"Sanctity" of "Traditional Marriage" is it real or BS?

[VanceMack]

Apparently y'all didnt get the memo.

"Mr Obama has already had his photo op and made his political offering of appeasement. Unfortunately, shortly afterward, groups of black ministers and black democrats were less than thrilled with this offering and became vocal. The administration would appreciate it very much if we just let all this die down until after the election. We are sorry if this offends your 'cause' but then...we have never cared for your cause...just your dollars and your votes. We will get back to you when you can be of use to us again in the future. Thanks in advance!"

 

[maquiscat]

There should be no marriage license. And in the US there was no marriage licensing until the mid 19th century. It actually began as a way to keep certain races from getting married.

Like it or not if you want any legal status between you and your spouse then the government needs to be involved. To what extent can be debated, but with out the government maintaining a record of the legal occasions of marriage and divorce then one cannot gain legal precedence of a spouse over the spouse's family, and a myriad of other legal aspects. If you are not worried about the legal aspects of marriage then same sex marriage is already available to you. Just go see any pagan priestess or priest or a UUC clergy.

 

[Geoist]

Like it or not if you want any legal status between you and your spouse then the government needs to be involved. To what extent can be debated, but with out the government maintaining a record of the legal occasions of marriage and divorce then one cannot gain legal precedence of a spouse over the spouse's family, and a myriad of other legal aspects. If you are not worried about the legal aspects of marriage then same sex marriage is already available to you. Just go see any pagan priestess or priest or a UUC clergy.

Sure, there is a place for government when it comes to marriage. We need the courts to work out divorces. But we had that before marriage licensing.

Seems like many of these issues you bring up were taken care of pretty effectively before the mid 19th century.

 

[Paschendale]

I always chuckle at these "traditional marriage" arguments, since there is no longstanding tradition of the nuclear family, based on romantic attachment. Our modern marriage is a very recent invention, and will likely not last very long. The main reason it feels traditional to many right now is because it was a staple of the 1950's, so it was the situation that Baby Boomers grew up with. A lot of their parents didn't. Few of their grandparents did. In terms of marriage, the last century has been hugely focused on overturning tradition. Women are no longer defined by their marital status. They are no longer treated as chattel, a legal extension of their husbands or fathers. Traditional marriage was that a wife could not own property, and a husband forcing himself on his wife (or wives in many previous centuries) was not considered rape. Marriage traditions that existed before the 20th century (and certainly before the 19th) more closely resemble slavery than our modern interpretations of marriage.

A one-man/one-woman household is almost entirely a 20th century invention and is anything but traditional.

 

[NoC_T]

Sanctity of Traditional Marriage is it real or BS?


I personally think both the danger to the Sanctity of marriage and the term "traditional" marriage are completely made up and hog was.

First the term "Traditional Marriage"

For one "traditional marriage" is totally made up subjective term.

Laws view marriages different and religions view marriages different.

Some marriages involve a pineapple, breaking of a glass, multiple wedding dresses, body decorations, jumping the broom, animal slaughtering/sacrifice (meal or offering) etc etc

Some marriages involve one man and multiple wifes

Some marriages involve two women, two men

Some marriages involve a religious figure of some sort

Some marriages involve the man being in charge and king of the house

Some marriages involve a magistrate, a singing elvis etc

Some marriage the father oi the bride or eldest family member has to conduct the ceremony

etc etc etc

There is no such thing as a Traditional Marriage" in a blanket term form, whats traditional for me, you, my neighbors, your neighbors could all be different.

Now onto the sanctity of marriage being impacted by others marriage.

Again complete BS.

Sanctity
noun \ˈsaŋ(k)-tə-tē\
1.) the state or quality of being holy, sacred, or saintly2.)ultimate importance and inviolability

definition 1 is meaningless has religion has nothing to do with legal marriage unless the people choose it to.
definition 2 ultimate importance. How is this impacted by somebody not in your marriage?

What do the following have in common

A guy who beats his wife
A women who cheats on her husband
A guy who doesnt love his wife
A women who totally disrespects her husbands
a Man married to 3 women
a woman married to 3 men
a man married to a man
a women married to a woman
A women who killed her husband
A man who divorced his wife
a couple that got married in a religious venue and tied their legal contract also with a religious vow
A couple that eloped to Vegas and got married by a signing elvis
A couple that got married in the court house by a magistrate


They have absolutely nothing to do with my marriage and have zero impact on it.

the importance and inviolability is strictly in my control, its not for others to decide. Maybe in my marriage Im the boss and my wife is fine with that but others thinks its wrong, guess what, its not your business and my wife dont care. to suggest that the two guys who are married across the street does anything to my marriage at all is insane and would suggest that nobody is in control of their own marriage LMAO

I would love any factual proof that:

1.) there is such a thing as a "traditional marriage" that applies to all
2.) that one marriage is impacted by another marriage and theres no control over tha t impact.

Well, where marriage is/was held as being traditional, in whatever guise, it is/was reflected across the majority of instances. In that light, such concerns as the above would be moot, where mores entail both acknowledgement and acceptance.

Sanctity more often describes the addition of a religious component. Traditions exist beyond religion.

 

[Cameron]

Sanctity of Traditional Marriage is it real or BS?

It's just a way of saying "gay people are an offense to God and would tarnish the institution of marriage" in a way that doesn't sound quite as bigoted.

 

[AGENT J]

It's just a way of saying "gay people are an offense to God and would tarnish the institution of marriage" in a way that doesn't sound quite as bigoted.

have to say I agree with that, for some thats exactly what it is

 

[AGENT J]

Well, where marriage is/was held as being traditional, in whatever guise, it is/was reflected across the majority of instances. In that light, such concerns as the above would be moot, where mores entail both acknowledgement and acceptance.

Sanctity more often describes the addition of a religious component. Traditions exist beyond religion.

which would not be affected by gay marriage :shrug:

 

[NoC_T]

which would not be affected by gay marriage :shrug:

True. At least from a reigious standpoint.

But people require no religion to discriminate.

 

[AGENT J]

True. At least from a reigious standpoint.

But people require no religion to discriminate.

true people discriminate for all types of reason but gay marriage wouldnt impact the tradition or sanctity or marriage from any standpoint except for gays.

 

[NoC_T]

true people discriminate for all types of reason but gay marriage wouldnt impact the tradition or sanctity or marriage from any standpoint except for gays.

Except that traditionally, gay marriage was unheard of, and rejected as being somehow 'wrong'. Which brings us right back to acknowledgement and acceptance.

 

[AGENT J]

Except that traditionally, gay marriage was unheard of, and rejected as being somehow 'wrong'. Which brings us right back to acknowledgement and acceptance.

according to who? thats your opinion and totally subjective

the point is and the fact is iit doesnt impact anybody accept gays

your traditions and sanctity is YOURS its not the worlds or america or mine

acknowledgement and acceptance is a subjective fantasy, i know people right now that dont have their straight marriage or interracial marriage acknowledged and accepted by people :shrug:

 

[NoC_T]

according to who? thats your opinion and totally subjective

the point is and the fact is iit doesnt impact anybody accept gays

your traditions and sanctity is YOURS its not the worlds or america or mine

acknowledgement and acceptance is a subjective fantasy, i know people right now that dont have their straight marriage or interracial marriage acknowledged and accepted by people :shrug:

It couldn't be subjective, since it's a fact. What it impacts is tradition. That being reflected in the accepted norm of straight marriage.

your traditions and sanctity is YOURS its not the worlds or america or mine

This makes no sense. By definition, a tradition cannot be personal.

Whatever the level of either acknowledgement or acceptance of a straight marriage, it wouldn't be rejected on the basis of it being anomalous, which of course, it isn't, given tradition.

Btw, I hope you're not under the impression that I'm arguing aginst same-sex marriage. That certainly isn't the case.

 

[AGENT J]

It couldn't be subjective, since it's a fact. What it impacts is tradition. That being reflected in the accepted norm of straight marriage.


This makes no sense. By definition, a tradition cannot be personal.

Whatever the level of either acknowledgement or acceptance of a straight marriage, it wouldn't be rejected on the basis of it being anomalous, which of course, it isn't, given tradition.

Btw, I hope you're not under the impression that I'm arguing against same-sex marriage. That certainly isn't the case.

it is 100% subjective thats the only fact, what MY traditions are MINE not yours :shrug:

by definition a tradition is 100% personal LMAO
where I come from what I believe are MY traditions, they may be given to me by my father or mother or family or society but they are one I choose

no I have no reason to think you are arguing against it :shrug:

just pointing out that a blanket statement saying equal gay rights impacts the sanctity or tradition of marriage is false, it may or may not traditions and sanctity are personal

it may be a tradition to break a glass at a weeding, but nobody in my family ever did that so whats that mean?

it means the people that think its a tradition are not impacted by my family that doesnt do it
and
it means that my family traditions werent impacted by people who do it

its all subjective

 

[NoC_T]

it is 100% subjective thats the only fact, what MY traditions are MINE not yours :shrug:

by definition a tradition is 100% personal LMAO
where I come from what I believe are MY traditions, they may be given to me by my father or mother or family or society but they are one I choose

no I have no reason to think you are arguing against it :shrug:

just pointing out that a blanket statement saying equal gay rights impacts the sanctity or tradition of marriage is false, it may or may not traditions and sanctity are personal

it may be a tradition to break a glass at a weeding, but nobody in my family ever did that so whats that mean?

it means the people that think its a tradition are not impacted by my family that doesnt do it
and
it means that my family traditions werent impacted by people who do it

its all subjective

You're arguing values and personal preference, not tradition.

Tradition describes the mechanics of transmission, not the content thereof. I could hold a certain belief, but it wouldn't be a tradition unless it was emulated and disseminated.

 

[Monserrat]

I don't see the problem with calling a marriage (in the US) between a man and a woman "traditional marriage" since that's what it is. It's a ritual that's been passed down and repeated by the society since its inception in the 1700's. Unless other forms of marriages have been practiced on a large scale during the same time period and in the same society then a marriage between a man and a woman is a tradition of that society as a whole.

With that being said, traditions aren't always good or important to sustain so it being traditional doesn't necessarily mean it's something that should be continued or remain unchanged.

The whole discussion over the sanctity of marriage should be left up to the religion and individual, it is what you make of it so I don't see why it should have any bearing on the state(s).

 

[AGENT J]

You're arguing values and personal preference, not tradition.

Tradition describes the mechanics of transmission, not the content thereof. I could hold a certain belief, but it wouldn't be a tradition unless it was emulated and disseminated.

no by definition I am definitely arguing tradition my wedding tradition example proves that :shrug:

it most certainly doesnt need disseminated or emulated in anyway what so ever on a large scale, it could be me and my family.

 

[NoC_T]

no by definition I am definitely arguing tradition my wedding tradition example proves that :shrug:

it most certainly doesnt need disseminated or emulated in anyway what so ever on a large scale, it could be me and my family.

Are you in a same-sex marriage? Are all your family in same-sex marriages?

Tradition entails transmisison, does it not? I'm not arguing the morality of homosexuality.

I wouldn't generally describe such an example as a tradition as such, being that the term usually describes widespread example, as of a cultural more. I suppose we could refer to such an example as a micro-tradition.

 

[AGENT J]

Are you in a same-sex marriage? Are all your family in same-sex marriages?

Tradition entails transmisison, does it not? I'm not arguing the morality of homosexuality.

I wouldn't generally describe such an example as a tradition as such, being that the term usually describes widespread example, as of a cultural more. I suppose we could refer to such an example as a micro-tradition.

theres nothing micro about it thats just your opinion by definition tradition wouldnt be impact in any general sense what so ever, im not sure what you dont understand.

to answer your questions its no and no and that helps prove my point, any marriage tradition my family has will not be impacted in any real way by gay marriage, its all BS. my family might ADD traditions but the ones that already exist will still continue to if we want them too, it will be our choice. A persons tradition wont change unless they choice them to is the whole point.

 

[Frogfussle]

You certainly live up to your ID name, Objective-J. All the objections to "non traditional" marriage are very very obviously excuses for hate and fear. I am amazed more rational people don't call them out on this. Religious objections? I don't see anyone raging against people who work on the sabbath and demanding they be killed. On the other hand I don't know any orthodox Jews.

 

[AGENT J]

You certainly live up to your ID name, Objective-J. All the objections to "non traditional" marriage are very very obviously excuses for hate and fear. I am amazed more rational people don't call them out on this. Religious objections? I don't see anyone raging against people who work on the sabbath and demanding they be killed. On the other hand I don't know any orthodox Jews.

wow who said that? thats pretty extreme and unfair I think.
while I think its BS and that can factually be proven all the excuse dont come from hate/fear im sure there are many other reasons people use this false excuse.

 

[Frogfussle]

wow who said that? thats pretty extreme and unfair I think.
while I think its BS and that can factually be proven all the excuse dont come from hate/fear im sure there are many other reasons people use this false excuse.

Name one. By this I don't mean what people say because they are often just quoting what they have been indoctrinated with since childhood but that indoctrination came from either hate or fear (or both) of the unknown even if it comes from a church and the prejudices of bronze age peoples. This stuff is handed down through the ages from generation to generation. Frinstance, as a child I "knew" that all members of the black race were inferior. Then I grew up. It is much harder to do in the case of homosexuals due to what a gay friend calls "the yucky factor". I don't personally go for anal sex but many heterosexuals do. I think it is yucky in either case but gay haters don't seem to object much to it in heterosexuals. Of course there are extremes. Some people object to any kind of sex. That isn't too surprising considering so much of society's attitude toward it.

 

[AGENT J]

Name one. By this I don't mean what people say because they are often just quoting what they have been indoctrinated with since childhood but that indoctrination came from either hate or fear (or both) of the unknown even if it comes from a church and the prejudices of bronze age peoples. This stuff is handed down through the ages from generation to generation. Frinstance, as a child I "knew" that all members of the black race were inferior. Then I grew up. It is much harder to do in the case of homosexuals due to what a gay friend calls "the yucky factor". I don't personally go for anal sex but many heterosexuals do. I think it is yucky in either case but gay haters don't seem to object much to it in heterosexuals. Of course there are extremes. Some people object to any kind of sex. That isn't too surprising considering so much of society's attitude toward it.

so you want me to name some but then say they dont matter because YOU are going to classify them as coming from fear and or hate anyway? lol

how about ignorance lol

you can categorize them however you like but its simply not true that every individual that worries about the tradition of their marriage does so on hate and or fear. some definitely do it out of shallowness and being uneducated.