Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

hyteckit · Nov 23, 2008, 03:12 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Exactly. IMO, if somebody's really about protecting marriage, they'll make a proposition to eliminate the right of heterosexuals to divorce.

If they really want to protect marriage, they should allow divorce, but banned those who have been divorce to get married again.

brassplayersrock² · Nov 23, 2008, 03:17 AM

"Exactly. IMO, if somebody's really about protecting marriage, they'll make a proposition to eliminate the right of heterosexuals to divorce."

true story: I have a cousin who is now in jail due to the fact that his ex wife didn't want to sign divorce papers. my cousins reaction was that he would go out and get a shot gun, come home, stage a home invasion and kill his wife. if there were to be a prop that made it so that people couldn't divorce, then perhaps more things like my cousin did might happen.

oh, you have a huge life insurance claim on your spouse? and she has recently been killed? yes? okay, here's your money.

brassplayersrock² · Nov 23, 2008, 03:19 AM

Originally Posted by hyteckit

If they really want to protect marriage, they should allow divorce, but banned those who have been divorce to get married again.

yikes. okay. so my uncle and his first wife divorce for some reason. they both marry someone else. the two of them both split up with their others, and are now back together again happily married. haven't seen my uncle this happy ever when he was with his second wife.

so would it be if the people get divorced and then remarry, would that be allowed? or no?

Cipher13 · 04:55 AM

Uh, seriously?

If there was a proposal to ban interracial marriage, and some racial demographic protested it, would that be "protesting democracy", and something to be ashamed of?

Are you a ****ing lunatic?

hyteckit · Nov 23, 2008, 05:57 AM

Originally Posted by brassplayersrock²

yikes. okay. so my uncle and his first wife divorce for some reason. they both marry someone else. the two of them both split up with their others, and are now back together again happily married. haven't seen my uncle this happy ever when he was with his second wife.

so would it be if the people get divorced and then remarry, would that be allowed? or no?

If you want to protect the "sanctity of marriage", they should not allow to remarry. What your uncle and his wives are doing is polygamy, swapping husbands and wives every few years, even though they are legally married to only one person at a time.

Want to protect the sanctity of marriage? Don't allow anyone who has been divorced to get married again.

ShortcutToMoncton · Nov 23, 2008, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by hyteckit

Want to protect the sanctity of marriage? Don't allow anyone who has been divorced to get married again.

But that's just silly. Marriages dissolve for any number of reasons, and many of them are legit and weren't reasonably foreseeable before marriage. Are you telling me that someone who entered into a marriage which turned out to be highly abusive shouldn't be allowed to re-marry? "Sorry you had your one shot, you chose...poorly...."

greg

Wiskedjak · Nov 23, 2008, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Polygamy is grounds for being excommunicated from the LDS Church. It's the FLDS and other splinter groups that practice polygamy, and as far as I know they didn't donate a cent to the Prop. 8 cause.

Yes, but it wasn't too long ago that the main trunk of the church promoted polygamy to it's members.

All I'm saying is that, if *I* were a Christian I'd be concerned about the Mormon Church using their massive wealth to influence political decisions. Christians (Catholic and Protestant) and Mormons may agree on many points, but they differ on some rather fundamental points to the degree that many Christians consider the Mormon Church a cult.

hyteckit · Nov 23, 2008, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

But that's just silly. Marriages dissolve for any number of reasons, and many of them are legit and weren't reasonably foreseeable before marriage. Are you telling me that someone who entered into a marriage which turned out to be highly abusive shouldn't be allowed to re-marry? "Sorry you had your one shot, you chose...poorly...."

greg

Hey, at least you have a shot, unlike gays who don't even have a shot.

Anyone who wants to ban gay marriage because of protecting the "sanctity of marriage" should be for laws against re-marriage. Once divorce, you can't get married again.

Wiskedjak · Nov 23, 2008, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

But that's just silly. Marriages dissolve for any number of reasons, and many of them are legit and weren't reasonably foreseeable before marriage. Are you telling me that someone who entered into a marriage which turned out to be highly abusive shouldn't be allowed to re-marry? "Sorry you had your one shot, you chose...poorly...."

greg

The point is not to say that there should be laws against divorce and remarriage. The point is that if you're concerned about the sanctity of marriage, you should more concerned over 40-50% divorce rates (60-67% for second marriages) than 2% (Railroader's number) of the population entering into same-sex marriages.

The Crook · Nov 23, 2008, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

The point is not to say that there should be laws against divorce and remarriage. The point is that if you're concerned about the sanctity of marriage, you should more concerned over 40-50% divorce rates (60-67% for second marriages) than 2% (Railroader's number) of the population entering into same-sex marriages.

I'm really confused.

How does anything threaten the "sanctity" of marriage? Viewed that way, marriage is a sacred, religious institution. The only thing that can affect the "sacredness" of marriage is religion itself-- if they changed it. Marriage and divorce laws aren't religious laws, so they don't affect religious concepts like "sacredness" at all.

Wiskedjak · Nov 23, 2008, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by The Crook

I'm really confused.

How does anything threaten the "sanctity" of marriage? Viewed that way, marriage is a sacred, religious institution. The only thing that can affect the "sacredness" of marriage is religion itself-- if they changed it. Marriage and divorce laws aren't religious laws, so they don't affect religious concepts like "sacredness" at all.

Yep. I'm just using their terminology.

OldManMac · Nov 23, 2008, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by The Crook

I'm really confused.

How does anything threaten the "sanctity" of marriage? Viewed that way, marriage is a sacred, religious institution. The only thing that can affect the "sacredness" of marriage is religion itself-- if they changed it. Marriage and divorce laws aren't religious laws, so they don't affect religious concepts like "sacredness" at all.

There you go, bringing logic into this "discussion." You're supposed to present your beliefs based on emotion, don't you know?