Leaving aside religion why do you believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman? Why not two men or two women or even two women and one man?
2006-11-10 08:45:08 · 14 answers · asked by Phaylynn 5 in Social Science ➔ Other - Social Science
I believe that marriage should be between loving, consenting adults of any gender. The divorce rate is a prime example of how well males and females handle marriage. Love and commitment are not only exclusive to a male and female couple.
2006-11-10 08:47:49 · answer #1 · answered by Justsyd 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The original intent of marriage has NOTHING to do with love. The notion of romantic love as a reason to marry is recent. A prime motivator for marriage prior to the introduction of romantic love was economic, just like everything else.
Didn't you ever wonder about that in history classes when you were younger and all these royalty would marry their child to another child of royalty and therefore the territory and wealth would combine? Think of Ferdinand and Isabella.
Anyway, I don't think marriage between a man and woman, or a woman and woman, or a man and man or whatever other combinations there are should really exist. It's an outdated institution in addition to the fact that one spends tons of money on the wedding and the divorce court. The rates of divorce are INCREDIBLY high, which is an embarassment to all the people who spout that marriage is a sacriment of god yet ignore that (I think) 50% or higher of all marriages end in divorce. Real sacred, right? Now, that's not to say that the marriage of gay people introduced would be any better or any worse, but, really, should the gay people of the United States have to suffer any more?
Finally, "children result from marriage" is downright untrue. Children result from unprotected sex and aren't always planned. They happen in marriage, they happen out of marriage, and they happen as a result of rape. Marriage is not inherently the best place for children to be, either. Recall the high divorce rate, either have a split household or two parents who are keeping it together for their kid(s) which is ever more unhealthy in addition to the fact that single parents are at a decided societal disadvantage as well.
Universal health (to avoid health insurance issues) and rewrite tax codes so married couples don't get tax breaks (it's heterosexist, anyway).
Marriage for all and let everyone suffer or marriage for none. That's what I say.
2006-11-10 09:09:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
In a very basic sense, the institution of marriage was mainly meant for the procreation of children and to start families. Physically and biologically, only a man and woman can create a child. (of course leaving aside adoption, in-vitro etc.) Obviously times have changed tremendously, but this was the original idea of marriage.
2006-11-10 08:57:27 · answer #3 · answered by Mompoet 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Marriage is, by definition, the union of one man and one woman. That is a marriage. To define any other combination of people as a marriage only serves to confuse the meaning of the word. It is a heterosexual institution, and has been since its inception.
To broaden the meaning as suggested would be like broading the term "Democrat" to include "Conservative Republicans", or broadening the term Television to include mirrors. It only confuses the language.
Marriage describes a union between 1 man and 1 woman. Any other meaning ascribed to marriage would only confound the language.
2006-11-11 04:26:34 · answer #4 · answered by Mike 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I believe marriage should be between 2 consenting adults who love each other and want to be commited to each other.
Guess I have odd thoughts for a Christian. But the law doesn't prohibit people who covet or bear false witness from marrying why should they pick and choose?
2006-11-10 08:56:08 · answer #5 · answered by Shalvia 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A primary reason for marriage is to provide for responsibility for support of children borne in a relationship.. It indicates a commitment to the relationship which enhances the probability of care of any children and if not a resource for getting that care without placing the burden on the rest of society. (it works to some degree0
2006-11-10 09:18:40 · answer #6 · answered by dano 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If your primary reason for marrying is "procreation" then yes it should be between man and woman...for healthy living then it should be between one woman and one man. BUT if your purpose of marriage is for "companionship" then...I think everybody has the right to choose "whom" she/ he wanted to spend the rest of his/ her life with.
2006-11-10 10:49:26 · answer #7 · answered by dimma59 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't. I believe it should be a bond between two people.
2006-11-10 11:29:14 · answer #8 · answered by Mariposa 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
understanding each other is the basic thing of marriage,it really takes time to understand each other,once understood it would be full of life to live that life.
2006-11-11 04:44:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think that sex should be between one man and one woman becasue it is somthing special that you two have together. You know that no one else has this connection with your spouce and it makes everything bettter!
2006-11-10 08:49:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋