What is the Sanctity of Marriage that conservatives are trying to protect?

J: What is the Sanctity of Marriage that conservatives are trying to protect?
Statistics show that nearly 50% of all marriages end in divorce (google it). Conservatives most famous argument against gay marriage is that they must protect the sanctity of marriage, homosexuality threatens marriage and families…so if half of those who make lifelong commitments to each other in front of God or a judge are lying their butts off, how is marriage so sanctimonious that it is worth denying people who are in love from getting married simply because it’s not traditional?

Answers and Views:

Answer by Skogen
America isn’t going to hell, it *is* hell. High divorce rates are due to a creeping nihilism overtaking the country.

Answer by John 15:20
It is against the Law of God according to His Holy Word which I choose to believe. And if marriage is so bad, why do you want Gays to have it? lol. Good spin though.

Answer by Facia Face
They are unfortunately not yet ready to differentiate between the religious sacrament of marriage and the civil institution of marriage. In our society that is growing ever more secular, it will eventually be impossible for anyone to deny the civil rights of all Americans, gay or straight.

Answer by Saraph!
That’s the beauty of being a Conservative: You don’t have to THINK about anything.

Answer by Forced to reuse Catheters
the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies,

Butt screwing just isn’t natural and breeds an unknown scope of viruses. This issue crosses party lines.

Answer by Stephen
I agree 100%. Marraige is a civil contract and as far as rights are concerned nothing to do with religion. Look how many people choose not to have a religious ceremony

Answer by Jimbo
During the Prop 8 trial, the conservative side told the judge that the sanctity of marriage is already in trouble, and adding gays to the mix will just make it worse.

Answer by myrrdin 810
they’re afraid if the two gay men down the street from them are seen living together, it will destroy their marriages, their wives will leave them, and their children will never speak to them again for allowing the two queers to break up their parents’ marriage.

Answer by Fans Of Racist Rush R Racist 2
Good question lol. They’re full of it lol. I have yet to see one good LOGICAL reason from them saying why gays should not be allowed to get legally married. Most of them have a problem with gays adopting children or having their own children. That’s a helluva lot of control to have over someone’s life! The nerve!

Answer by James L
Its a fight over who gets to define the word marriage. For many people marriage is a religious institution. It represents the blessing of God over the union of two people. By allowing it to be used to endorse and sanctify the union of homosexuals, whom they believe to be sinful, it corrupts a holy institution. But for others, marriage is simply a legal designation ordained by the courts to recognize that two people are now forming one family. For both groups, the separation of church and state is the rationale for their objections. Logically, if marriage is a religious matter then any church could define it any way they liked and the US government would have no right to impose on it in any way. But if it is a purely civil designation then no church has a right to impose its definition on the rest of the people. The basic fight is not about the sanctity of marriage. It is just people whining over a word. The Gay Marriage advocates are just as whiny as the religious purists. If they were content to accept civil unions rather than the word marriage no one would bother with it. Does using the word marriage really make it more special a commitment than civil union? Its just a word both sides could lighten up on this fight.

Answer by George McCasland
Actually, it’s 85% of marriages where they got married prior to age 24, and/or were living together prior to marriage. The problem is 18-years-olds thinking they are adults. Gay couples breaking up is even higher. But, none of this is the real issue. Homosexuals are two faced on this subject. They refuse to acknowledge the rights of all the other sexual orientations, which include bisexuals which deserve the right to a pluralistic marriage, those attracted to a close relative and/or parent, and those attracted to someone very young, or a very young person whose only attracted to the much older. Just as they can be considered homosexual, they can be anyone of the other orientations, so what about their rights to marry someone much older? As for those attracted to the very young, that sexual orientation was established scientifically in 2000 by the American Psychological Association in the exact same homosexuality was in 1974.

Which sexual orientations should continue to have their rights to marry violated, and who should make that decision. For true equal rights, polygamy and incest laws, between consents adults would need to be abolished. But, that would still leave you the the rights of pedophilias and geriophilias who are attracted to each other.

Define who should have the rights and why homosexuals don’t fight for the rights of all?
\\\\\