With so little respect for marriage and epidemic levels of infidelity, what do straight people mean by?

Question

"sanctity" of marriage?

Answer 1

It is to cover up their prejudice against gays. Gay marriage wouldn't affect us at all if it passed, except it would make a great number of people happy.

It will be passed eventually. At one time whites were not allowed to marry blacks.

Answer 2

"Straight" people are not the ones claiming a "sanctity of marriage". It is Fundamentalist Right Wing Christian Gay Haters that use that term. They mean that marriage is for straights only. With such a high rate of divorce and infidelity in straight relationships, even among "Christians", (remember Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker?), it is clear that there is no sanctity of marriage.

Answer 3

Marriage was originally a civil contract, like a business partnership, not a religious matter. In cultures not effected by Judeo-Christian values same-sex, polygamy, polyandry, open and closed marriages, line marriages, even marriages with expiration dates that have to be renewed like a Drivers license have all been used, and worked fine. Heterosexual lifelong monogamy, historically and worldwide, has been the exception rather than the rule, it is actually one of the rarer and least success full forms, hence the points you mention. You mis-state the case, however, when you attribute the position to "straights", say rather the "fundamentalist Christians". They are the ones opposing human rights for gays, bombing abortion clinics, calling for increased use of the death penalty, advocating torture of political disenters and government suppression of religious freedom, and all this under the flag of being "Pro-life" and "Supporting traditional moral values". Those people don't speak for straights in general, or, for that matter Christians in general, they have a disproportionate influence for their numbers because they are the ones most likely to express their opinions in the voting booth. Things will change when the rest of us stop letting them pick our legislators.

Answer 4

LOL I always wondered on that one myself!!

With all their "Britney Spears" style 55hr marriages and the fact that half of all marriages end in divorce, how they can say that allowing homosexuals to marry would in anyway damage the supposed "sanctity" of marriage, I have to laugh.

Honestly, in my opinion, I believe the opposite would be true. Because we've (homosexuals) had to fight so hard for equality, that if and WHEN we are granted our legal right to marry, we will probably HELP the state of Marriage in general. We will appreciate our hard earned right to marry more than our straight counterparts who take them for granted.

Answer 5

Since most men cheat on their wives and about a quarter to a third of women cheat on their husbands. Most marriages end in divorce. Where is this sanctity of marriage we here about.

Answer 6

You're thinking of christian fundies. I'm straight and I say marriage should be about love-I don't care about the genders, religions, etc. of the involved party.

It's based off of one or two verses in the entire bible-which only mention man on man sexual contact-no mention of women or marriage. It's really just a feeble excuse to bash anyone who is not 100% straight, IMO.

Answer 7

marriage is a religious term. civil union would be a political term. so the sanctity of marriage comments are church and state mixing. and it's just another way of the radicals in this country to force there views on us

Answer 8

i'm a self proclaimed Buddhist and that i see the sluggish deterioration of marriage at each turn yet I as a rule purely see them in human beings if the Christian faith. even nonetheless; i've got self assurance that Oregon Flower is incorrect in each experience of the word because of the fact Marriage did no longer come alongside because of the fact Christianity got here alongside. Marriage became a prepare that has been around for hundreds of years and it meant plenty to them then and it skill plenty to human beings now. in recent times even nonetheless, in usa, marriage is a company it incredibly is agreed upon and taken care of like a extra costly thank you to this point and it fairly is unhappy. i in my view used to have self assurance that marriage became purely a solid tax injury till I met the guy who replaced my international. And now, i ultimately have self assurance in marriage and that i comprehend whilst it happens that it fairly is going to be between the main serious issues I do in my existence. Now i will no longer be able to assert that a "god" ordained this yet i can assert that when i flow to sleep or meditate, i comprehend i'm making the stunning judgements.

Answer 9

It means they have nothing else to argue with, so it's a last resort statement. It means they're running out of reasons to deny us the right to marriage.
Atheists get married all the time, nobody complains. You don't have to get married in a church, so it's not a religious affair, it's a state affair.

Answer 10

It means they have a thing agaisn't gays/lesbians getting married but marriage is a religous issure not a govt's one. Our govt should just stay out of it.