...is 'we must protect the sanctity of marriage in its traditional definition" then why don't gay marriage opponents also attempt to outlaw divorce?
2007-03-21 08:36:46 · 11 answers · asked by Year of the Monkey 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
My argument against gay marriage is that the institution of marriage is religious based. I'll respect the gay lifestyle as long as they respect my religious lifestyle. I'm all for civil unions to give gay couples legal rights to property and such. To me, it is the best compromise.
Rosie O just wants to spit in the face of religion and everything/everyone else that she doesn't like. Hopefully, she is in the minority of the gay community.
2007-03-21 08:39:26 · answer #1 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Marriage is a religiously based institution.
As I was married in a Roman Catholic church...that makes it a religious institution.
And exactly what is the traditional definition of marriage?
I do believe that differs from religion to religion. As does divorce.
And why is this even a situation for government to get involved with?? Doesn't this country have a separation of church and state? I don't remember saying prayers in public school!
2007-03-21 15:46:34 · answer #2 · answered by Nibbles 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think anyone that views marriage as sacred is exactly happy about the whole divorces everywhere thing. Obviously divorce has a place when it comes to abusive relationships, but yes, there are way too many people who say they just "fell out of love."
What I'm saying is you won't see someone who views marriage as sacred as voting for something to make divorce any easier than it is.
2007-03-21 16:12:22 · answer #3 · answered by daisyk 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hypocrisy, that's why. It's not about "marriage", it's about not liking homosexuals. The more interesting point is that most people in this country think that infedelity in a marriage is more acceptable than gay marriage itself, even though most gay couples are more faithful than hetero. Just a little food for thought.
Now put that in your lil' blunt and smoke it!
2007-03-21 15:52:08 · answer #4 · answered by mixedup 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is a question I've been asking for years. Unfortunately, no one has ever given me a good answer to it. I wish you luck getting one. The thing is, I don't understand how people can so staunchly defend the concept of marriage if they are willing to allow it to continue to be legal to dissolve one.
Marriage is, today, a disposable institution. To call it sacred is silly.
2007-03-21 15:48:03 · answer #5 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because Divorce is not the cause of marriages breaking up, it only legalizes it.
Being a genealogist on the side, gay marriage gives me nightmares, it is already almost impossible to track family trees. I will bet a quarter that a gay genealogist will concur.
2007-03-21 15:40:33 · answer #6 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Did you know that Yanswers has a category for each and every state? You should take this there. This is not a national issue. There are too many important issues, that affect all of us, for people to continue to be distracted by this.
2007-03-21 15:40:29 · answer #7 · answered by LittleLamb 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If that's what gay marriage opponents call an argument, I think I'll pay them with bubble gum wrappers. After all, that's what I call "money".
2007-03-21 15:39:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Good question! Isn't everyone a hypocrite?
2007-03-21 15:40:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
F ags are a disease and that is why we should keep abortion. See if we keep abortion and study more on f ags we can figure out who will be one before they are born and we can cut their little heads off in the womb. No more disease.
2007-03-21 15:42:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋