what do you think of this in regards to the protection of marriage?

Question

Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children to marry Nancy Reagan, who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage.
Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds.
Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.
Dick Armey - House Majority Leader; Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas; Gov. John Engler of Michigan; Gov. Pete Wilson of California, George Will, Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced
Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr, not yet 50 years old, has been married three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of Marriage Act." "WHICH marriage are you defending??"
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, Sen. John Warner and Gov. George Allen, Rep. John Kasich of Ohio; Rep. Susan Molinari of New York - Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker - ALL DIVORCED

what are we protecting?

answerguru - so taking marriage lightly does not destroy its sanctity?

PuterPrsn - Clinton did NOT make it OK to commit adultery.. that is wrong no matter what sex your spouse is

mister nice guy - I did not compile the list and obviously it was done in this manner because Republicans are the ones trying to pass the laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman

Answer 1

The word "marriage". Just because these few people are divorced under circumstances which obviously bother you doesn't change the fact that the word "marriage" means the union of one man and one woman.

If you want the state to recognize other unions, then call them that - unions. Call them ALL unions. "Marriage" is a religious term anyway.

And why does it matter if these people divorced? Mr. Clinton made it alright for anyone to commit adultery, and you're worried about people getting legal divorces and remarrying?

Answer 2

Nothing, its just to sidestep the real issues at hand. But, if this was a real issue which its not, I would say the first thing to protect would be the children because we are not going to be able to stop divorce no matter what. The family courts need a major overhaul when it comes to mens rights with their kids and how men are massively descriminated against. 90 percent of women get custody right off the bat not because they are a more fit parent because, it saves the court money. Its a gender biased system that does not work at all. Our system encourages women to get pregnant and punishes men that deserve custody. If welfare was not as easily available to women better choices would be made by society. If a man was given an equal chance just as much as a woman was in court to obtain custody we might not have as many troubled kids in court in later years. Their is more to raisng a child than just paying support to someone your not sure is responsable enough to receive it. What kind of society are we when we care more about 2 guys getting married rather than the direction that our youth is heading. As far as protection of marriage act goes, straight people havent figured out how to stay together so, why would gays be any different. Wow, just think how much more money that would cost the courts when Adam and Steve got divorced but, hey isn't that more important than ruling on whether or not little Jonny gets to live with his dad vs. his alcoholic, drug using mother?

Answer 3

I guess I don't understand how other peoples marriage and divorces effect my marriage. What do they have to do with my relationships?? Even gay people - what does that have to do with my marriage?? I don't get it when politicians, religious leaders or anyone else say they are protecting the sanctity of marriage, whose marriages are they protecting? How can they protect mine? I am not stupid or naive but trying to make a point, no one can protect or destroy my marriage but my husband and I.

Answer 4

The act of protecting marriage is not about not being able to get a divorce but so marriage stays between man and a woman. Your argument misses the point and is not correct. You are argueing the wrong thing. Next time please get your facts strait.

Answer 5

Family values are raised there, in the family.... not congressmen nor the president will be my rolemodels for my marital life, I really couldn't care less on how many mistress these guys have, they can marry their dogs if they want to, I'm cool with that, I don't give a damn, really... if they do their work properly, I wouldn't mind voting them and having "Spike" as first lady.

Too bad if people confuse government with mom and dad.... sorry for you.

Answer 6

The only way to protect marriage would be to outlaw divorce (which would just result in a whole lot of unhappy marriages).

Discriminating against gay people and not allowing them full rights (such as marriage) doesn't protect marriage. It's rhetoric, and pretty transparent rhetoric as well.

Thank you for sharing.

Answer 7

Excellent question. The sanctity of marriage falls short of these republicans.

The state that has the lowest percentage of divorce is Massachusetts...a state FULL of Democrats.

Answer 8

Awesome point! If they want to protect marriage by making it between one man and one woman, they need to make it FOREVER, too, just like the Bible says. Otherwise, they are being hypocritical.

I am not against allowing gay marriage. I am just pointing out yet another aspect of their hypocrisy.

Answer 9

exactly. if they want to protect marriage, they should make it illegal to get divorced, not prohibit anyone from marrying. the state of marriage is already down the toilet.

this is just another transparent attempt to rile up the conservative base in an election year.

Answer 10

You raise a very good point/issue. Marriage has so much against it right now and is the fundamental core of the family unit. If one can't identify family, one can't identify themselves.