continue to call it "Jedi."  You can think of it as shorthand for "the Jedi religion" if that untwists your knickers a bit.  If you're still hot and bothered about it, then write a letter to Lucas asking what the official name of the religion is.


Midichlorianism?

Don't ask Lucas for a name, he sucks ass at creating names. It'll turn out the name of the religion the Jedis practice is called "Doodookakapeepeeism" or some shiat like that.
 
2013-05-16 11:17:12 AM

Ghastly: ciberido: havocmike: For the last farking time : "Jedi" is not a religion.

A "Jedi" is a high level practitioner of an unnamed religion, likely "Forcism".

It's like someone asking "what's your religion" and responding "Rabbi".

Until we get a name for the religion, we'll continue to call it "Jedi."  You can think of it as shorthand for "the Jedi religion" if that untwists your knickers a bit.  If you're still hot and bothered about it, then write a letter to Lucas asking what the official name of the religion is.

Midichlorianism?

Don't ask Lucas for a name, he sucks ass at creating names. It'll turn out the name of the religion the Jedis practice is called "Doodookakapeepeeism" or some shiat like that.


Indeed, do not... You'll probably also inspire the crazy motherfarker to redo all the movies again so he can digitally insert references to the new ridiculous name everywhere!
 
2013-05-16 12:56:47 PM

Resident Muslim: ciberido: It kinda depends on whether, by "polygamy", you mean "polygyny" (one man, more than one wife) or "group marriage" (any combination of men and women married together, so long as there are at least three in total).

And??
Don't leave me hanging! How about you explain on both cases?
Also, why limit to three?


I didn't "limit" anything to three.  I said "at least three" because, if you have less than three people in the marriage, it isn't polygamous, is it?
 
2013-05-16 05:48:39 PM

ciberido: Resident Muslim: ciberido: It kinda depends on whether, by "polygamy", you mean "polygyny" (one man, more than one wife) or "group marriage" (any combination of men and women married together, so long as there are at least three in total).

And??
Don't leave me hanging! How about you explain on both cases?
Also, why limit to three?

I didn't "limit" anything to three.  I said "at least three" because, if you have less than three people in the marriage, it isn't polygamous, is it?


Ok. Now I feel stupid (doesn't take much).

But you still didn't explain the difference.
 
2013-05-16 11:25:19 PM

Resident Muslim: ciberido: Resident Muslim: Speaking of which, and I'm thinking (asking?) out loud here...are there any arguments FOR gay marriage that don't also argue for polygamy?

It kinda depends on whether, by "polygamy", you mean "polygyny" (one man, more than one wife) or "group marriage" (any combination of men and women married together, so long as there are at least three in total).

And??
Don't leave me hanging! How about you explain on both cases?



A system where it's ok or normal for one man to have more than one wife, but not vice-versa is inherently sexist, patriarchal, and anti-feminist.   A system where any combination of adults can make a valid marriage, including one woman with multiple husbands and one man with multiple wives, is not inherently sexist, patriarchal, or anti-feminist.  That's the key philosophical difference.

Also, in practical terms, societies in which men can have more than one wife (but not vice-versa) also leads to a situation in which powerful/rich men have multiple wives and men lower in socioeconomic status have no wives, which places additional strains on the society.  A society in which a significant percentage of men who want to get married cannot find a wife is in trouble.

This can also occur if the ratio of men to women gets badly skewed, as in China.
 
Displayed 68 of 68 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report