LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

MARRIAGE ARE DECIDED IN HEAVEN

Page no : 2

(Guest)

 

A very common example;

 

When a boy get job out of native place, it is heard generally "It was very difficult to make food and wash the dishes and cloths so I decided to get married".

 

 

It is a false shelter in the name of religion that: "Pati is Parmeshwar".. all the fundas are made by Pandas.

 

 

So now all the false fundas are getting down and rights are getting up.

1 Like

Isaac Gabriel (Advocate)     25 October 2010

Live in relationship is also the will of god to be performed for the satisfaction of the physical needs without any   hindrance to society at large.  not made at heaven, it is the circumstantial inevitability to maintain order in society at all.It is not an averse or curse .

N K Bajaj (Financial Controller)     25 October 2010

Live in cases are decided in hell

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     25 October 2010

if live ins prevailed in ancient india,why did society eventually turn to marriage?

if they had been successful with no harmful effects on any1,why did people choose to go in for marriage then?

 

any answer??


(Guest)
I have no answer, just surrendering.

(Guest)

 

if live ins prevailed in ancient India, why did society eventually turn to marriage?

If I have a answer then why I ask MARRIAGE ARE DECIDED IN HEAVEN and  is Live in relation are decided in ?

I just have no answer, just surrendering to you.:P


(Guest)
CONGRATS. SO WHO WILL CELEBRATE AND WHO WILL NOT? I AM GOING TO CELEBRATE YOUR VICTORY. ASK ME WHY? THAT I WILL NOT TELL TO ANYONE.

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     25 October 2010

i addressed this question to arup jee,since he's a promoter of live in relations and has high regards for men's cocubines...god knows why!

anyways,

live in= enjoying all benefits without any committment, walking out at will

 

marriage=enjoying all benefits with committment+being with spouse under all circumstances forever

 

in a marriage, if man is adulterous,society looks down upon him,law catches him,etc.

however if the man/woman are adulterous in live in,no society or law helps the deserted partner.the adulterous partner can leave u in 1 day of relationship also.

 

so which feels better?

 

there must be strong reasons why indian society turned to marriage after practising live in relations..if they were so beneficial,they wud have contd. till date...and now we are again turning to live in...are we confused about wot we want?

or do we lack patience and sincerity in relationships that we keep changing the arrangements?

 


(Guest)

Dear Mr. kushan, I think you know that I never come on such topics but I smell something here to check and really really I enjoyed.  Go ahead n enjoy, but I'll say BYE since I got what I wanted here.  You have given me real laughter... 


(Guest)

Oh so sorry Madam, you have written there "any answer" so I thought it is addressed to everyone who joined this thread.  Please treat my further postings as deleted.  


(Guest)

 

Dear Ram Samudre - DRF

You said You have given me real laughter... I AM GOING TO CELEBRATE YOUR VICTORY. ASK ME WHY? THAT I WILL NOT TELL TO ANYONE. 

 

Thanks!!!!:P


(Guest)

 

A beautiful film in 1978 american comedy film what is story here it is;

 

Plot

Joe Pendleton (Warren Beatty), a backup quarterback for the American football team Los Angeles Rams, is looking forward to leading his team to the Super Bowl, when he is involved in a terrible collision with a truck. An over-anxious guardian angel (Buck Henry) on his first assignment plucks Joe out of his body early in the mistaken belief that his death is imminent, and Pendleton arrives in the afterlife.

Once there, he refuses to believe that his time was up, and upon investigation, the mysterious Mr. Jordan (James Mason) discovers that he is right; he was not destined to die until much later. Unfortunately, his body has already been cremated, so a new body must be found. After rejecting several possibilities (men who are about to die), Joe is finally persuaded to accept the body of millionaire industrialist Leo Farnsworth. Farnsworth has just been drugged and drowned in his bathtub by his wife Julia (Dyan Cannon) and her lover, Farnsworth's personal secretary, Tony Abbott (Charles Grodin).

Julia and Tony are naturally confused when Farnsworth reappears, alive and well. Joe Farnsworth buys the Los Angeles Rams in order to lead them to the Super Bowl as their quarterback. In order to succeed, he must first convince, and then secure the aid of, long-time friend and trainer Max Corkle (Jack Warden) to get his new body into shape. At the same time, he falls in love with an environmental justice activist, Betty Logan (Julie Christie), who disapproves of industrialist Farnsworth's capitalist policies and actions.

As the movie's plot line heads toward the Super Bowl, the characters all face a crisis. Julia and Abbott continue their murderous plans, and Abbott shoots Farnsworth dead. The Rams are forced to start another quarterback, Thomas Jarrett, in the climactic football game. After a brutal hit on the field, Jarrett is himself killed. With Mr. Jordan's help, Joe then occupies his final body, that of Jarrett. Joe, in Jarrett's body, is shown leading the Rams to victory. This, however, creates a plotting difficulty: how can Joe reconcile his episodes of metempsychosis with his future as a successful American athletic superstar?

During the team's post-game victory celebration, Mr. Jordan performs his last feat, a memory wipe on Jarrett. This action removes Joe's memory of his past life and allows Mr. Jordan to depart. Joe becomes Thomas Jarrett and the cosmic balance is restored; the winning quarterback, Jarrett, is shown meeting Betty after the celebrations have ended, and as the film ends it is strongly implied that they are falling in love as a result of a mutual sense of déjà vu.

 


(Guest)

Dear Mr. Kushan, see, this is not a subject matter for which we have to fight like we fight for our rights.  And if by our words / opinion someone feel hurt that I would not like here.  So let all be happy with their willingness.  This topic is not affecting life of any individual from any outside force.  So if I do not give here my opinion it will give no harm to anyone.  So I said that I will not tell this to anyone.  If it would have the matter of our rights I wouldn't have kept quite.  Let the people enjoy at their wish and why should I bother.

Parthasarathy (Business)     25 October 2010

Please see my message above


(Guest)

Parasarthy ji

 

You call marriage a legalised prostitution.Do you realise that you are also the result of this legalised prostitution?

Was your mother a prostitute to your father?Can you say this to her?

So think before you use such derogatory words for a sacred institution like marriage.

1 Like

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Recent Topics


View More

Related Threads


Loading