How Fundies are Destroying Marriage | INFJ Forum

How Fundies are Destroying Marriage

Discussion in 'News and Politics' started by Satya, Oct 22, 2009.

Share This Page

Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 2 users.
More threads by Satya
  1. Satya

    Satya C'est la vie
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Threads:
    540
    Messages:
    7,284
    Likes Received:
    549
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INXP
    While researching the various conservative groups across the country who are taking an anti gay marriage stance, I noticed that they utilize the same resource for their information. The conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation, can be largely credited for such research that argues the social costs of gay marriage, threats to religious liberties, and threats of homosexuality being taught in schools, that groups like the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and Protect Marriage Washington have been utilizing in their campaigns.

    However, while looking into The Heritage Foundation's research on the social costs of gay marriage, I came to a startling revelation. They may have made such a grave error in their interpretation of the research that groups like the National Organization for Marriage may now actually be contributing to the decline of traditional marriage.

    How so? Well the research that the Heritage Foundation utilizes to argue the social costs of marriage is mostly derived form studies in the Netherlands. Back in the 1980s, the Netherlands saw a sharp increase in the number of children born out of wedlock and a sharp decline in the number of marriages. This was largely due to an upsurge in alternative forms of cohabitation that became available to heterosexual couples. The Dutch academics that the Heritage Foundation cite make the argument that the gay movement's political campaign, which aimed to separate child procreation/rearing from the institution of marriage, was likely a main contributor to this trend that followed throughout Europe.

    However, this ignored two vital liberalizations. The introduction of no fault divorce and the influx of women leaving home to work.

    So this leaves two possibilities open...

    1. The introduction of no fault divorce and the influx of women leaving work in the 60s and 70s has over time lead to the degradation of traditional marriage to the point that attitudes now no longer consider procreation as a fundamental element of marriage and that has lead to attitudes favorable to allowing gay marriage.
    2. The political campaigns in the 80s for gay marriage have lead to attitudes that procreation is not a fundamental element to marriage, which in turn has lead to the degradation of traditional marriage.

    The former seems more likely to me, but conservatives are leaning more towards blaming gay marriage for the decline of traditional marriage. In addition to that, rather than focus on how no fault divorce and women leaving home to work is affecting heterosexual marriages, groups like the National Organization for marriage have turned the national focus to how the "homosexual agenda" is out to undermine religious liberties and indoctrinate and recruit children in schools. By taking this rather prejudiced route, NOM may have effectively cemented the decline of traditional marriage by distracting people from the true factors that are leading to its decline. As a result, even if NOM were to get a Constitutional Amendment passed to outright ban same sex marriage, the institution will be utterly destroyed because the prevailing attitudes that allowed the question to even be raised will still continue to propagate each generation and alternative forms of cohabitation will become more likely as heterosexuals turn with their LGBT counterparts to alternative choices such as civil unions and domestic partnerships. The Constitutional Amendment would eventually be overturned.

    Shockingly enough, probably in large part because of the work of groups like NOM, a recent Gallup poll showed that a majority (54%) now support alternative civilly recognized forms of cohabitation (civil unions and domestic partnerships), a huge shift within the conservative base. The irony is that these alternative choices, as we saw in the Netherland study, were largely the reason so many children were born out of wedlock and marriages were on the decline. The efforts of groups like NOM are increasing support for civil unions and domestic partnerships, even though such alternative choices to marriage are the very reason marriage is declining in Europe.

    Finally, considering that Massachusetts, the state which first allowed gays to marry, now carries the country's lowest rate of divorce, you really have to wonder how much of an effect gay marriage really has, if any.

    Groups like NOM could have piled the millions upon millions they collected into fighting for covenant marriages, restricting the terms of divorce, and providing incentives for women to stay at home rather than work, which would have probably had an enormous impact on protecting the institution of traditional marriage, and maybe even decreasing the attitudes in favor of same sex marriage. However, due to what I percieve to be their major miscalculation, they have dumped that money down the drain on a cause which they are demographically losing with each generation, largely because they did not focus on the true causes behind the decline of traditional marriage, and they have probably ensured traditional marriage's inevitable demise as a result.

    What are the Consequences of Redefining Marriage?

    USATODAY.com - Civil unions gain support

    Marriage, family stronger in states supporting marriage equality

    Thoughts?
     
    #1 Satya, Oct 22, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2009
  2. Billy

    Billy Contents Under Pressure
    Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2009
    Threads:
    95
    Messages:
    4,826
    Featured Threads:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1,249
    Trophy Points:
    381
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CT
    MBTI:
    infj
    Enneagram:
    ....
    More flame bait? Why do you always post such antagonizing titles then slam us with some serious left wing activist shit? Its getting old dude.
     
  3. slant

    slant Ruboobie
    On Holiday

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Threads:
    334
    Messages:
    10,318
    Featured Threads:
    40
    Likes Received:
    16,540
    Trophy Points:
    1,751
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    ENFP
    Enneagram:
    6-4-9
    I still say that you are focusing on the wrong issue. It's not gay marriage that is the problem; it's the way the government is set up regarding marriage that is the problem.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  4. OP
    Satya

    Satya C'est la vie
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Threads:
    540
    Messages:
    7,284
    Likes Received:
    549
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INXP
    Why don't you actually address the arguments that I posed? The only person who has put out any bait in this thread is yourself.

    This thread has absolutely nothing to do one way or the other with the marriage debate. In other words, the purpose of this thread is not to discuss whether or not people should support gay marriage. This thread is an amusing observation of how the position the anti gay marriage side has taken may be undermining the very goal they use to justify their position.

    If you wish to start a thread arguing that the government should not recognize marriage (only civil unions) then feel free. I'd certainly post. However, if you actually read through my thread, then you will see how the anti gay marriage side is effectively, more or less, doing just that.
     
    #4 Satya, Oct 22, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2009
  5. slant

    slant Ruboobie
    On Holiday

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Threads:
    334
    Messages:
    10,318
    Featured Threads:
    40
    Likes Received:
    16,540
    Trophy Points:
    1,751
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    ENFP
    Enneagram:
    6-4-9
    I did read through your post and I find your post fascinating, I'm just wondering what sort of response you would like because what I posted was my initial thoughts on the matter. I mean, really, what you are talking about is marriage and how it is believed that the value of marriage has been decreased, and blamed on gays, right? And then also, you stated that womens' rights have influenced the rate of divorces, which is true. Yeah, it's definitely true. Women having rights enabled them to be able to afford households all by themselves; before they depended completely on men.

    I guess, my opinion is split. To a certain extent, anti gay propaganda is wrong- yes. It's obviously very biased as well. I'd like to encourage unity rather than separation. Obviously they still have their right to an opinion but I do see the research you put into this- very well thought out too.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    #5 slant, Oct 22, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2009
  6. OP
    Satya

    Satya C'est la vie
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Threads:
    540
    Messages:
    7,284
    Likes Received:
    549
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INXP
    Excellent. I see what you are saying.

    However, I thought posting the main points in bold would get what I was trying to say across, but I'll try to state more concisely what I was getting at with this thread...

    1. The fundie groups have distracted society from the real causes behind the decline of traditional marriage (divorce and women's rights) by focusing the attention on homosexuality (gay marriage). Over time, this will further the decline of traditional marriage because the real causes are not being addressed.
    2. The actions of the fundie groups are leading to increased approval of civil unions and domestic partnerships, which are actually the main cause behind the decline of traditional marriage in Europe.

    As such, fundies are probably doing more to destroy traditional marriage in the US than gays ever could.

    The thoughts I am looking for is whether or not you agree with my arguments, whether or not its a bad thing that traditional marriage is failing, and whether or not it would even make a difference if the fundies managed to beat gay marriage at present.
     
  7. acd

    acd Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Threads:
    143
    Messages:
    15,254
    Featured Threads:
    11
    Likes Received:
    34,205
    Trophy Points:
    1,387
    MBTI:
    infp
    Enneagram:
    9w8 sp/sx
    I don't think it's a bad thing or a good thing if traditional marriage is failing...
    Traditional marriage has been used to reinforce gender roles and domestic violence up until recent decades.. But not in all cases.

    So I don't mean to say that all traditional marriages are repressive and oppressive and abusive. They're not.. I would venture to say that a majority of straight men don't expect women to be subject to them, anymore.

    Families are where socialization begins for members of a society. If the family as a whole is unhealthy and dysfunctional, then so will society be.

    Personally, I don't see how gay marriage poses a threat to the health of society. If children are raised in abusive traditional or gay homes, they're still going to turn out dysfunctional.

    Relgious opposition to gay-marriage is based on gender roles. If the man isn't the head of the woman in the household, then he is no longer the head in society. Feminism and gay rights go hand in hand because they both want equal rights for people of different sexes and genders. Religious opposition to gay marriages serves to protect a patriarchal society. I think that's the way they see it, mostly.
     
    #7 acd, Oct 22, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2009
  8. Faye

    Faye ^_^
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Threads:
    311
    Messages:
    7,278
    Featured Threads:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4,614
    Trophy Points:
    892
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Gridania
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    4w5
    You may very well be right Satya. The declining marriage rate is a multi-faceted issue. I don't know if the anti-homosexual marriage people are actually making the institution of marriage worse, but they are definitely not helping. They are making marriage worse for homosexuals though (in that homosexuals can't get married).

    We live in a society where now, if you want to be in the middle class, you pretty much have to have the wife in the workforce as well (assuming you're a hetero couple) unless the man is a lawyer, doctor, or something else that is really highly paid. I think that is part of the reason those professions are so highly valued now and so many people go for them is that people in general hold many socially conservative attitudes even in places where you wouldn't expect those attitudes.

    Obviously, the traditional marriage structure, which is patriarchy and to a large extent patriarchal terrorism, isn't going to last.
     
  9. acd

    acd Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Threads:
    143
    Messages:
    15,254
    Featured Threads:
    11
    Likes Received:
    34,205
    Trophy Points:
    1,387
    MBTI:
    infp
    Enneagram:
    9w8 sp/sx
    They know it.
    And since it isn't going to last, religious conservatives resort to fear tactics like: society will crumble, God will smite us, and people will be molesting children and engaging in beastiality.
     
  10. slant

    slant Ruboobie
    On Holiday

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Threads:
    334
    Messages:
    10,318
    Featured Threads:
    40
    Likes Received:
    16,540
    Trophy Points:
    1,751
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    ENFP
    Enneagram:
    6-4-9
    On this note, no. I don't think it's at all a bad thing that traditional marriage is failing, although I can see the cons. If less people are getting married, that means more divorced couples, and that means more kids growing up with single parent families. We had a thread about this a long long time ago regarding single parent households, and the overall conclusion I came to was that it is detrimental to society when most households are single parent.

    This isn't because children who are raised in a single parent household 'come out wrong'---it's because most of the parents who are single parents are living at poverty level and struggling to get by. Even if they have an education, they have to rely on other services like daycares to take care of their children while they are at work. Single parents can't afford to spend the amount of time at home that they would like to.

    On the other hand, we see social changes with the departing from traditional marriage. We see homosexual couples being accepted, we see interracial marriages (which, while it sounds racist, was 'traditionally' unacceptable for a long long time and is still frowned upon on circumstances), we see less arranged marriages and we see less sustained domestic abuse.

    Why? Because couples who once 'stayed together' because they had no other choice, women and men who were being abuse mentally and physically by their partners decided not to take it anymore. They know they can get a better life, and divorce is an option. There is a time and place for divorce, and people feel more comfortable using that option now.

    Marriage has been devalued, and if Gays get marriage it will not devalue marriage at all- it will progress it, to being more of a social thing than a religious thing. You also have to keep in mind though that not all religions are against gays. Marriage is apparently sacred and holy, yet, we don't treat it that way. What is important about the Gay Marriage rights is not the marriage itself; it is the social conditions attached to it. What is important is that gay couples are seen as valid socially and culturally as the traditional couple is, and I've seen that happen even without laws being passed to allow these couples to marry.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  11. OP
    Satya

    Satya C'est la vie
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Threads:
    540
    Messages:
    7,284
    Likes Received:
    549
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INXP
    Interesting posts.

    Given the statistics of equality states, do you guys think gay marriage even has any effect on marriage?

    It seems clear to me from the trends in Europe that registered partnerships like civil unions and domestic partnerships, have an impact on marriage just because they are an alternative choice for not just homosexuals, but for heterosexuals as well, and so I wonder if gay marriage has anywhere near the same impact.
     
  12. slant

    slant Ruboobie
    On Holiday

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Threads:
    334
    Messages:
    10,318
    Featured Threads:
    40
    Likes Received:
    16,540
    Trophy Points:
    1,751
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    ENFP
    Enneagram:
    6-4-9
    Nope, I don't think gay marriage has an impact on marriage besides religious/political conflicts that would follow.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  13. acd

    acd Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Threads:
    143
    Messages:
    15,254
    Featured Threads:
    11
    Likes Received:
    34,205
    Trophy Points:
    1,387
    MBTI:
    infp
    Enneagram:
    9w8 sp/sx
    I think it has no impact. What impacts traditional marriage is women being self-sufficient and providing for themselves, as was stated in the OP.
     
  14. Blind Bandit

    Blind Bandit Blind Man Being Lead to Nowhere
    Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Threads:
    132
    Messages:
    3,886
    Featured Threads:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Trophy Points:
    792
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Billy for god sakes man if you don't like it don't post.

    Your driving me nuts.

    I also tend to agree. The idea of marriage has been changing for a while now.

    And honestly gay marriage is just the scape goat for such changes.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    #14 Blind Bandit, Oct 22, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2009
  15. IndigoSensor

    IndigoSensor Product Obtained
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Threads:
    762
    Messages:
    14,154
    Likes Received:
    1,297
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    1w2 sx/so/sp
    Interesting relization, and I agree with pretty much all you said. I am inclined to agree with the second reason to why this is occuring. It is almost ironic, but at the same time this makes sense. It is very often that when people get very fanatical over what they want, or if they become extrodinarly adament and refuse to even concider other sides. They end up screwing everything up and create their own fall unintentionally. This is the case here. That, and culture changes, and you can't stop that.

    Marriage should be a simple concept. If you like someone, and want to go to the "final step" you marry them. It allows all the legal binding stuff, and all that jazz, and the word marriage has a "traditional sound" to it that people find appealing, and it makes it feel completely offical. No two people should be denied a marriage lisences just because of who they are.

    The only reason why religious groups want to put a lock on marriage, is because religious groups like to hold on to tradition, and understandably so. However, marriage has more governmental purposes then does religious. If a religious group wants to forbid a marriege within their religious, that is fine. However, when they try to overstep outside their religion and control how things "should be", then that is unconstitutional in my opinion.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  16. Blind Bandit

    Blind Bandit Blind Man Being Lead to Nowhere
    Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Threads:
    132
    Messages:
    3,886
    Featured Threads:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Trophy Points:
    792
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    My biggest issue is region doesn't have a hold on the use of marriage.

    people were probably marrying in some form before we even made fire.

    I don't see what the problem. If a religion doesn't want to marry someone thats fine. They don't have too. No one is making them. But its a persons right to be married and the government shouldn't bend to religious leanings.

    Religion needs to but out of everyones live and keep its mouth shut.

    Gay marriage shouldn't even be an issue.

    An interesting side note. I got a flyer yesterday at the college. I should have told the person where he could put that flyer. Said flyer talked about maintaining the traditional marriage I ripped it up. I'm sick of this vale of ignorance.

    / Rant
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  17. IndigoSensor

    IndigoSensor Product Obtained
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Threads:
    762
    Messages:
    14,154
    Likes Received:
    1,297
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    1w2 sx/so/sp
    Yup, that is my opinion exactly.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  18. BenW

    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Threads:
    47
    Messages:
    971
    Likes Received:
    94
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INTP
    Contracts should not be monopolized by governments.
    Marriage, regardless of the participants having mismatched genitals or not, is a voluntary agreement, and shouldn't be regulated.
     
  19. Faye

    Faye ^_^
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Threads:
    311
    Messages:
    7,278
    Featured Threads:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4,614
    Trophy Points:
    892
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Gridania
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    4w5
    Priests seem to have the molesting children thing covered. Can you say "self-fulfilling prophecy"?
     
  20. testing

    On Holiday

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Threads:
    37
    Messages:
    902
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    qwer
    Dude, you're kinda scary, you know that? (-:

    Without actually reading everyone's posts, (sorry, no time) my main thought is that the decline of traditional marriage is obviously and solely the responsibility of heterosexual couples themselves who are doing a mighty fine job of treating each other badly and destroying their relationships (and/or) marriages (and/or) families without the help of any gay people whatsoever, thankyouverymuch. Any organization which wastes time and money trying to prove otherwise is deluded.

    Personal experience -- the "devout" catholics I know who gave me crap about Living in Sin and Being a Slut etc., etc., have all been divorced, in some cases several times, and these women see no problem at all with marrying a man for solely for money, to the point of running background checks on him and his bank accounts, and then dumping him based on that information. Not what I would call a fine role model for any kind of relationship.

    If people want to stay together, married or not, they will. If they don't, they won't. Why pretend otherwise?
     
    Satya likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page