What is the sanctity of marriage?

[Upchurch]

There is a lot of talk about protecting the sanctity of marriage, but what does that mean?

sanctity

1 : holiness of life and character : GODLINESS
2 a : the quality or state of being holy or sacred : INVIOLABILITY b plural : sacred objects, obligations, or rights

(Obviously, I'm going at this within the context of gay marriage) So, what makes marriage holy or sacred? Based on the general themes of most religions, one would think that it is things like love, devotion, and commitment that are the key factors in the holiness of marriage. Only the Catholic Church puts "producing offspring" as the primary reason for marriage.

Why, then, do we propose a constitutional amendment to prevent gay couples from promoting and sharing in the sanctity of marriage, but we do nothing to make divorce illegal, which is the antithesis to everything marriage stands for in any religion?

 

[Zero]

Actually, government cannot do anything in regards to 'sanctity', since that is a specifically religious matter. After all, most places no longer have an anti-blasphemy law on the books, which is what this 'protection of marriage' nonsense is really all about. The folks involved should call it what it really is, like 'defense of religious bigotry', or 'defense against religious blasphemy from people we want to oppress'.

 

[Matabiri]

Actually, government cannot do anything in regards to 'sanctity', since that is a specifically religious matter. After all, most places no longer have an anti-blasphemy law on the books, which is what this 'protection of marriage' nonsense is really all about. The folks involved should call it what it really is, like 'defense of religious bigotry', or 'defense against religious blasphemy from people we want to oppress'.

I suspect "sanctity" is also used in a colloquial sense to mean "inviolability" (dictionary.com includes this), so not strictly religious.

 

[Zero]

I suspect "sanctity" is also used in a colloquial sense to mean "inviolability" (dictionary.com includes this), so not strictly religious.

You suspect wrong. This is a specifically religious issue,obviously. Find me 3 people (who have no strong and obvious religious affiliation) speaking out against gay marriage. Nearly every mention of it I have seen has brought up "God" or "Scripture". Let's not pretend that this is anything other than religious bigotry,ok? At least let's have that amount of integrity...

 

[Monketi Ghost]

This issue seriously annoys me. I may be hetero, but... if the Constitution is actually amended to exclude certain people from having certain rights, well...

I may just give up on the U.S. and leave the country entirely.

Gawd, I hate this.

 

[Zero]

This issue seriously annoys me. I may be hetero, but... if the Constitution is actually amended to exclude certain people from having certain rights, well...

I may just give up on the U.S. and leave the country entirely.

Gawd, I hate this.

Are you like me,in that you think this sort of thing is the exact opposite of what America is supposed to stand for?

 

[Matabiri]

You suspect wrong. This is a specifically religious issue,obviously. Find me 3 people (who have no strong and obvious religious affiliation) speaking out against gay marriage. Nearly every mention of it I have seen has brought up "God" or "Scripture". Let's not pretend that this is anything other than religious bigotry,ok? At least let's have that amount of integrity...

Sorry, I missed your point the first time I read your post. I was commenting solely on the meaning of the word...

Anyone who argues that gay people shouldn't get married because of the "sanctity of marriage" should be forced to live naked in a garden all year round, because that's the closest you can get to being in a state of grace, right?

 

[Zero]

Sorry, I missed your point the first time I read your post. I was commenting solely on the meaning of the word...

Anyone who argues that gay people shouldn't get married because of the "sanctity of marriage" should be forced to live naked in a garden all year round, because that's the closest you can get to being in a state of grace, right?

Yeah, and eat nothing, because of that whole 'sanctity of life' thing.

 

[ceo_esq]

You suspect wrong. This is a specifically religious issue,obviously. Find me 3 people (who have no strong and obvious religious affiliation) speaking out against gay marriage. Nearly every mention of it I have seen has brought up "God" or "Scripture". Let's not pretend that this is anything other than religious bigotry,ok? At least let's have that amount of integrity...

Don't speak too soon. According to a 1997 poll cited at this pro-gay-marriage website, just over one-third of respondents of no religious affiliation indicated that they did not approve of gay marriage. That's a highly significant minority, doubtless representing millions of unreligious Americans, who would object to your characterization of their position as religious bigotry.

 

[Matabiri]

That's a highly significant minority, doubtless representing millions of unreligious Americans, who would object to your characterization of their position as religious bigotry.

So... just ordinary homophobia then?

 

[Zero]

Don't speak too soon. According to a 1997 poll cited at this pro-gay-marriage website, just over one-third of respondents of no religious affiliation indicated that they did not approve of gay marriage. That's a highly significant minority, doubtless representing millions of unreligious Americans, who would object to your characterization of their position as religious bigotry.

Is there a reason you chose the oldest poll on the website?

Irregardless, as expressed in the media, this is a religious issue, and even if many non-religious people don't support it, we can still honestly say that this is MOSTLY about religion, overall.

 

[PotatoStew]

What about marriage between multiple partners (polygamy, I think, right?)? Should that be allowed? Why or why not?

 

[Zero]

What about marriage between multiple partners (polygamy, I think, right?)? Should that be allowed? Why or why not?

Sure, why not? Two moms would be better than one, you save on living expenses, and the kids get to have extra attention.

Of course, that's not the issue.

 

[hammegk]

So... just ordinary homophobia then?

Whatever that might actually be, but I'd say close to the truth.

Part of the implication of this discussion is that the tiny activist gay/lesbian community, aided by a liberal judiciary, have "convinced" the rest of the population that gay is a lifestyle as accepted as heterosexuality. A moral rather than legal question for many people, whether based on religion or just on the "phew" factor, and how people see acceptable presentations of lifestyle choices to their younger generation.

Then the real problem arises when society tries to balance longer term societal viability vs the freedom for everyone to do as feels good today. By definition a gay/lesbian society will disappear in one generation (yes, I'm ignoring modern technology); what societal benefit accrues to that lifestyle? Gay is a genetic deadend (if truly genetic)

The next question is that is the individual reponsible for all personal choices and acts, or are some choices and acts more beneficial to society at large? Opponents of gay marriage are not discussing individual morals, rather what activities could and should be proscribed as less desirable.

If bestiality were declared "legal" tomorrow, what percentage of the population would begin to delve into that "lifestyle" over the next few years? Or, incest between adults? Or, etc.

just my 2cts ....

 

[ceo_esq]

Is there a reason you chose the oldest poll on the website?

Yes. It was one of only two polls on the site, as far as I could tell, that reported data on religious affiliation. The other one was a 1998 poll regarding a specific legislative measure on same-sex partnerships in Michigan which, incidentally, reflected roughly the same one-third/two-thirds split in opinion among the nonreligious as the 1997 California poll did .

Irregardless, as expressed in the media, this is a religious issue, and even if many non-religious people don't support it, we can still honestly say that this is MOSTLY about religion, overall.

I'm not quite sure what it means to say that this is a religious issue as expressed in the media. As is so often the case, it may say more about the media than about the issue, frankly. But at any rate, the poll data suggest the existence of important nonreligious factors that inform the opinions of opponents of gay marriage. In fact, addressing those factors may prove to be more crucial to the passage of gay marriage laws than the religious questions, because they are factors that may well be common to both the religious and nonreligious adherents of the anti-gay-marriage view. Moreover, the battle over gay marriage will ultimately have to be fought on nonreligious ground before lawmakers and judges, where overly reductive allegations of religious bigotry are likely to fall, quite justifiably, on deaf ears.

 

[PotatoStew]

Sure, why not? Two moms would be better than one, you save on living expenses, and the kids get to have extra attention.

Of course, that's not the issue.

It is in the sense that part of the issue is a changing definition of what constitutes marriage.

I've spoken with people who don't see any problem with gay marriages, but think that polygamous marriages should not be allowed. Is that a consistent attitude? I don't know. It does seem to be a relevant issue in this discussion, IMO, but I could be wrong.

 

[Upchurch]

Getting back to the point of the thread (or at least, my point of the thread), why isn't divorce more of a threat to the sanctity of marriage than homosexuals are? Why is divorce acceptable if the concern is really about keeping marriage sacred?

 

[jnelso99]

Getting back to the point of the thread (or at least, my point of the thread), why isn't divorce more of a threat to the sanctity of marriage than homosexuals are? Why is divorce acceptable if the concern is really about keeping marriage sacred?

Probably because the political leaders who are pushing the anti-gay-marriage agenda don't want to look hypocritical since a bunch of them have been divorced themselves.

Have any fundies or people pushing the anti-gay-marriage agenda said one single word about Britney Spears' "marriage"? I'm guessing not. Apparently getting married on a whim and then changing your mind two days later doesn't hurt the sanctity of marriage...

And apparently having homosexuals marry means that heterosexual couples will, I don't know, explode or something.

 

[Ralph]

I asked a question on the rapture.ready board regarding the following: If 2 people are in a married,monogamous relationship
would it be "ok" (as in "not a sin")...if they made a porn video.......of themselves and watched it.

Nothing was said about sanctity----but it was suggested by one person that this would amount to "defiling the marital bed".

 

[Upchurch]

I asked a question on the rapture.ready board

Hey, that's a great idea! Let's see what they come up with.