How exactly does Gay Marriage threaten the sanctity of marriage?

Question

I don’t ask this as a question meant to inflame, but rather to get to understand the ideas opposing this. Those who oppose gay marriage say it threatens marriage. Yet, as a married (happily so) heterosexual woman who firmly supports gay marriage, I can’t quite understand HOW exactly that would be true. If you are heterosexual, knowing gay people are getting married isn’t going to stop you from getting married is it? It’s not going to turn you gay. So how exactly does it weaken marriage? What is the actual logical course of this line of thinking?

I understand wanting to teach ones own children their own ideas of what is moral and what is not. But by this argument, you teach your children that being Gay is wrong, how does someone else getting married who is gay undo that? Wouldnt your child listen to you, and not some strangers up the street? Please explain.

And say the laws were changed so that a civil union garenteed EXACTLY the same rights as marriage. So Gay Couples would be joined in something exactly like marriage, but called something else. Would that solve the problem?

Answer 1

Does changing the definition of dog to also include cats threaten the truth behind the definition of the word dog? YES.

The thing is. I am against modifying the definition of marriage to appease the vastly minority homosexual community. HOWEVER, I am not against people choosing to be with whomever they want to be with . THAT is called personal choice. Whether they would want to call it a 'civil union', 'legal union' or even 'iuagfiufg' is of no consequence. Have whatever new term you wish. You do not change the definition of marriage though. I am not against them having rights to insurance, inheritance, or whatever, but the definition of marriage should not change because of the choice of will of this minority.

Answer 2

Great question.......it's doesn't threaten the "sanctity of marriage", how can it when most heterosexual marriages end up in divorce?? And then you've also got spousal & child abuse to deal with as well. I am not gay but have many friends who are, even some who are parents and I can honestly tell you there is no logic in this line of thinking. It's too bad other people won't take the time to find that out for themselves.

Answer 3

Yeah I would think that divorce threatens the sanctity of marriage more. Noam Chomsky talks about how people place issues in a certain context to guide people towards adoptiong certain opinions. He describes it as "bordering the debate". So if someone presents the issue of "gay marriage" as a binary debate such as "bad for sanctity of marriage vs. human right", people choose from the options given. Then people are talking about this manufactured debate and it drowns out the more sophisticated and thought out debates. I think promoting monogamy and commitment is good for any community, not that I think it's necessary, but it certainly adds to stability. Maybe the issue is that the people who oppose gay people having the same legal benefits as straight people just don't like gay people. If that's the case, I didn't think people had to be liked to have rights in this country. I'm straight and I think that gay people should be given every right that straight people have. I'm not affraid of a gay take-over.

Answer 4

There is no concrete arguement except for hatefullness and shortsighteness. Not to mention the peope that still live in the middle ages. Oh yeah and lets throw some hypocrites in there also. As a christian and a heterosexual married man my wife and I support gay marriage. Why shouldn't people find the love they deserve? This is a ridiculous issue.

Answer 5

It doesn't. Many people who hate have been taught to hate and there is no logic to it. It is much easier to mock some one then to try and understand. Why do some straight men constantly ask other straight men if that guy over there is gay? Who cares? Are they looking for a secret midnight rendezvous perhaps? Guess what nobody cares who is gay except people who are looking for excuses why there life isn't what they thought it was and they need somebody to bash. Gays care who is gay but at least they have the guts to be who they really are and not hide behind a mob of liars.

Answer 6

What sanctity. Welcome the gays to the marriage ceremony membership. Now once they uncover out that's no longer their existence lengthy companion; no such matters as % your baggage and go away and existence is going on. Oh no; now in the event that they fall in love once more they have got to dossier for divorce like several different married couples that fall in love once more. Gotta pass via the entire authorized hassles that divorce can carry approximately. Not to many persons appear at marriage as a sanctity. I am blessed for father and mother that appear at it that manner.

Answer 7

It's a matter of definition. Marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman. This definition has been accepted since the beginning of civilizations.

Any other union is not a marriage.

There is already a good definition for other unions. They are usually called civil unions.

Let me give you an example. A democracy is commonly defined as a government for the people by the people.

Some could say, "Well, yes, but since all people are equal, we all should get equal pay, no matter what we do. But, let's still call it a democracy."

Then, we don't have a democracy any more, we have socialism.

Get it?

Answer 8

lol ... there is no logic to this way of thinking ... and there are many reasons why gay people would want to get married, not only for the procreation bit, which so many people are so upset about ... there is a question of wills and living wills, next of kin if you're in hospital, property division, etc., etc. I sincerely do wish that people would mind their own business, and, as you say, what threat does it pose to a heterosexual marriage or heterosexuals in general??

Answer 9

It's not that the ramifications of gay marriage would impose it's standards on individuals (although it could as hetero's marriages impact to a certain degree as well).

The "sancitity" is the original santification that God designed and commanded as the structural content of this holy union.

Mark 10:5-9 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

Meaning God specifies what He WANTS marriage to contain. A man and a woman.

If He had wanted two men and two women to be a part of this divine contract; doesn't it stand to reason that God is big enough and wise enough to include it in His Word, for His creation who tend to assume a lot of things without His input?


Peace Out.

Answer 10

Because God didn't create Adam and Stan and tell them to be fruitful and multiply. It is the gay rights agenda to go into every school system and teach that their lifestyle is the correct way and that is not something that I want taught to my child.
God destroyed two cities because of their wicked and homosexual behaviors.
Gay marriage threatens the morals and virtues that I am trying to teach my family and that threatens potential future marriages between a male and female.