Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
2986 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 865

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1090860 17-Jul-2014 16:01
4 people support this post
Send private message

networkn: I guess we can be grateful no kids are involved.


Who's 'we'? What actual business of yours is it?

660 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 36
Inactive user


  Reply # 1090864 17-Jul-2014 16:04
Send private message

Dratsab:
networkn: I guess we can be grateful no kids are involved.


Who's 'we'? What actual business of yours is it?


no one has to have any business with anyone as such, but when such high profile weddings are in limelight, its out there for people to watch and follow and hence people can take it (marriage)  for granted.

children are worst affected, so its good in a way that there was no such case.

 
 
 
 


2986 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 865

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1090870 17-Jul-2014 16:15
3 people support this post
Send private message

I can see the point you're trying to make, but 'we' have no concern whether children were involved or not. That's for the parties directly affected. All 'we' (or at least some amongst us) can have is our own sense of self appointed righteousness, which in this case is coming from dross hung out as low-picking fruit by people who don't fact check, twist facts and present unbalanced stories at every opportunity.



15331 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4046

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1090871 17-Jul-2014 16:16
One person supports this post
Send private message

Dratsab: I can see the point you're trying to make, but 'we' have no concern whether children were involved or not. That's for the parties directly affected. All 'we' (or at least some amongst us) can have is our own sense of self appointed righteousness, which in this case is coming dross hung out as low-picking fruit by people who don't fact check, twist facts and present unbalanced stories at every opportunity.


Say what now?


Awesome
4780 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1059

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1090913 17-Jul-2014 17:40
2 people support this post
Send private message

trig42: I saw someone say in the 'debate' leading up to the decision to change the law that Gay Marriages would increase the divorce rate. True that.


True what? One example of a separation (based on conjecture no less) means the divorce rate has increased? and it's because of gay marriage? What data do you have to back up your fauxpinion?




Twitter: ajobbins


BDFL - Memuneh
59414 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10624

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1090914 17-Jul-2014 17:43
3 people support this post
Send private message

I got divorced in 1999. I helped increase the divorce rate for hetero couples.




Talk DIrtY to me
4061 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2112

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1090917 17-Jul-2014 17:45
4 people support this post
Send private message

One hundred percent of divorces are caused by marriage.




Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?


4649 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 470

Trusted

  Reply # 1090920 17-Jul-2014 17:54
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:
First same sex marriage in NZ didn't last a year!.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11294678

I know not every couple will be like this, but hard to not think it wasn't just done for the free stuff they got.  


Pretty cynical view!

If they've separated (it wasn't confirmed on the piece I saw), then I would imagine it is for similar reasons to those that cause half of heterosexual marriages to fail.

No reason us straight folk should be the only ones to enjoy all the misery of marital separations.




Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org


1493 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 506

Subscriber

  Reply # 1090946 17-Jul-2014 18:38
Send private message

So apparently are not allowed to make comments about ethics of buying car radar detectors, (thread locked and posts deleted)

But it seems to be ok to revel in someone's marriage breaking up with undertones of homophobia.

Sad.

A.


BDFL - Memuneh
59414 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10624

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1090950 17-Jul-2014 18:45
Send private message

The radar discussion is not locked. The replies that were off topic were removed there because they were off topic.




56 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 8


  Reply # 1090962 17-Jul-2014 18:52
Send private message

Pointless discussion - marriage is legal construct, if there is any meaning beyond that it is purely up to the individuals.

Who cares if shiny things made the couple overzealous - people have been marrying for stuff (visas, politics, dowries, etc.) for thousands of years. 

Opinions about the 'sanctity' or 'commitment' of marriage are just that - opinions. 



819 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 25


  Reply # 1090963 17-Jul-2014 18:53
Send private message

Dratsab: I can see the point you're trying to make, but 'we' have no concern whether children were involved or not. That's for the parties directly affected. All 'we' (or at least some amongst us) can have is our own sense of self appointed righteousness, which in this case is coming from dross hung out as low-picking fruit by people who don't fact check, twist facts and present unbalanced stories at every opportunity.



I think the point being made, which you may have misinterpreted, was that any possible emotional harm from this possible divorce is limited to the married couple.

3787 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 592

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1091102 17-Jul-2014 23:00
Send private message

andrewNZ: I don't know (or care about) specifics, but they married as soon as they were ALLOWED to. They may have been together and wanting to marry for a long time prior.


Same sex marriage was not illegal under the status quo. The law change merely overturned a legal precedent whereby DIA refused to issue a marriage 'license' to same sex couples. A license which, incidentally, can be substituted for other legal instruments.



15331 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4046

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1091112 17-Jul-2014 23:20
Send private message

MrMistofeles: Pointless discussion - marriage is legal construct, if there is any meaning beyond that it is purely up to the individuals.

Who cares if shiny things made the couple overzealous - people have been marrying for stuff (visas, politics, dowries, etc.) for thousands of years. 

Opinions about the 'sanctity' or 'commitment' of marriage are just that - opinions. 




Did I give any indications that my comments were anything other than my opinion? 90% of what you would find on any forum, geekzone being no exception, are opinions.



15331 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4046

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1091115 17-Jul-2014 23:23
One person supports this post
Send private message

NZtechfreak:
networkn:
First same sex marriage in NZ didn't last a year!.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11294678

I know not every couple will be like this, but hard to not think it wasn't just done for the free stuff they got.  


Pretty cynical view!

If they've separated (it wasn't confirmed on the piece I saw), then I would imagine it is for similar reasons to those that cause half of heterosexual marriages to fail.

No reason us straight folk should be the only ones to enjoy all the misery of marital separations.


My opinion is that they got married "because they could" (A very very poor reason). They got a bunch of stuff for being "first". Clearly the commitment wasn't really present to undertake something that deserved better.

Most marriages last better than a year, most people would try and save a marriage for longer than that.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

New Zealand hits peak broadband data
Posted 18-Jan-2018 12:21


Amazon Echo devices coming to New Zealand early February 2018
Posted 18-Jan-2018 10:53


$3.74 million for new electric vehicles in New Zealand
Posted 17-Jan-2018 11:27


Nova 2i: Value, not excitement from Huawei
Posted 17-Jan-2018 09:02


Less news in Facebook News Feed revamp
Posted 15-Jan-2018 13:15


Australian Government contract awarded to Datacom Connect
Posted 11-Jan-2018 08:37


Why New Zealand needs a chief technology officer
Posted 6-Jan-2018 13:59


Amazon release Silk Browser and Firefox for Fire TV
Posted 21-Dec-2017 13:42


New Chief Technology Officer role created
Posted 19-Dec-2017 22:18


All I want for Christmas is a new EV
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:54


How clever is this: AI will create 2.3 million jobs by 2020
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:52


NOW to deploy SD-WAN to regional councils
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:46


Mobile market competition issues ComCom should watch
Posted 18-Dec-2017 10:52


New Zealand government to create digital advisory group
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:47


Australia datum changes means whole country moving 1.8 metres north-east
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:39



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.