What do you mean "you religious people"? I am not sure religious people are going to be happy with the state labeling everything "Civil unions". I proposed the civil union solution as a way to deal with the issue of homosexual marriage without having to change the values of society to redefine what it considers to be marriage, before the issue can be resolved.
Yeah, cause it's very hard to say that marriage is between two people (of either gender) rather than between a man and a woman. SOOOO HAAARD.
As for the other stuff, I was explaining where the ideal view of marriage has originated, and where the basic ideas have developed. They have developed in a religious context, not a secular one. Secularly, they have been implemented in the legal system, to also allow for divorce.
You are talking about Chrisitan marriage, not marriage in general. Christianity hijacked marriage in the 11th or 12th century AD, in it's desire to control people's lives and their sexuality. Marriage wasn't initially religious, and it's a cultural act, rather than a religious one for many people outside of the western world. Marriage is now a secular institution (in my country if you don't get marriad at city hall you're not married, regardless of how many priests marry you, and it's like this in many countries).
Look at the wedding vows and see what they call for. It is mutual sacrifice for one another, in love. When you then attempt to take this idea and say it isn't sow, and subject to change, the people will end up deviating from it, arguing that they have a right for this or that, and cheapening it.
Can't peopel make up their own vows? And the ideea that marriage has anything to do with love is recent. Even Christian marriage, when it was concieved, had nothing to do with love. Marriage was a tranzaction between families. People didn't choose whom they married. Their feelings had nothing to do with it.
As for people deviating from yor traditional view of marriage being cheapened, can you be more precise. Don't wan't to respond to that 'till I'm sure what you'r reffering to.
Why is there divorce today and it is a major part of the marriage landscape if not for the fact that what marriage is has been cheapened in a culture that derives its ethics from rights?
I actually read something related to this topic for a class. The author came to the conclusion that divorce itself isn't the issue, but rather the ease with which people can get married. People often get married without thinking things through, without knowing themselves and knowing what they want out of life. Plus movies and works of literature have strongly influenced people's perception of love, and have made them develop unrealistic expectations. During the romantic period love was presented as chaotic and passionate, but the lovers usually died at the end, and their realationship never left the "honey moon period". People nowadays think that if their relationship ceases being a perpetual courtship ritual, then it's over.
Still, It's bettet than in India where people don't choose whom they marry and where the divoce rates are low, not because people are better at relationships over there, but because their in-laws will kill them if they file for divorce. Just because people don't divorce doesn't mean they have a successfull relationship.
