Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the idea is that heterosexuals should be able to monopolize the cheapening of marriage. You know, ~50% divorce rate, prenups, that kind of thing.
[i]
The separation rate (I won't use the word "divorce") is even higher among homosexuals.
So how does Homosexuals getting Married/Divorce the reason why your mom and dad got a divorce? or the reason why you will get a divorce? or the reason why I will get a divorce?
sorry but no one person/or group of people can cause me to get a divorce or ever will...all of you who claim to be againts gay marriage because it cheapens "Marriage" and will make marriage decline because of divorce rates....well what i see there is a lack of faith in your own marriages or in the marriages of others....and its thinking like that that will really cheapen the value of what "Marriage" is...
The separation rate (I won't use the word "divorce") is even higher among homosexuals.
No kidding.
It's harder to consummate and maintain a relationship that is legally unrecognizable and cannot gain any of the benefits of marriage. This is more from the legal aspect of it rather than the religious aspect, which you could say is not a factor for me. I guess it's up to everyone's church or whatever to decide whether to recognize gay couples as married or not. Anyone who disagrees, I suppose, could just find another church that fits in with their views. It's not that difficult, and none of it should have any bearing on what the government recognizes.
My point was essentially that heterosexuals have already cheapened the meaning of marriage to the point that it's rather hypocritical to deny homosexuals the right to marry on the basis of preserving the non-existent sanctity of marriage.
My point was essentially that heterosexuals have already cheapened the meaning of marriage to the point that it's rather hypocritical to deny homosexuals the right to marry on the basis of preserving the non-existent sanctity of marriage.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Just because there is a high divorce rate doesn't validate any kind of unnatural/abnormal "marriage."
And the high divorce rate is a relatively recent occurrence. It was quite low in the 1960s and all of the decades before then.
And this begs the question - what makes it inherently "wrong?"
You've once again stated the obvious about divorce rates. Marriages stayed intact when women could either be happy with their husbands or not, but either way they were stuck. You'd just slap her in the face and tell her to get in the kitchen, and that was that. What was she going to do, run out, get a job, hire a divorce lawyer and make ends meet? Divorces back then happened when the man didn't want to be married to that woman anymore.
And this begs the question - what makes it inherently "wrong?"
You've once again stated the obvious about divorce rates. Marriages stayed intact when women could either be happy with their husbands or not, but either way they were stuck. You'd just slap her in the face and tell her to get in the kitchen, and that was that. What was she going to do, run out, get a job, hire a divorce lawyer and make ends meet? Divorces back then happened when the man didn't want to be married to that woman anymore.
I guess that's one thing to be said for gay marriage. If one wife slaps another's face, we get to watch one helluva catfight.
And this begs the question - what makes it inherently "wrong?"
It is quite obvious the difference between a normal marriage and those who want the make-believe ones. As for what makes it wrong, that has been the topic for the last 87 pages of this thread, so there is no need to go over what has been already said.
Quote:
You've once again stated the obvious about divorce rates. Marriages stayed intact when women could either be happy with their husbands or not, but either way they were stuck. You'd just slap her in the face and tell her to get in the kitchen, and that was that. What was she going to do, run out, get a job, hire a divorce lawyer and make ends meet? Divorces back then happened when the man didn't want to be married to that woman anymore
You left out one important point... marriages stayed intact more back then because people didn't give up as easy. These days, many people divorce over silly reasons. Back then, they were more likely to try to work out their problems. Morals were also higher back then, another reason why fewer marriages ended.
And there were women who divorced men. What they usually did was go back home to live with their parents again.
Speaking of "slapping her in the face," back in the 1950s, the husband of one of my Aunts once started to raise his hand in an attempt to slap her. She stopped him right away and said, "Don't you dare try to slap me." And he didn't try it again. See, it depends on the person. It is too much of a generalization to say that "husbands always slapped their wives back then." Not true.
It is quite obvious the difference between a normal marriage and those who want the make-believe ones. As for what makes it wrong, that has been the topic for the last 87 pages of this thread, so there is no need to go over what has been already said.
The "just because it is" argument. "It's wrong because it's immoral, and it's immoral because it's wrong." Pointless and redundant or not, I asked that specifically to see if I'd get that response. I'm just cool like that.
I'm done here, at least for awhile, as I guess I have 85 pages of back-and-forth to read.
I'll leave by say that divorce is not a bad thing in some cases. Some marriages were not meant to be. I rank the day my parents split up for good as one of the happiest days in my life. It got old listening to them fight.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
