Throughout history men have practised polygyny (the marriage of one man to multiple women). A few societies practised polyandry (the marriage of one woman to multiple men). Meanwhile, homosexual marriage has never been common or widely accepted by any society. Still, the Greeks accepted pederasty as a part of their cultural norms. At some point, there was a nearly worldwide move to emphasize marriage as between man and woman, a legal union between husband and wife.
What historical influences caused a shift in the definition of marriage?
Why had the majority of Earth’s societies moved to define marriage as man and wife?
Today, in a reversal, homosexuals have lobbied their way into acceptance at nearly every level of society and they are on the brink of coercing acceptance and recognition of homosexual marriages in the United States. How soon will people start championing the right for multiple partners in a marriage? How soon will people start coercing acceptance and recognition of polygamy? How soon before we start hearing “love” as the reason for such unions? How soon before we are coerced into redefining marriage as any arrangement between people who love each other?
Your questions seem to be framed in the rhetoric. “How soon…” I do not know. But for sure, in a few years, homosexuality will be the norm as heterosexuality is today. Makes me reflect on how mobile phones, in my childhood, were an extraordinary dream - as idealistic as imagining a planet inhabited by aliens was. Look at what’s happened today.
Well, it’s all about what you think marraige is for.
Traditionally (Indeed, up until about the 17-18th century in Europe) marraige was about property and was the sole provence of the upper class. Two rich families would link their property through a political union with the added advantage of producing new members with a built-in allegiance to both sides of the equation (the children). Homosexual unions did not have the advantage of creating that equalizer, though they may have been more common than you might think. Check out: Christianity, social tolerance, and homosexuality: Gay people in Western Europe from the beginning of the Christian era to the fourteenth century AND Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe both by John Boswell.
When marraige ceased to be about property/progeny, why not include homosexual marraiges? It is supposed to be about love in the modern times.
through out history governments that promoted poligamy and homosexuality have fallen. This is because theey have lost the grace of God,… and became subjects to their own ignorant will and demize. But now we have science,… will this make life better?
The difference between men and women was created to consolidate lifes needs into roles toward each other.
The human soul is neither male nor female,… and it takes love between the sexes to look beyond these differences. Homosexuals are naturally bias toward estrogin and testosterone.
Men that marry more then one wife will in fact, over compensate for the estrogine in their life,… and will thus limit the influance of women in their mindset. IE middle east.
Any culture that accepts these things will suffer the psychological backlash.
There is no proof that any of these things should be accepted.
Well the changes in the idea of marriage often moves
quickly. For example in my lifetime (I am 46)
there were laws in the U.S. forbidding marriage
between the races. Some states had laws that prevented
blacks and whites from marrying. To protect the races
I suppose. Now only a true fanatic would advocate that.
So I am assuming laws about homosexuals will also
change very rapidly as well. I suspect in the next
few years, homosexual marriages will be common
for the simple reason there is no reason on the planet earth
to forbid them. Now as far as polygamous marriages, I am
married and can’t for the live of me, see why any guy would
marry one woman, little less 2 or 3. Women are insane.
If sheep could cook…
Hey…if a bunch of people want to form a civil union, so be it. I was made the offer once, but I didn’t want to marry either one of them,separately or together, so I said no. Now, if Bradgelina were to ask…hmm…
Basically, before writers created the ideal of romantic love, marriage was a business.
Peter asked why anyone would want to marry 2 women…what about 2 men? My God, you’d spend every free moment picking up socks and finding keys…
I think the divorce rate would always have been around what it is now if it wern’t for the fact that in the older days, a woman asking for a divorce would basically have to like… get up and move out of town. Something that perhaps wasn’t the easiest thing to do.
I don’t think it’s a given that gay marriage will become as universally accepted as straight marriage. There are too many prejudices and biases that aren’t likely to change. Legalization will probably come in time, at least in some areas, but since Islam and Christianity seem to mostly forbid it, and don’t seem to be going away, I doubt gays will see equality everywhere until those religions run their course.
Fay,
The same could have been said about inter-racial marraiges 100 years ago. I mean, people used religion to justify uni-racial marraiges too. Are inter-racial relationships the norm now? Well, no. In fact, I could count the number of times I’ve seen inter-racial relationships dislayed in the public media on one hand . . . and often in comedies ABOUT the fact that its about inter-racial relationships. At the same time, in terms of people, I’ve seen many inter-racial couples on the street and been friends with many people involved in them. I imagine that gay marraige will be in the same boat in 50 years. It won’t be widely accepted, as measured by the barometer of the media, but on the street it won’t be uncommon. At least in certain areas.
Perhaps, but I don’t think it’s the same thing. Many areas are racially homogeneos (eg China, parts of the mid east, parts of Africa). There interracial marriage isn’t an issue. But many of those areas still have taboos against homosexuality.
I can’t speak to how much “progress” is being made in other parts of the world, but the liberalism in the US feels like a fad to me. I’m not sure there’s any real movement towards widespread acceptance of gay marriage. Some US states want it, others don’t. The Supreme Court will perhaps eventually decide it, but will it be a conservative court or will it be decided later by a more liberal court? Hard to say.
The government has no place in people’s bedrooms or homes. You can’t cherry pick rights…every person has individual freedoms or no person has individual freedoms. As long as you’re not impinging upon somebody else’s rights…what’s the big deal? The same rules and the same rights apply to every individual or the liberty of all is in jeopardy. VIPs shouldn’t get special treatment, and the beggar shouldn’t be treated with disdain.
If any group gets special (positive or negative) treatment, it’s the top of a very slippery slope. It divides people and opens the door to persecution.
I’m not judging it or defending it, Shy, just stating what I think will happen. Human rights are routinely trampled by all the governments of the world, and if that’s not enough we tend to do it to one another, too. In a better world things would be different, but I don’t see it changing any time soon.
the government doesn’t have to endorce what isn’t proven. You can choose to have homosexual relations,… but why does the government have to give it a seal of approval??? Is it for the tax break?,… everything else can be solved with living wills and other contracts.
The divorce rate is a sad condition of a world that first, distracts you to proper reasons to get married,… and second, keeps a two income family stressed and not focusing on a mariiage.
