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.

  • thumb
    Jun 16 2012: I sure would give a listen to a better argument for that ban than the divorce and violence one given.

    As much as the idea appeals to me, I'm all for religious freedom (including freedom from religion.)

    What I would like to see is a dismantling of the connection to the state, and much of the reasons that gay people want to get into marriage.

    As part of a contract to provide a stable environment for children: OK
    As a tax break: No, it's discriminatory to people who don't want to get married.
    As a legally binding commingling of income: No, I want this whole business of depending on income to survive to go away, it's unfair, wastes time and is bad for health, the environment, morality, etc. Not only should one not have to depend on a spouses income and assets, one should not have to depend on any income and assets. We can go beyond that and still make up some incentive game for luxury and unique things, places to live, whatnot.

    What IS with this silly stuff about visiting people in hospitals anyway? Anybody should get in and the patient should have the power to have anybody kicked out. When it comes to medical proxies, okay, you can figure out some sensible rules there, but the whole legal racket needs to get softened up when it comes to life, death and medicine anyway. Real bad things happen and we have to deal with it, it shouldn't always be an income opportunity.

    Rules and law are good to an extent, but they are really getting out of hand in so many ways. In the 236 years of nationhood, we must have a stack of laws that measure in kilometers now. This is probably doing more harm than good overall.

    Marriage as a declaration of love and commitment is a sweet thing. As an insurance policy, corporate merger, retirement plan, control mechanism, employment program for lawyers, tabloid fodder, weapon, etc., it's just ugly.

    But while all that legal/financial protection is still in place, it is not fair to exclude non-heterosexuals.
    • Jun 16 2012: I agree that current laws about marriage do seem to give something of an unfair bias towards certain religious/social practices, and it is unfair to provide laws that help certain religions/lifestyles more than others.

      Such laws to some extent could even be said to be in violation, or close to it, of freedom of religion, and other constitutional rights.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.