Letter From Dave Sim
While I waited for my 20 minute delayed train in Toronto Union Station, I cracked open the Aardvark Vanaheim bubble envelope to find… a letter… a 27 PAGE letter!…
From none other than Dave Sim.
Which is exciting enough in itself, BUT WAIT! THERE’S MORE!
It turns out this correspondence is going to be the feature in this weeks Blog and Mail.
So we are going to do things a little differently this time around.
As each new installment of the Blog and Mail is released in the Cerebus Yahoo! Group, I will add a link to it below.
Strap yourselves in because we are in for a long and turbulent week.
READ IT HERE:
Blog and Mail - PART 8 (The Conclusion)
-
5 Comments so far
Leave a reply
27 pages? 27 pages? Wow. How long did it take you to read it? Is Dave responding per verbatim in the Blog & Mail?
Hi Margaret!
Welcome to the Wonderful World of Ultraist.net!
Geeze, I dunno how long it took to read the whole thing. It was 10 minutes while waiting for the train, plus 45 minutes on the train, plus a little bit more after that…
And yes, Dave is responding per verbatim in the Blog and Mail. So you guys will be getting the full shebang!
Enjoy!
On the Cerebus Yahoo! Group, Jeff Tundis wrote:
———— Here we go again. Marriage is a Christian hijacked form of Maritatus (Maritatum) — the legal, state sanctioned contract to regulate inheritance and the like. Yes, children’s welfare is *part* of it, but it was only after the Christian’s took it over and altered it to omit the parts they didn’t like (like legal polygamy)did it become “about children.” The Biblical definition of marriage is a corruption.
-Jeff
(Thought I’d save you the trouble, Steve)
And then Steve Bolhafner wrote:
Well, not quite.
To say “the Biblical definition of marriage is a corruption” goes too
far, I think. The ancient Hebrews did have marriage, after all, though
they had different words for it. If you said the *Christian* concept
of marriage is a corruption of Maritatus, you’d be closer to the
truth. And Maritatus was very much about building Families, and
therefore “about children” in a very real sense of the word (although
children — even adult children — were the property of their father
and could be disposed of at will, just to give one obvious example of
the differences in outlook).
The Christians *claim* they are using the Roman word for the Jewish
concept. As successors to the Jews, they are following (more-or-less)
Jewish law (except they can eat pork and don’t have to obey *all* the
laws). Christian marriage is, theoretically, the same as ancient
Hebrew marriage.
Except it’s not. Christian marriage — especially in our culture — is
NOTHING like marriage in the Old Testament. Indeed, polygamy is one of
the things in the Old Testament that the Christians didn’t like there,
either.
LEGALLY speaking, all of the laws regarding marriage in all European
countries (and all the American countries, who inherited their laws
from the Europeans) do indeed descend directly from the Roman
Maritatus. No doubt about that.
Steve Bolhafner
Cool. I just finished reading the last installment. Dave has some really good things to say, I think. That was fun.
Cool. What do you think about all of this? any toughts?