It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Save heterosexual marriage: ban straight divorce!

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Why do you not consider making it harder for ALL individuals to get married?
If marriage were made more difficult to achieve, then less individuals who were truly committed to it would pursue it.




posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
I met my ex-wife at church, a Baptist one I had been going to for a couple of years!

We got married some two years later at the church after we had been baptised together and in front of 300 people.

She ended up having an affair with another member of the church and we split up. Within a week, she moved in with him (he was already divorced) and because I simply couldn't ever trust her again, I had to Divorce her!

So because I was left with no choice really, does that mean I am going to be judged by Jesus or will she suffer for committing adultery?

I know it says the Lord hates Divorce but if we are to believe he has a plan for our lives, then why did he let that happen?

When or if I get to Heaven, I will be calling a seriously urgent sit round the table meeting with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit because I have a lot of questions!

Any of you experts out there know the answer to my above question about who was in the wrong with me and my ex-wife?



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   
banning straight divorce may increase murder rates.

i'd like to think i am wrong, but i don't know everyone,
et


edit on 19-9-2010 by Esoteric Teacher because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by woodwytch
 

That kind of anger makes it clear to me what kind of misery awaits when society becomes (or reverts to being) truely "scriptural". It really makes one feel empathy for women in history, before divorce became destigmatized and common place, I suppose after the late 1960s' sexual revoltution - and that "revolution" is the subject of so much conservative displeasure.
Yeah, I can also speak of the pain of young gay people killing themselves, of people being murdered and assaulted, rejected by parents and churches, of lack of status for loving, long-term gay relationships.
Painful issues indeed. But yet it's still OK to judge and say almost anything about gay people.
But yet divorce and remarriage are not targeted, although the scriptural basis is solid.
Rather divorce is seen as a symptom of other social evils.



Ok, I appologize for being testy in my first post ... I've taken a deep breath and composed myself ... but now I'm just confused !


You are wanting to ban hetrosexual divorce because the scriptures say divorce is a mortal / moral sin (sorry being a Pagan, I don't know the Bible that well) ... and yet you have said that you are a Gay man ... but isn't the Bible against homosexuality too ?

Personally I think people should be aloud to live the lifestyle they choose ... with who they choose ... but that said there needs to be a margin for error ... being mere humans (well most of us at any rate --- just remembered I'm on ATS), we certainly make our fair share of errors ... and unfortunately that will always be the case.

Whilst we walk this Earth (whatever path we choose) ... we will naturally make mistakes ... does God really want us to be stuck with those mistakes ... my mistake was naivety ... is that also a sin ?

Woody



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   
I was just wondering -
should we love divorcees, and just hate their sin?

Should divorcees be allowed in the army if they keep up the pretense they are still married?

If my disobedient son wears cloth of two fibres, puts out a fire on the Sabbath, gets divorced, eats lobster, turns gay, practices witchcraft, becomes a banker (charging interest), lies down with a cow, and refuses to kill everyone of the next tribe God has marked for genocide, which offense should I stone him for first?



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by minkey53
I met my ex-wife at church, a Baptist one I had been going to for a couple of years!

We got married some two years later at the church after we had been baptised together and in front of 300 people.

She ended up having an affair with another member of the church and we split up. Within a week, she moved in with him (he was already divorced) and because I simply couldn't ever trust her again, I had to Divorce her!

So because I was left with no choice really, does that mean I am going to be judged by Jesus or will she suffer for committing adultery?

I know it says the Lord hates Divorce but if we are to believe he has a plan for our lives, then why did he let that happen?

When or if I get to Heaven, I will be calling a seriously urgent sit round the table meeting with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit because I have a lot of questions!

Any of you experts out there know the answer to my above question about who was in the wrong with me and my ex-wife?


You and your wife had a contract. She broke it.
All you did by getting a divorce was get legal recognition of the fact that the contract was broken.

Btw, I don't believe at all in an old-testament god who makes all sorts of stupid rules.
Love thy neighbour as thyself should be enough for any religion, and not even that for a perpetually partying neighbour who turns his bass up at three in the morning until it shakes your floor, when you have to be up at six.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwytch
 

Hey Woodwytch, thanks for relaxing. My OP is not about me judging divorced people.
It is using the topic of divorce as a wider point that addresses hypocrisy in conservative positions.
This will make more sense to members who follow fundamentalist Christian/social conservative statements.
If you have been less exposed to their thinking it will seem like a rant against divorce.
What I've been trying to demonstrate is the selective use of scriptures in public life, and an inconsistant morality by a pseudo-religious, right-wing stream.
However, even at face value you've made a powerful point in saying that divorce is necessary, especially for women to escape abusive relationships. In fact, one probably shouldn't even begin the topic without making that point (oops).
However, to a scriptural world-view personal happiness and choice are not crucial to how we should be governed.
Religious views would gladly ban gay relationships, and some would even forbid the use of a condom within marriage to prevent a husband passing HIV to his wife. Millions of people live by those statements, and daily attempt to push their agenda of "no-choice" on others. To them freedom from disease and abuse, and the focus on personal happiness are not legitimate grounds for countering scripture.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
did'nt marriage used to be recorded only at the front of the Bible? anyway I think the some answers are in these scriptures

Revelation-
The voice of bridegroom and bride will never be heard in you again. Your merchants were the world's great men. By your magic spell all the nations were led astray.

****For all the nations have drunk the maddening wine of her adulteries. The kings of the earth committed adultery with her, and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries.

'Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!'

Isaiah-
The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them

As a young man marries a maiden, so will your sons marry you; as a bridegroom rejoices over his bride, so will your God rejoice over you.

Luke-
Now then, at the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?"
Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.

Hebrews-
Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 

We should love divorcees, but hate their sin(s).
It's not the lifestyle God wanted when He made Adam and Eve.
He made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve AND Gertrude, Jezebel, Lucy, Mary and Liz Taylor.

You should stone your son firstly for the Sabbath offense. The creation comes first in Genesis considering the abominatiuons you mention. Although that lobster thing - pity you can't stone him twice.


As for divorcees in the miltary: I think forced conscription or a period of reflection should be mandatory before any divorce is granted to heterosexual men. A good chaplain or other men will talk some sense into them over two years or so.
I'd in any case encourage a convent or aversion therapy.
Otherwise they just do it again and again.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by minkey53
 


I'm no expert, but if I remember correctly, Jesus let you off the hook in the Book of Mark, but not your adulterous wife .Now, Paul may have hoisted you back onto that hook in the Book of Luke, but I'm not really clear on that.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
banning straight divorce may increase murder rates.

i'd like to think i am wrong, but i don't know everyone,
et


You're not wrong.
Murder rates would definitely go way up.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by snowspirit
 

Do we have cross-cultural or historical studies to prove that sanctions against divorce actually increase the murder rate?
I have an inkling such studies would actually show the opposite.
The easiness, indeed social grace and lucrativeness of high-class divorce actually cheapens lives.
The partner becomes a disposible commodity.
Symbolically that's very close to de-humanization and murder.
Perhaps some countries have more spousal murder because easy divorce encourages adultery and experimentation, and partners tend to become homicidal when the proposed settlement doesn't go their way.
Arguably we'd have far less domestic murders with laws against divorce, except in cases of extreme adultery and abuse.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by minkey53
 

I must concur with some other comments to you.
From what I've read in the Gospels, only the partner who commits adultery is at fault.
Thus you are quite innocent according to Scripture.

In my charismatic reborn Christian days sex was considered a way of merging spirits and souls. And only your first sex was automatically recognized by God as a legitimate union. Everything else required pleading and repentence. In fact, sex was even considered a means to pass on demons. So, to the religious sluts and mooses on the loose - you might wake up with more than just an STI, crabs and a hangover. You might wake up one morning being possessed by Beelzebub or Legion.
You just don't know where these people you sleep with have been - possibly even the White House or Bohemian Grove. Uggh



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   
So it is clear that from a religious world-view that the adulterer/adultress causes grounds for legitimate divorce, by placing the other partner into medical, emotional and spiritual danger.
So the person (at least male) in this circumstance can re-marry without fault (perhaps after a medical check-up and an exorcism).
The other partner should be half-shunned and pitied, and perhaps even made to wear a big "A" on their garments, in salute to American "founding farther" type justice, as explained in Hawthorne's "The Scarlett Letter".

The only problem is, there are only so many attractive widows and spinsters.
If hardly anyone divorces then where do legitimate divorcees find partners?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 


Halfoldman I absolutely love your sense of humor, and counter-point style of making your point. I agree with the point you are making. It is not banning or condoning of taking legal actions. It is getting past the tendancy in our generation to throw people away if they aren't as useful as they once were. We have forgotten how to truly love one another.
I sat, and listened to a coworker list off the reasons, and justifications for all 7, yes 7 of her divorces, and was starting a new list on her current husband. All the reasons she listed started with "I" don't feel... anymore. He doesn't MAKE ME feel... anymore. Of course to her perspective she was the total victim. I asked her if they had considered couselling. She said no it just wouldn't work. I asked if she had ever tried couselling in the past. No it just doesn't work. I spoke with her husband a few days later, and he isn't even aware there is a problem. Most likely he won't until he gets the papers, and counselling will be out of the question because it has the potential to strip her of her self justifications to throw him away. This is the kind of divorce that should be frowned upon.

If your spouse is abusive he/she has already broken the covenant, and deserves to get kicked to the curb. No need to feel any guilt for leaving a truly abusive relationship. Caution however should be taken in just how loosely you construe abuse. Some people could count a strong disagreement, or insensitivity as emotional abuse, and grounds for divorce. If that were the case no one would ever stay married. Marriage is about honoring, and cherishing the other person. Putting their needs, and desires first, and above your own. If you can't do that, don't get married.

I think we make it both too easy to marry, and too easy to divorce. We have marginalized, and lessened its importance to such a degree that the argument over gay marriage is laughable. Why would you want to be part of something that has been made into such a farce? You would be better off just being who you are with your significant other regardless of what the world thinks your label should be. I know several gay couples, and most of them have much more highly functional relationships than most heterosexuals. They know the right, and wrong way to argue, and they don't throw the threat of abandonment in each others faces all the time. Maybe gay people with strong healthy relationships should start marriage couselling for the heterosexuals of the disposable starter wife generation.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 





Few people realize that the institute of marriage is first and foremost about children and their rights. You don't get it either (no offense meant). We rarely think about it these days, but it's the primary purpose of marriage. The rules often kick in in case of divorce -- which is the purpose of having the rules in the first place. You can have 10,000 vows but that wouldn't produce alimony.


It is the institute of parenthood that is important in this case, not marriage. I dont think we need any legal or state regulations of the institute of marriage.




How about we get rid of Legal Marriage altogether and let couples unite in a marriage with suitable vows between them whether it be spirtual or other, it could even include a personal contract if they wish.


I agree 100%. It would also finally solve pointless gay marriage arguments..



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by 23refugee
 



and yet...God allowed it....a long, long time ago....
why....
oh, ya, the men were just abandoning the wives...who were then left in a society that demanded that they have "a head" to take care of them!!
yes, Christ knocked divorce......what was Peter's response....
something like"If this be the case, it's better not to marry..."???
what Christ went into was that if a man or women divorces, abandons their spouse, they cause them to commit aduleury....
and he inferred that men too.....could commit adultery if they didn't stick with their wives and leave the other women alone!
then all of a sudden, marriage wasn't that great to peter....
divorce was allowed for the sake of women!
it should remain allowed for the same reason....



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   
The sad fact is that most marriages end in divorce.

Here is a good idea - don't get married!

I don't think anyone is fit to get married.

Here is another good idea - get rid of marriage!



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


seems some help unwittingly?-the other to be tempted and thereby "justify" themselves for seperating and ultimately end up with another themselves, hmm

1Corinthians-
Do not deprive each other of sexual relations, unless you both agree to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time ... Afterward, you should come together again so that Satan won’t be able to tempt you because of your lack of self-control.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Wow, another whining pro homosexual thread...........I guess it's been a few days and we had to have another one. Posters on here have made fun of the situation several times from the gay perspective.......hmmmm, and you expect peole to take you seriously........what a joke, give it a rest.




top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join