What are morals

[TheGoldoffEternal]

According to you

Why would that show a spike in divorce rates in comparison to the ratio of marriages at a given time and not be indicative of the general trend. Obviously a spike would occur due to the number of couples that were waiting to be divorced but couldn't in normal relationships but doesn't explain why you'd expect the divorce rate to be 'spiking' in same sex couples, as its always been allowed.

Oh I love it when people try to prove that non believers have no moral compass. They tie themselves in such delicious knots!

Oh come on. This is basic.

At time point A, same sex marriage becomes legal. Lots of people get married in a short period of time, because they've been waiting to do it.

Then life goes on, and some of those marriages break down. Initially that number is likely to be larger than the norm, because when something is suddenly no longer forbidden, people make impulsive, romance-driven decisions.

Then after a while, it all settles down. This is what has happened in the Netherlands. It's interesting to see the divorce rate is higher among lesbian couples; I wonder whether this is something to do with the fact that in general, women seem more 'wedded' (sorry) to the idea of marriage and commitment than men. Would be an interesting topic for some sociology research.

Overall I don't see divorce as a bad thing. Sometimes it's the best thing for everyone involved, and that can absolutely include the children. What is a bad thing for children is acrimonious divorce where both sides get really adversarial. People need to be better than that. But religion isn't going to help there.

i mean.. one small point.

When no fault divorce was introduced in the USA, a largely Christian country, the divorce rate went up... but the death rate of the male population dropped...

Nobody has ever said that every sexual orientation (no preference) should be a component of marriage. Plenty of countries have legalised gay marriage without legalising zoophilia, paedophilia, or whatever other slippery slope you want to bring up.

How does gay marriage devalue marriage? Bc gay relationships are inferior in your eyes? How?

Zoophilia is a kink, there is no such thing as a natural orientation exclusively or even partially to animals.

If marriage is by default religious to you, what about marriage between atheists? Are they devaluing marriage?

And do you really see gay relationships as on a par with beastiality?

No church is forced to perform gay marriage just bc civil marriage is legal for gay couples. Civil marriage is none of the church's business, we don't live in a theocracy.

Plus some churches, eg. Quakers, wanted to perform same sex marriage.

What's your source for male couples not remaining together? Gay men actually have a lower divorce rate than straight couples.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03631990221122966

It's lesbians who have the highest, though it is levelling out. Nothing to do with 'men shoyld not be with men', it's because men are least likely to initiate divorce, and women the most. So 2 men are least likely to get divorced, and 2 women the most.

Plus remember both dating pools are very small, esp for lesbians. I suspect compatibility issues are more of an issue with tiny dating pools.

You've made your disapproval of gay marriage very clear, please have the courage of your convictions.

I have read the analysis posted. It doesn't say what this poster thinks it does. But what else should we expect from people who use faith as a excuse to deny people basic human rights?

No, religion was merely a useful enforcer at a time when the rule of law was weak or non-existent, with the carrot of eternal life and the stick of eternal damnation. Laws aren't 'passed down' from Christianity, or indeed any other religion (well, I suppose apart from specifically religious-based law like Sharia, or the Beth Din, or canon law), or are only in the sense that most religions preach a fundamentally similar message in terms of living fairly, with charity and justice towards other people. But you don't need a deity for that.

Could you link? Thank you for challenging .

Two other reasons for a higher gay divorce rate should also be noted, @Alicealig .Gay people are less likely to have children, which are a major reason couples may stay together who otherwise would not.

And a lot of women stay in marriages they might otherwise leave because they are financially dependent. This is much less likely to be the case in lesbian or gay couples.

Christianity has never existed to control anyone it's always been a guide of how to live your life and to navigate through the ebbs and flows.

Tell me you're neither widely read, widely travelled nor widely experienced without actually saying so. 🙄

Catholic Northern Ireland is surely a big rebuttal to that statement. Or the Spanish Inquisition. Christianity is one of the most benign religions, but that kind of blanket statement is wrong.

I don't think Catholicism in NI is any different to Catholicism elsewhere, other than in being an ethnic badge as well as a sect within Christianity.

https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/3/e010556

I Googled it, wasn't hard to find.

Sorry, thank you so much!

No worries at all, I am the Queen of search terms 😂.

Religion cannot enforce, only people, or men can enforce the laws.

But you can't separate religion from its 'staff'. Religion is only its adherents.

In terms of enforcement religion is merely the doctrine, and IS separate in that enforcement is a physical act. The reasons for the force at this point isn't relevant but the separation is fundamental.

I'm not all that sure what you mean however, when you say religion is only it's aherants?

Enforcement isn't necessarily physical. It can be purely psychological. The idea of shunning, for instance, as a threat for those who choose to relinquish a particular belief system.

An adherent is someone who supports a specific set of ideas/beliefs/practices. Any religious sect is made up of its adherents, and to a lesser extent the texts, artefacts etc they have made which are specific to that belief system.

Religion is only its adherents, because no adherents = no religion. Religion is a thing done by people who behave according to what they believe in.

And this is the whole problem with religion. I have no beef with gods, though I don't believe any exist. I have beef with those among their faithful who want to impose the tenets of their faith on me, including all the bigoted oppressive ones.

Enforcement as a fundamental is physical, hence the word within, force. There may be psychological inferences or you may even get a nice letter in the post. But that letter or enforcement notice is a letter threatening PHYSICAL FORCE if not complied with.

No, you are misunderstanding the term.

the act of compelling observance of or compliance with a law, rule, or obligation

Really I'm not. The term is correct. How does one COMPELL observance of the law?

Through the means and threat of force which can only be physical.

That's nonsense. Shunning, as practised by JW, is not physical. It is however hideous psychological brutality. Force, like abuse isn't always physical. That's basic.