Cuba, its cheap and nice.What good mini vacations are out there for couples who only have 3 days or so to get away? Somewhere hot!!!?
It would be helpful it you stated what part of the US because if you only have three days, you don't want to spend too much time traveling.
Here's an idea on the east coast...
It's a charming beach town in Florida called -- Delray Beach, Florida!
It's a fun Caribbean-type, laid-back beach town with fun vibrations and charm! Vibrant and lively nightlife and nice upscale restaurants and sidewalk bistros.
Awesome weather all winter long!!! Easily in the 80's. Perfect beach weather and bikini weather!
http://www.i-love-delray-beach.com/delra鈥?/a>
And there is a hotel there that totally resembles the Caribbean -- Crane's Beach House and Tiki Bar. It has also been rated as one of the most romantic hotels.
They have reggae music, white sandy beach area, and a tiki bar. Here are some photos of the hotel...
http://www.i-love-delray-beach.com/crane鈥?/a>
Here are some coupons on hotels and attractions too! Palm Beach
County is celebrating it's 100th anniversary and a lot of hotel specials and 2-for-1 coupons going on right now.
http://www.i-love-delray-beach.com/flori鈥?/a>What good mini vacations are out there for couples who only have 3 days or so to get away? Somewhere hot!!!?
mexican 3day cruise
pismo beach
the desert
las vegas
palm springs
san diego
The coastal islands of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida make a great mini-vacation, or full vacation! They're easy to get to, beautiful, and warm. In South Carolina, you have Kiawah Island and Hilton Head Island. Kiawah is great if you are looking for luxury, relaxation, nature and romance. It's also just outside Charleston, South Carolina so you have access to all the restaurants and activity there. Hilton Head is for a more active beach vacation and is also a beautiful spot.
In Georgia, Tybee Island is a laid-back getaway only 30 minutes from Savannah, Georgia - another great place to explore while you're in the area! Savannah's quaint inns, excellent restaurants, and beautiful scenery make it a romantic trip for couples. Jekyll Island is less than 2 hours from Savannah is another quiet spot offering a lush coastal habitat, a lot of history, and a grand, historic hotel.
In Florida, Amelia Island is just off the coast of northern Florida and has a gorgeous beach, lots to do and a fun, historic city (Fernandina Beach).
I have plenty of information and personal recommendations for hotels, restaurants, activities, local events and more on my site about these islands at www.sea-islands-vacation.com.
A lot depends on your budget, your interests, and your location.
Assuming you can afford to fly, there are spas and resorts of every type, in every type of climate, in reach. Seek one where people honeymoon and you'll know for sure that 'romantic' tone is a given (rather than golf, or tourism activities, for instance).
Try to find a location within a three- or four-hour flight, so you don't spend too much of your three precious days getting there and back.
We've enjoyed Tucson, Cape Cod, and Corpus Christi for just lolling around doing nothing much in gorgeous hotels; San Francisco, New York, Boston, and Chicago for sports, theatre, concerts, and fine dining; the Catskills and the Adirondacks, Yosemite, and the Grand Canyon for hiking.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Some claim gays shouldn't marry because they can't reproduce? Does this make sterile couples sinful also?
Should they also be prevented from marrying because they can't reproduce?Some claim gays shouldn't marry because they can't reproduce? Does this make sterile couples sinful also?
Marriage, at least a healthy marriage, should ALWAYS be about love, loyalty, and companionship. ALL couples who have those three things should be allowed to marry. Reproduction shouldn't have anything to do with it. Our population is high enough as it is. We NEED couples who can adopt -- that goes for gay couples, sterile couples, and couples who choose not to bear their own children.Some claim gays shouldn't marry because they can't reproduce? Does this make sterile couples sinful also?
I don't see how a legal contract of marriage between two people, which has NOTHING to do with religion, shouldn't be legal for same sex partners.
The only argument that I have heard that is reasonable, is the ';slippery slope'; argument. That if we say it's ok for two men to get married to each other, then why not brother/sister, etc.
Most of the arguments are just pathetic and sad as the one you pointed out.
That is a stupid excuse! If being gay is wrong (and I'm not saying it is) then it wouldn't be about reproducing! Many straight couples chose not to have kids and that isn't wrong!
If marriage is a sacred religious institution, then should atheist couples be allowed to marry?
(The answer is yes)
Apparently.
Also, atheists shouldn't marry either because marriage is supposed to be ';in the eyes of GAWD.';
No, you must understand that gays cant marry because God ordained marriage to be between a man and a woman. so couples that cant have children are doing nothing wrong.
It's a straw argument, just like all the arguments against gay marriage. Pretty pathetic, isn't it?
YES, if it is between two sterile male or between two sterile female.
Peace!
Blind people cant drive cars, Are you suggesting deaf people shouldnt be able to drive just to make it fair?
lol touche!oil companies
Marriage, at least a healthy marriage, should ALWAYS be about love, loyalty, and companionship. ALL couples who have those three things should be allowed to marry. Reproduction shouldn't have anything to do with it. Our population is high enough as it is. We NEED couples who can adopt -- that goes for gay couples, sterile couples, and couples who choose not to bear their own children.Some claim gays shouldn't marry because they can't reproduce? Does this make sterile couples sinful also?
I don't see how a legal contract of marriage between two people, which has NOTHING to do with religion, shouldn't be legal for same sex partners.
The only argument that I have heard that is reasonable, is the ';slippery slope'; argument. That if we say it's ok for two men to get married to each other, then why not brother/sister, etc.
Most of the arguments are just pathetic and sad as the one you pointed out.
That is a stupid excuse! If being gay is wrong (and I'm not saying it is) then it wouldn't be about reproducing! Many straight couples chose not to have kids and that isn't wrong!
If marriage is a sacred religious institution, then should atheist couples be allowed to marry?
(The answer is yes)
Apparently.
Also, atheists shouldn't marry either because marriage is supposed to be ';in the eyes of GAWD.';
No, you must understand that gays cant marry because God ordained marriage to be between a man and a woman. so couples that cant have children are doing nothing wrong.
It's a straw argument, just like all the arguments against gay marriage. Pretty pathetic, isn't it?
YES, if it is between two sterile male or between two sterile female.
Peace!
Blind people cant drive cars, Are you suggesting deaf people shouldnt be able to drive just to make it fair?
lol touche!
Are we too young for couples counseling?
boyfriend and i have been togethr for 4 years
currently separated for 1 month
brokeup because he hit me PLUS we really did need a break
hes my first bf im his first gf
were both 20
im not running to get back together with him %26amp; dont wanna think about that for a a few more months ...like 6-8mnthz but if we did, we would need counseling for sure
is it worth it? or are we too young?Are we too young for couples counseling?
Jessy, don't.
You got rid of an abuser good for you, now look toward the future and to meet someone else, someone better.
Abusers don't change and those who do they do it later in life when they pass 50 and 60 and have had a life time of hurting people around them.
You started dating you were 16, you're now 20, you have grown into a young woman with different goals, aspirations, needs. This man does not suits you anymore.
Couples conselling are for people in a marriage, with children, houses, assets and they need to work their problems. When we're 20 and our boyfriend hit us, we leave him!Are we too young for couples counseling?
You are NEVER too young or too old for couples counseling. In all honesty, a man hitting me under any circumstances is grounds for termination of the relationship (same should hold true for a woman hitting a man). But if you want to give things a shot in counseling, I am very supportive of that. There is no magic in the ';I am his first girlfriend and he is my first boyfriend'; thing. I see way too many couples who think there is something sacred about being each other's ';first'; and that the relationship should be salvaged at all costs with that as a primary reason. It is not a reason at all, honey. Find a good counselor who specializes in couple counseling (yeah, we all have our specialties), do everything that the counselor recommends and see where things go from there. I wish you two well.
No, you're not too young, but think about it; guys that hit girls aren't very likely to just stop after a session with a therapist. It's hard to move on when it's been so long, and we women tend to create patterns when it comes to realationships that we have a hard time breaking, but be good to yourself. Find a guy that respects you and won't physically, or in any other way, hurt you. Too many girls get stuck in that cycle. It's really hard when you haven't ever been with anyone else, but that can also be a problem. Guys can get weirldy obsessed with their first kiss or first girlfriend - and it's not a good thing, and places the girl in a strange, dependent, one-sided relationship. This may be a good thing that it's ended, hun.
If he hit you, then that's the only significant issue in all this. That might be the part you are too young to see. And I'd agree that counseling is a good idea, but not couples counseling. He needs individual counseling to figure out why he has anger problems, and you need individual counseling to figure out why your self-esteem is so low that you got involved with someone like him in the first place, and why you'd even be thinking of the possibility of getting back with him.
I do think it's really smart of you to break it off, because many people don't. And suddenly it's 10 years later, they are battered and bruised, they have little kids who are totally disturbed and they're scared to walk out their front door.
You've taken the hardest step, so just keep looking forward to a future that doesn't include someone who would hit you. This never gets better over time - it gets much worse, and you will not be the exception to that rule.
They don't care how young you are to go to counseling. I actually know a married couple (who is just a few years older than you) who have a wonderful relationship but go to counseling just to keep it a wonderful relationship. However, why don't you try to find someone else instead maybe even someone better before you even try to make it work with him.
You are never too young for counseling but in this case just go your separate ways and be done with it. You are not married, you don't mention children, there is no reason to have to work this hard on your relationship.
It's been my personal experience that once a person crosses that line, and physically abuses their significant other, there is no going back. The abuse continues and it just gets worse over time. Forget about him and move on.
I read everything you wrote.
So what is the marriage/divorce question that you have?
He hit you, he'll do it again. Thank your lucky stars you're out of this mess.
Too young?!?!?!
Hon, they will take your money regardless age!
good luck
currently separated for 1 month
brokeup because he hit me PLUS we really did need a break
hes my first bf im his first gf
were both 20
im not running to get back together with him %26amp; dont wanna think about that for a a few more months ...like 6-8mnthz but if we did, we would need counseling for sure
is it worth it? or are we too young?Are we too young for couples counseling?
Jessy, don't.
You got rid of an abuser good for you, now look toward the future and to meet someone else, someone better.
Abusers don't change and those who do they do it later in life when they pass 50 and 60 and have had a life time of hurting people around them.
You started dating you were 16, you're now 20, you have grown into a young woman with different goals, aspirations, needs. This man does not suits you anymore.
Couples conselling are for people in a marriage, with children, houses, assets and they need to work their problems. When we're 20 and our boyfriend hit us, we leave him!Are we too young for couples counseling?
You are NEVER too young or too old for couples counseling. In all honesty, a man hitting me under any circumstances is grounds for termination of the relationship (same should hold true for a woman hitting a man). But if you want to give things a shot in counseling, I am very supportive of that. There is no magic in the ';I am his first girlfriend and he is my first boyfriend'; thing. I see way too many couples who think there is something sacred about being each other's ';first'; and that the relationship should be salvaged at all costs with that as a primary reason. It is not a reason at all, honey. Find a good counselor who specializes in couple counseling (yeah, we all have our specialties), do everything that the counselor recommends and see where things go from there. I wish you two well.
No, you're not too young, but think about it; guys that hit girls aren't very likely to just stop after a session with a therapist. It's hard to move on when it's been so long, and we women tend to create patterns when it comes to realationships that we have a hard time breaking, but be good to yourself. Find a guy that respects you and won't physically, or in any other way, hurt you. Too many girls get stuck in that cycle. It's really hard when you haven't ever been with anyone else, but that can also be a problem. Guys can get weirldy obsessed with their first kiss or first girlfriend - and it's not a good thing, and places the girl in a strange, dependent, one-sided relationship. This may be a good thing that it's ended, hun.
If he hit you, then that's the only significant issue in all this. That might be the part you are too young to see. And I'd agree that counseling is a good idea, but not couples counseling. He needs individual counseling to figure out why he has anger problems, and you need individual counseling to figure out why your self-esteem is so low that you got involved with someone like him in the first place, and why you'd even be thinking of the possibility of getting back with him.
I do think it's really smart of you to break it off, because many people don't. And suddenly it's 10 years later, they are battered and bruised, they have little kids who are totally disturbed and they're scared to walk out their front door.
You've taken the hardest step, so just keep looking forward to a future that doesn't include someone who would hit you. This never gets better over time - it gets much worse, and you will not be the exception to that rule.
They don't care how young you are to go to counseling. I actually know a married couple (who is just a few years older than you) who have a wonderful relationship but go to counseling just to keep it a wonderful relationship. However, why don't you try to find someone else instead maybe even someone better before you even try to make it work with him.
You are never too young for counseling but in this case just go your separate ways and be done with it. You are not married, you don't mention children, there is no reason to have to work this hard on your relationship.
It's been my personal experience that once a person crosses that line, and physically abuses their significant other, there is no going back. The abuse continues and it just gets worse over time. Forget about him and move on.
I read everything you wrote.
So what is the marriage/divorce question that you have?
He hit you, he'll do it again. Thank your lucky stars you're out of this mess.
Too young?!?!?!
Hon, they will take your money regardless age!
good luck
Should homosexual male couples be allowed to adopt boys?
I don't like the idea, I sense a big controversy over that in the future.Should homosexual male couples be allowed to adopt boys?
It sounds like you are assuming that homosexuals are all pedophiles. Is this true?
Why not also assume that heterosexual men would have prurient interests in their female daughters, whether adopted or not? The logic is the same.Should homosexual male couples be allowed to adopt boys?
Did you know that most boys who were molested by older men were molested by a ';straight'; married uncle, grandparent, or their own father. Being gay doesn't make you a pedophile, and it annoys me that the Catholic Priests are making everyone look bad. Actually, while we're on the subject, should Catholic males be allowed to adopt little boys? Seems more dangerous to me.
Let me calm your never then. Gay people don't raise gay children (unless the child is gay). (Just as straight parents don't always raise straight children.) Adoption and raising kids is a lot work. Being a parent is a full-time job. Anyone who wants to sacrifice their time and adopt and give a child a family and a home deserves to have that.
Okay, so socially to some people that doesn't sound so good. Some people like yourself are uncomfortable with the idea. That's cool. But would you rather see a child have a home and a family or not? I feel it'd take a really cold-hearted person to deny a child a family just because of parent's orientation.
And believe it or not, this does happen in nature too. Animals raising young that aren't their own that are of the same sex. Not too too common, but it does happen.
Yes, yes and yes!
Why not?
Because they like other males, and that exposes children to sex abuse?
If it is for that, then straight dads shouldn't have girls!
Because they'll make him gay?
People can't make others gay. Or you are gay or you're not.
I don't see that much controversy in my crystal ball.
Wow. Umm I heard a story about a man in his mid 40s that adopted a girl from Russia, he abused her, starved her, raped her, and made her lie to authorities. Now was this man gay? No.
Just because a gay man likes men, this does not go to say that he likes little boys. Do YOU?
Would you rather have the child languish in foster care? At least if a homosexual male couple adopts the kid, he'll have a relatively stable home. What matters is that the kid has loving and supportive parents.
Should heterosexual single men be allowed to adopt girls?
Obviously they have to be careful. A couple is less likely to be a threat than a single man of any orientation.
Using your same logic you can therefore conclude that all heterosexual men will molest their female adopted children!!
Please say you see the jump in logic there. It's a rather absurd leap, don't ya think? :@)
There shouldnt be anything wrong with it. The only thing that might happen is the gay parents turn the kid gay. But thats still a might, and not something thats bad. There isnt anything wrong with it in my mind.
I guess I'm missing something. We allow heterosexual males to adopt girls, don't we? So, what's your issue?
What makes a homosexual couple less equipped to raise a boy?
Well...men adopt little girls. It's not any different. As long as they aren't pedophiles, it really should not be a factor.
Yes. I dont see the big deal about whether they adopt a girl or a boy.
Why wouldn't they be allowed to?
as long as they aren't pedophiles yes.
yes i think they should i don't see anything against it
i think that gay couples should only be allowed to adopt children of the opposite sex. that way there is no suspicion on their character and children will get adopted. do I think It'll happen...?? No... because so many gay people seeking to adopt children seem to want children of the same sex as them for some reason... strange.....
No, No, and No. Neither should females.
personally, i don't agree with it. i think it is a way to indirectly produce more gay men.
If the childs not born gay it might make him gay when it grows up. Not natural. No No No
It sounds like you are assuming that homosexuals are all pedophiles. Is this true?
Why not also assume that heterosexual men would have prurient interests in their female daughters, whether adopted or not? The logic is the same.Should homosexual male couples be allowed to adopt boys?
Did you know that most boys who were molested by older men were molested by a ';straight'; married uncle, grandparent, or their own father. Being gay doesn't make you a pedophile, and it annoys me that the Catholic Priests are making everyone look bad. Actually, while we're on the subject, should Catholic males be allowed to adopt little boys? Seems more dangerous to me.
Let me calm your never then. Gay people don't raise gay children (unless the child is gay). (Just as straight parents don't always raise straight children.) Adoption and raising kids is a lot work. Being a parent is a full-time job. Anyone who wants to sacrifice their time and adopt and give a child a family and a home deserves to have that.
Okay, so socially to some people that doesn't sound so good. Some people like yourself are uncomfortable with the idea. That's cool. But would you rather see a child have a home and a family or not? I feel it'd take a really cold-hearted person to deny a child a family just because of parent's orientation.
And believe it or not, this does happen in nature too. Animals raising young that aren't their own that are of the same sex. Not too too common, but it does happen.
Yes, yes and yes!
Why not?
Because they like other males, and that exposes children to sex abuse?
If it is for that, then straight dads shouldn't have girls!
Because they'll make him gay?
People can't make others gay. Or you are gay or you're not.
I don't see that much controversy in my crystal ball.
Wow. Umm I heard a story about a man in his mid 40s that adopted a girl from Russia, he abused her, starved her, raped her, and made her lie to authorities. Now was this man gay? No.
Just because a gay man likes men, this does not go to say that he likes little boys. Do YOU?
Would you rather have the child languish in foster care? At least if a homosexual male couple adopts the kid, he'll have a relatively stable home. What matters is that the kid has loving and supportive parents.
Should heterosexual single men be allowed to adopt girls?
Obviously they have to be careful. A couple is less likely to be a threat than a single man of any orientation.
Using your same logic you can therefore conclude that all heterosexual men will molest their female adopted children!!
Please say you see the jump in logic there. It's a rather absurd leap, don't ya think? :@)
There shouldnt be anything wrong with it. The only thing that might happen is the gay parents turn the kid gay. But thats still a might, and not something thats bad. There isnt anything wrong with it in my mind.
I guess I'm missing something. We allow heterosexual males to adopt girls, don't we? So, what's your issue?
What makes a homosexual couple less equipped to raise a boy?
Well...men adopt little girls. It's not any different. As long as they aren't pedophiles, it really should not be a factor.
Yes. I dont see the big deal about whether they adopt a girl or a boy.
Why wouldn't they be allowed to?
as long as they aren't pedophiles yes.
yes i think they should i don't see anything against it
i think that gay couples should only be allowed to adopt children of the opposite sex. that way there is no suspicion on their character and children will get adopted. do I think It'll happen...?? No... because so many gay people seeking to adopt children seem to want children of the same sex as them for some reason... strange.....
No, No, and No. Neither should females.
personally, i don't agree with it. i think it is a way to indirectly produce more gay men.
If the childs not born gay it might make him gay when it grows up. Not natural. No No No
Why should couples who have NO kids, pay taxes for schools?
i think its stupid myselfWhy should couples who have NO kids, pay taxes for schools?
For the same reason people with no cars pay road maintenance taxes. It's called community.Why should couples who have NO kids, pay taxes for schools?
jimdemes is right. Heck, we homeschool and I'd LOVE to have the money we pay in school taxes every year to do it. But I have to help educate other kids, too, so they'll take care of me when I'm old and they're doctors and lawyers and members of Congress.
Because our school system helps to improve our economy (if it has enough funding to work optimally and efficiently). An improved economy means that all American citizens benefit from higher wage and better social services, among the thousands of other benefits.
because the government are shite
The same reason why Social Security and Medicare are taken from our pay checks. We are a symbiotic society. We all help one another.
why do people with no cars pay road tax?
For the same reason people who don't drive pay taxes for roads. Although you may not directly benefit from a service, you indirectly benefit from it in many ways. As a citizen of the US, it's your duty to pay taxes for services you may not use directly, like it or not.
Yes, because school would be too expensive for couples with kids. Some would not be able to afford it. Public school also benefits people who never have kids. In 50 years it would be hard to find a doctor or a lawyer because how will they get a college degree if they didn't even go to 1st grade because their parents couldn't afford it.
BECAUSE THEY LIVE IN THE CITY...
Because that couple went to school because some other childless couple paid tax
Even they dont have kids they are members of a community which care about education. Do you think that those taxes are enoough to support even minimum education..?
To ensure that the kids of today grow up to be intelligent, hard working, productive members of society
Imagine two societies, one in which most people have at least a basic education. These people are able to work in jobs and positions that offer the services that we all need to funcion as a successful society. Now imagine a society where half of the people or more do not have a basic education. These people will not be productive members of society, instead, they will become a burden on society, seeking federal programs for economic assistance, seeking money that will be coming out of your pocket anyways, one way or another. Which society would you rather live in?
For the same reason people with no cars pay road maintenance taxes. It's called community.Why should couples who have NO kids, pay taxes for schools?
jimdemes is right. Heck, we homeschool and I'd LOVE to have the money we pay in school taxes every year to do it. But I have to help educate other kids, too, so they'll take care of me when I'm old and they're doctors and lawyers and members of Congress.
Because our school system helps to improve our economy (if it has enough funding to work optimally and efficiently). An improved economy means that all American citizens benefit from higher wage and better social services, among the thousands of other benefits.
because the government are shite
The same reason why Social Security and Medicare are taken from our pay checks. We are a symbiotic society. We all help one another.
why do people with no cars pay road tax?
For the same reason people who don't drive pay taxes for roads. Although you may not directly benefit from a service, you indirectly benefit from it in many ways. As a citizen of the US, it's your duty to pay taxes for services you may not use directly, like it or not.
Yes, because school would be too expensive for couples with kids. Some would not be able to afford it. Public school also benefits people who never have kids. In 50 years it would be hard to find a doctor or a lawyer because how will they get a college degree if they didn't even go to 1st grade because their parents couldn't afford it.
BECAUSE THEY LIVE IN THE CITY...
Because that couple went to school because some other childless couple paid tax
Even they dont have kids they are members of a community which care about education. Do you think that those taxes are enoough to support even minimum education..?
To ensure that the kids of today grow up to be intelligent, hard working, productive members of society
Imagine two societies, one in which most people have at least a basic education. These people are able to work in jobs and positions that offer the services that we all need to funcion as a successful society. Now imagine a society where half of the people or more do not have a basic education. These people will not be productive members of society, instead, they will become a burden on society, seeking federal programs for economic assistance, seeking money that will be coming out of your pocket anyways, one way or another. Which society would you rather live in?
What are the biggest age gaps between celebrity couples?
Catherine Zeta Jones are 25 years apart hes 64 shes 39
Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are nearly 16 years apart hes 47 shes nearly 31
Asthon Ketcher and Demi Moore are also nearly 16 years apart hes 31 shes nearly 47 but what other celebrity couples have a big age gap between themWhat are the biggest age gaps between celebrity couples?
32 Years
Joan Collins . . . Percy Gibson
Norma Ferriera . . . Chris Harvey (British couple. She: 50: He: 18 when met. news story)
Martha Raye . . . Mark Harris
---------------
34 Years
Gina Lollobrigida . . . Javier Rigau y Rafols
---------------
39 Years
Edna Townsend . . . Simon Martin (British couple in 2005. She: 70: He: 31. news story)
---------------
71 Years
Wook Kunder . . . Muhamad Noor Che Musa (Malaysian couple in 2006; She: 104. He: 33)
More details.
http://www.angelfire.com/stars4/lists/co鈥?/a>What are the biggest age gaps between celebrity couples?
Rod Stewart and Penny Lancaster, 26 years
Harrison Ford and Calista Flockhart, 23 years
Marilyn Manson and Evan Rachel Wood, 19 years
Barbara Hershey and Naveen Andrews, 21 years
Halle Berry and Gabriel Aubry, 10 years
Celine Dion and her husband
Donald Trump
Hugh Hefner
etc..
I think it was Anna Nicole Smith who was like twenty and her husband that super old guy who was eighty-five. Their age difference was sixty-four years.
geees, that old coot anna nicole married was old enough to be her
great grand father. always thought she was entitled to all that money and more, the guy looked like the crypt keeper
Celine Dion and her husband
Isn't it Hugh Hefner and his twins?
I think it's 63 years difference.
Doanld Trump and his wife
Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are nearly 16 years apart hes 47 shes nearly 31
Asthon Ketcher and Demi Moore are also nearly 16 years apart hes 31 shes nearly 47 but what other celebrity couples have a big age gap between themWhat are the biggest age gaps between celebrity couples?
32 Years
Joan Collins . . . Percy Gibson
Norma Ferriera . . . Chris Harvey (British couple. She: 50: He: 18 when met. news story)
Martha Raye . . . Mark Harris
---------------
34 Years
Gina Lollobrigida . . . Javier Rigau y Rafols
---------------
39 Years
Edna Townsend . . . Simon Martin (British couple in 2005. She: 70: He: 31. news story)
---------------
71 Years
Wook Kunder . . . Muhamad Noor Che Musa (Malaysian couple in 2006; She: 104. He: 33)
More details.
http://www.angelfire.com/stars4/lists/co鈥?/a>What are the biggest age gaps between celebrity couples?
Rod Stewart and Penny Lancaster, 26 years
Harrison Ford and Calista Flockhart, 23 years
Marilyn Manson and Evan Rachel Wood, 19 years
Barbara Hershey and Naveen Andrews, 21 years
Halle Berry and Gabriel Aubry, 10 years
Celine Dion and her husband
Donald Trump
Hugh Hefner
etc..
I think it was Anna Nicole Smith who was like twenty and her husband that super old guy who was eighty-five. Their age difference was sixty-four years.
geees, that old coot anna nicole married was old enough to be her
great grand father. always thought she was entitled to all that money and more, the guy looked like the crypt keeper
Celine Dion and her husband
Isn't it Hugh Hefner and his twins?
I think it's 63 years difference.
Doanld Trump and his wife
What are the sociological and anthropological reasons for couples to have children? please quote scholar/study
question is part of a academic essay, so please quote author/scholar/study and provide links, references or source of data. TksWhat are the sociological and anthropological reasons for couples to have children? please quote scholar/study
The sociological reasons are clear. It is for love and to keep the blood line going.
Since this is a sociology forum, there will be no conclusive anthropological reasoning forthcoming.
But it was a good try.What are the sociological and anthropological reasons for couples to have children? please quote scholar/study
Well, I'm not using any citations, because I definitely feel you should do your research yourself.
I would say that people have children not only because we are biologically predisposed to perpetuate our species, but because it is normative. Procreation is an important part of culture everywhere, no matter whereyou go.
I would do some work with Emile Durkheim and his concept of Anomie. Women who choose not to have children are considered strange, and in many ways, outcasts. Couples who chose not to bring children in the world are often questioned and pressured about their family choices.
Breaking a social norm can be easy, but is rarely pleasant.
Do your own freaking work...I'm sure you'd love links and resources and data. Why don't you try the library, the internet, scholarly journals, and hey I know, even books.
The sociological reasons are clear. It is for love and to keep the blood line going.
Since this is a sociology forum, there will be no conclusive anthropological reasoning forthcoming.
But it was a good try.What are the sociological and anthropological reasons for couples to have children? please quote scholar/study
Well, I'm not using any citations, because I definitely feel you should do your research yourself.
I would say that people have children not only because we are biologically predisposed to perpetuate our species, but because it is normative. Procreation is an important part of culture everywhere, no matter whereyou go.
I would do some work with Emile Durkheim and his concept of Anomie. Women who choose not to have children are considered strange, and in many ways, outcasts. Couples who chose not to bring children in the world are often questioned and pressured about their family choices.
Breaking a social norm can be easy, but is rarely pleasant.
Do your own freaking work...I'm sure you'd love links and resources and data. Why don't you try the library, the internet, scholarly journals, and hey I know, even books.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)