KGB

There is a huge difference between "suggests or even encourages" and incessent pestering. Someone forcing his/her own child into making a choice between a parent and a potential mate is coercion - it may not be coercion according to the fanatical perpertrators, with whom you and Anonymouse eagerly simpathize, but their (the parents') inability to reason without fervent passion means their opinions can be disregarded with little effort. For you to say they are "heartily encouraging" proves you are a fanatic who is not accustomed to reasonable thought. To claim that I'm speaking nonsense is one thing; to actually prove that my original post is full of nonsense is something totally different. You continue to claim that I'm speaking nonsense but you have not debunked anything I've said. If you are to dispute my original post, please prove it is nonsense without using words like illogical and nonsense. If you want a good example of nonsense, it is this: I am replying to you with the hope that you will at least consider my point of view, but I think this is highly unlikely. Because of this, I will restrain myself from visiting this forum. You and your leader Anonymouse are basically expanding the conventional Armenian views on inter-racial dating to areas where logic is not even applicable - it is fanaticism. To actually claim that having interest in non-Armenians is a prurient interest (basically, it is a sin) shows that you have developed your own religion to justify yourselves.

You are a fanatic. It seems your religion is Christianity mixed with a heavy dose of Armenian racism. All I can say is don't ever stray far from the Armenian community because you will find yourself all alone, especially if you decide to attend a church that is not located anywhere near an Armenian community. The church you attend will be full of people who, like you, also consider themselves to be "true disciples of Christ," except that they won't know what an Armenian is and won't even make an effort to find Armenia on a map. Dealing with you is a waste of time because you will not budge one inch from your present position, regardless of what your opponents say. Have a nice life...

No deal because you either 1. don't know the definition of coerce or 2. are sticking to a single, rigid definition of coerce and deeming that definition to be the only one applicable to this argument, which means you must consider yourself to be an online despot. Anyway, to clear up this petty argument about the definition of a word, please check the link below. Read the second defintion of coerce and then dare to continue your argument about the meaning(s) of the word. I will respond to the rest of what you wrote later: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/coerce

So, being in love with a non-Armenian is a “prurient interest”? Is this correct? Here is an example: an Armenian mother threatens her son that she will never speak with him again if he marries his non-Armenian girlfriend – what do you think? I think you would probably consider the mother’s threat to be completely justified, but I’m sure the son would consider this to be coercion. imply - to express indirectly imagine - to form a mental image of something not present You are creating ideas in your own mind while claiming that those ideas were created by me by indirect statement, which is false. I agree that happiness is not something one suddenly finds or falls into. However, an unhappy Armenian/Armenian marriage is still possibile. My point is that I would prefer a happy marriage with a non-Armenian over an unhappy marriage with an Armenian – that’s all. Anything else that you are able to extract from that simple point is a product of your own imagination. This sounds like evolution with a religious twist… pretty interesting. So if a culture is living amongst other cultures, if it is completely surrounded by other cultures which happen to be mixing amongst themselves, is this single culture, which refuses to submit by declining to participate in the mixing, following the basic law which you speak of?

Yes, you understand my basic points.

Actually, some people are forcing themselves. How do you know they aren’t? Are you psychic? Saying it’s not coercion and is education doesn’t make it so, regardless of what you think. Did I say this? Re-read my posts and prove to me that I said non-Armenian/Armenian marriage is the ‘will of the individual’ and an Armenian/Armenian marriage is ‘forced’ and ‘coerced.’ Rather, IF this is the case, then the Armenian/Armenian union should be avoided. All I'm saying is that happiness should not be sacrificed in the name of "keeping the blood pure." That's all. Seeking out an Armenian union is great, I encourage it and think that's the way it should be as long as the union of the two people in question is "meant to be" (forgive me for using that cliche, but I could not think of a better substitute). No, I have not forgotten this and never will, mostly because I’ve been encouraged to think like this about Armenians since I was a young child. I don’t quite understand, especially about biology trumping ideology – what do you mean by this? Also, if a system of thought is part of or supports “atheistic secularism,” is it to be rejected? What alternative do you suggest?

Do you mean the ones they preach in church? I've heard a few of them in the past but was unable to connect most of it to what was happening outside of the church community.

Something tangible.

Education? And what if the education does not persuade the targeted individual into realizing what is at stake? What if that person does not give in? What will the educators do then? How will the educators treat that person then?

The people getting married are forcing themselves to avoid non-Armenians because of the incessant persuasions of family members, which actually can be classified as coercion in certain cases.

Anahid, My original point was that getting married to an Armenian - forcing an Armenian marriage that should not be - simply in order to "preserve the race" is harmful. All the other uncertanties and things associated with getting married are not what I was talking about.

"Iran's economy is marked by a bloated, inefficient state sector, over reliance on the oil sector, and statist policies that create major distortions throughout. Most economic activity is controlled by the state. Private sector activity is typically small-scale - workshops, farming, and services. President Mahmud AHMADI-NEJAD has continued to follow the market reform plans of former President RAFSANJANI, with limited progress. Relatively high oil prices in recent years have enabled Iran to amass some $40 billion in foreign exchange reserves, but have not eased economic hardships such as high unemployment and inflation." Source: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ir.html (it's under "economy overview," about half-way down the page) Can you see why they would want oil prices to remain high?

I would be able to predict the Armenian's behavior much better than the non-Armenian's behavior.

Anahid, Yes, I understand that many people rush into marriage, but I don't see how this is relevant. I understand that Armenians share certain characteristics which are almost intangible and that these characteristics are essentially the glue that keeps them together. However, this is not all that should be relied upon, especially under the current conditions that diasporans live under. From your last sentence, it seems you are referring to that initial spark which attracts two people, then grows into a raging fire, and finally calms down and becomes a pile of burning embers. Basically, the spark and huge fire feel like they will last forever, but they never do. The burning embers are what are most important: there must be fuel for them to continue glowing, so that the heat does not vanish. To get to my point, Armenians know each other well enough to understand HOW to provide fuel for those embers. However, this is an idealized situation which I'm referring to. There are plenty of miserable Armenian marriages out there - I've seen them with my own eyes and they are basically the reason why I made my original post. If you had seen these marriages as well you might agree with me and see that my argument contains more logic than you may think.

The overexaggeration is that there is no threat and there won't be one for a very long time. Iran is not even close to developing nuclear weapons. If one truly believed the media reports, it would seem that Iran would be able to develope nukes as soon as they finish enriching uranium, which is bogus. So what if Saddam was allowing inspectors? The plan to attack Iraq was made years in advance and it was well known throughtout the world that it was probably going to happen. Iraq and Iran are two different situations and cannot be compared based on the perceived threats they pose/posed and the amount of media coverage each one received/receives.