I was discussing recently cryonics with my girlfriend, who is highly uncomfortable with the notion. We identified what may (tentatively) be part of the underlying objection by people, especially loved ones, to cryonics. Essentially, it comes down to a lack of closure. When someone dies, you can usually mourn and move on. But if there' a genuine chance of resurrection, then the ability to more or less move on to some extent goes away.
If this is the case, then one might ask why the same thing doesn't happen with religions that believe in an afterlife. That could be because they believe that everyone will be resurrected. But it may also be that in part, people often don't at some level believe there necessarily will be an afterlife, or if they do, their version of an afterlife is highly abstracted. If that's the case, cryonics may be being hurt by its own plausibility.
If this is the case, then one might ask why the same thing doesn't happen with religions that believe in an afterlife.
The religion I'm familiar with (dunno about others) explicitly says that the death of either spouse terminates the marriage.
That could be because they believe that everyone will be resurrected.
Yeah, but some people will go to heaven and other people will go to hell, so I don't think that's the answer.