TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Is there anyone trying to ban heterosexual monogamous marriage?

1 in 5 marriages end in divorce, according to one TED talk, and 1 in 4 women will suffer from domestic violence, according to statistics from a fact sheet by the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

That sounds fairly detrimental to society and the "sanctity of marriage", which should be enough to have heterosexual marriage legally banned, correct?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jun 15 2012: Michael,
    It seems like a huge "stretch" to say "detrimental to society" should be enough to ban legal heterosexual marriage. People who are "hetero" who want to get married would be victims of discrimination? Ban one discrimination to accept another?

    Also, since LZ cites the US Constitution as the gay agenda, then people could ask, "Did the national forefathers face such issues during their formulation of the founding documents? Did they actually have issues with homosexuality at that time? They probably never thought of it; maybe if there were issues in families they were "swept under the rug". If there were public issues, would they have named homosexuality as an evil?

    I am not in favor of discrimination of persons. But, another thought comes-----perhaps the Constitution is not fully evolved! It is a result of thousands upon thousands of years of human experience and perhaps there lurks around the corner an update we have never imagined. This does not address your question, but I think the Constitution could change in the next 100 years. Surely it would not ban legal "hetero" marriage, would it?

    Food for thought.
    • Jun 16 2012: Mark Kurtz,
      I am not actually in favor of banning marriage of any kind, with the exceptions of when at least 1 member is unable to make an informed decision of whether to get married.

      I am more interested in trying to use the threat of removing marriage, a privilege that most people take for granted, to make people reevaluate what they have, a sort of modern day version of Solomon's "cut the kid in half" solution, to make Gay Rights and Gay marriage, not about other people's rights, but about everyone's rights.

      just how vulnerable would some people's lives and situations would become, if marriage, regardless of the gender, age, religion or anything else about of the people involved, were not recognized by the law?
      • Jun 16 2012: OK, for clarity, what is the idea you have worth spreading?

        If marriage were not recognized by the law.....hard for me to imagine. A free for all? Would mankind suffer degeneracy? Would civility suffer? Has anyone asked what is the purpose of marriage?

        Just asking as I am not sure regarding your implied suggestion.

        • Jun 16 2012: one of the arguments against gay marriage, is the protection of the "sanctity" of heterosexual marriage.

          what I am wondering is if anyone is, or has used domestic violence, divorce, and the other negative issues that are fairly common among heterosexual marriages to make people reevaluate and confront marriage.

          pointing out that some heterosexual monogamous marriages are just and demeaning to the sanctity of marriage as they claim homosexual marriages are.

          I am curious as to how effective making these points, and threatening to take away the legal protections on marriage would be in persuading people to not treat homosexual marriage as some kind of threat.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.