If your accusations were true, it only affirms the fact that they were not marriage.<quoted text>
I'm familiar with the debates. I was merely supplying the sources that the other poster did not.
One issue NOT mentioned in the rebuttals is that afrerements were SUPERIOR to marriage contracts because both parties entered into them voluntarily, and neither were considered at any point to be the chattel of the other.
However, I've never been to a wedding or officiated one where it was not voluntary.
Moreover, I've not only never heard the word 'chattel' used, the challenge has been to consider the other BEFORE one's self, to cherish each other, and the complimentary nature of a male/female union.
Hence the superiority of marriage over any other relationship.
You, on the other hand deceitfully posted a one sided, historically distorted position, and then supported the bigotry with your own.
What does the desperate deceit of your position expose???