Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2012 August 14
Humanities desk | ||
---|---|---|
< August 13 | << Jul | August | Sep >> | August 15 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
August 14
editRuintia
editWhat is the Ruintia? List of extinct animals of the Hawaiian Islands say it is an extinct mammal, but I can't find anything about it on the internet.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- I've deleted it. It was added by User:98.196.92.165, whose primary contributions are to fictional animals, with a history of adding incorrect information to articles.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 07:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe you or the other editor was thinking of the rhytina, which is an extinct mammal from that area.--Shantavira|feed me 07:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Unlikely. Steller's sea cows were endemic to the Commander Islands, which isn't anywhere near Hawaii. -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 07:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe you or the other editor was thinking of the rhytina, which is an extinct mammal from that area.--Shantavira|feed me 07:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Responding to Prayer Requests
editWhen a religious friend tells me about a problem they are facing (for example, their grandmother is very ill) and asks me to support them by praying, the answer which comes to my mind is "I am so very sorry but I don't believe in prayer".
I never give this sort of answer because although it is straightforward and truthful, I think it is TOTALLY useless, if not worse than useless, to the person who made the request.
Under these circumstances, is there any type of response that is compassionate and honest and helpful to the person who made the request? Thank you, CBHA (talk) 05:56, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
non-reference oriented matters |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
The WP Reference Desk is not a Citizens' Advice Bureau.
"I don't pray, but I hope it all turns out well for you." HiLo48 (talk) 08:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
relocated the above 3 comments under the hat. — Lomn 15:51, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
|
What serious thinkers have said on atheists and prayer
I think this is a very legitimate issue of philosophy, specifically etiquette, as a branch of ethics. Ayn Rand was an atheist who repeatedly made the point that saying things like God bless you are a way of saying "you are a great value to me", or "I wish you the highest." Google Ayn Rand on God Bless You. That shows concern for people as individuals in their own terms. Presumably some of the New Atheists would think that something like not compromising your principles is more important. Christopher Hitchens asked that people not pray for him as he was dying. μηδείς (talk) 02:00, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
- And in the flip side of the original question here, someone might be inclined to tell Hitchens, "OK, I won't," and then go ahead and do so anyway, privately. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
See [1], [2], [3] and [4]. 203.27.72.5 (talk) 04:49, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
- Here is some detailed exposition on the topic by someone who has obviously thought about it enough to churn out several pages each. There is more at
http://www.squidoo.com/sympathy-101-for-atheists
(that host is in our spam filter for some reason) and it's an even better essay in my opinion. Here are some briefer forum suggestions. 75.166.207.214 (talk) 03:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC) [copied here from talk by μηδείς (talk) 04:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)]
The famous physicist Niels Bohr purportedly had a horseshoe nailed above the door to his office. When visitors asked why he had it there, he said "it's supposed to bring good luck". When the visitors then asked him whether as a scientific guy, he really believed such a silly superstition, he'd reply "of course I don't believe in it, but it's supposed to work whether you believe in it or not". I guess you could treat the request for prayer as similar to a request to keep a horseshoe in your office, and go along with it if it wasn't too much hassle, even if you didn't believe in it. 67.122.211.84 (talk) 21:12, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
- Good answer! 75.166.207.214 (talk) 00:14, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
- When rational people buy lottery tickets, they know at the outset that there's an extremely slim chance of them winning anything significant. They buy the ticket not because they believe they're going to win, but because not to do so would give them no chance at all. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 03:44, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
I use the phrase "I will keep you/them in my thoughts" .Hotclaws (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Question about the validity of marriage
editHere is a hypothetical situation that struck my curiosity. Let's say that a man and woman get married. This is, let's say, in the USA and in a state that forbids same sex marriages. During the course of their marriage, one spouse (let's just say, the husband) has a sex-change operation. He is now legally a female. What happens to the status (validity) of that marriage? Does it remain the same, as if nothing happened and nothing changed? Or does the sex-change operation somehow invalidate the marriage? I am just curious about this situation, even though it is bizarre and unlikely. Any ideas? Or, has this actually ever happened in real life somewhere? I am asking about the legal status and validity, not moral or religious or otherwise. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- According to this FAQ, marriage laws are based on the legal gender of the people at the time of their marriage, so the marriage remains valid even if one partner later changes to a different legal gender. It does happen from time to time; here's an article from ABC News with a biography of one such couple. For transgender people who fall in love after their transition, the legal question depends on (a) whether their state allows same-sex marriage, and (b) whether their state allows legal changes of gender. Ironically, this means that in the most conservative states, where no legal change of gender is permitted, gay and lesbian transgender people are getting legal same-sex marriages that other gay and lesbian people can't get. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that's "ironic". It makes perfect sense if you look at it the way they do. From the point of view of the lawmakers in those states, these are not same-sex marriages at all. To them, you have a man and a woman, except one of them (let's say th man) got some strange ideas in his head that led him to undergo cosmetic surgery. Odd, maybe, but not an impediment to marriage. The woman is not specially privileged because her husband is trans — she could have married any man, not just one who had done the cosmetic procedure. --Trovatore (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Iran goes about this the other way around. There homosexuality and transvestism is a death penalty crime, and same sex marriages are not happening any time soon, if ever. But sex reassignment surgery is actually encouraged and completely legal, since after changing legal genders, future marriages will not be same-sex anymore (only applies if the transgender people in question are heterosexual of course).-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 18:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that's "ironic". It makes perfect sense if you look at it the way they do. From the point of view of the lawmakers in those states, these are not same-sex marriages at all. To them, you have a man and a woman, except one of them (let's say th man) got some strange ideas in his head that led him to undergo cosmetic surgery. Odd, maybe, but not an impediment to marriage. The woman is not specially privileged because her husband is trans — she could have married any man, not just one who had done the cosmetic procedure. --Trovatore (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Though I mostly agree with all of the above, it's also notable that laws, even in just the U.S. vary considerably in this regard, and that there federal, state, and even sometimes local precedents that routinely come into conflict as different legal and governmental bodies try to decide who the ultimate arbiter is (though States do mostly dominate influence on the issue, but can vary considerably amongst themselves). Also note that in most cases, regardless of external factors influencing changes in marital status, almost any partner could sue for divorce citing irreconcilable differences caused by the other spouse; in rare cases they might even be able to get an annulment if their partner was in transition or intending to transition. Though again, considerable variation here. Snow (talk) 23:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- This question is of some importance in the UK. Note first of all that having a sex-change operation doesn't legally change one's gender. In the UK a legal change of gender occurs on granting of a gender recognition certificate, but this can't be granted to a person who is currently married. So a married person wishing to change gender legally has to have their marriage dissolved, and the couple can afterwards have a civil partnership. The awkwardness of this procedure is one argument in favour of introducing equal marriage (that is, marriage without regard to the gender of those involved) in the UK. --rossb (talk) 22:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)