Well i can certainly agree with marriage not being in the Governments realm. I think it should be up to religious institutions to marry people if they want to. if people want to be together that's their choice, if they want to get married by a religious institution that is theirs too. Morally consenting adults is my standard. if people want to be polygamous that is their choice, but its not for me. i have trouble seeing a world where most people are not monogamous at the end of the day. now what some people have suggested with the state raising children and such sounds just downright distopian. a disciplined dictatorship sounds much better.
When I read The Fault in Our Stars, there was this bit where one of the characters, Isaac, was going to be blind, and his girlfriend, whom he thought would be with him forever, dumped him because of this. And Isaac kept saying, "We made a promise to each other." Hazel, the MC, replied, "Maybe she didn't understand what she was promising." To which Isaac said, "But love is when you keep the promise anyway. You keep the promise anyway!" Simple though that dialogue made it, I think it has some truth. Love is a choice. It is not an emotion, though emotions plays a role. There's a lovely picture I've seen on FB a few times. It depicts 2 old people. I forget the caption now. But they've just had a fight and they're sat on the opposite end of the bench, their hands folded across their chest, turned away from each other. It's raining. And the old man, with an angry face, without turning to face the woman, stretched out his hand and holds an umbrella over her. That's love. It's those moments when you're not perfect, but you choose to cherish each other anyway. It's those moments when you say, "I'm not giving up." Sometimes, clinging on even when it doesn't seem to make sense anymore. I think people make mistakes. The church tends to teach that if you're married to a person, then you were meant to marry that person in accordance to God's will, because divorce was never supposed to happen. However, I have my doubts here. If people are allowed to make mistakes and go against God's will, make bad choices, which all of us do everyday, then why not in marriage? While I do not see divorce as a good thing, I understand it as a tragic necessity, even though I do believe marriage should be forever. However, people always change. When my ex's parents divorced, he told me that one of the reasons why his mother divorced his father was because "he isn't the man she married X years ago" (I forget how many years). I told this to my mum, who has been happily married to my dad for over 30 years. And my mum replied immediately, "Yes, but nobody is the person they were 10 years ago. Your dad is not the man I married long ago either." My parents' secret to a happy marriage? There're probably a million things, but the one thing they hold of paramount importance is this: compromise. You must compromise with each other. And as for a good partner, find someone who would be willing to compromise for your sake. I think the problem boils down to the commitment phobia nowadays, to the fact that a lot of society is asking, "What's in it for me?" Somewhere I read once, a healthy relationship is never 50-50. 50% from each partner. No. A healthy relationship should be 60-40. 60% giving, 40% receiving, where you always give more than you take. Relationships are often seen as something that should serve ME, complete ME, when relationships are really about serving the OTHER. And there's no completing to do - you should be a complete, healthy individual by the time you marry because, though we might want this to be so, your partner is not the one who could "fix" you. They're human and flawed as you are. They cannot fix you. I think marriage is a leap of faith - it is a risk. You cannot know how someone's gonna change 20 years down the line. But the key is making that commitment to grow together - to love that person anyway, as The Fault in Our Stars says. I think having something in each other that we admire can be very helpful in a marriage. I think in a marriage, you cannot think of what you want anymore. You must first think about what your partner wants. Lastly, character is important. I've heard before that when looking for a partner, you should see how they treat their friends. Personally, in finding my husband, I've found something else that's even more revealing. Watch the way your partner treats your parents. Parents he doesn't have to love. My own father tells me, watch the way your partner treats his own parents, because the way he usually is at home is probably the way he'll be like with you. I think all of these are good indications. And I've learnt that compromise really is key. I think people make mistakes with marriage probably because so often they're driven not by reason, but by passion, thinking that love is passion and that that rush is what a marriage ought to feel like. Another thing in choosing a spouse - first think what are the things that are important to you, and does your partner meet those specific needs? Yes, while a relationship is about putting the other person first, likewise that person has to be good for you. Is he/she good for you? I've always known what love should be, one that always forgives and that is faithful, but no one ever taught me to ask, "Is he good for me?" Everything should be weighed in balance with that question, because your own well-being is also important. And it is good to learn to be self-critical without dismissing any wrongs done to you.
Wow. That's a wonderful essay on what makes marriage work. Can't argue with any of it. Of course there will be people who don't feel this way at all, but I think you've made a very strong case here. Common sense AND heart. What's not to like? Well said!
we can always count on @Mckk for detailed enlightenment. Well done. I couldn't add anything if I wanted too. (Well of course any of us could, but there's no need.) Your considerations are appreciated, friend.
Not really. Many people eventually decide that they do want kids, even if they didn't want them initially. But if you never reach the point where you want them, they're not magically thrust upon you. Well, this isn't exactly accurate. Averages are misleading -- if it were true that everyone died at 13, many babies would not survive to adulthood. There were cavemen who lived to their 60s or even 70s or beyond. It's just that there were so many other dangers that a great many people died young (especially under 5), so averages are kind of skewed. Disease and infection took a lot of lives, and many conditions that would lay you up today for a day or two were fatal not even so long ago as the caveman days. Yeah, they can make you insane, but sometimes they're so damn cute and sweet. One last point -- the notion of romantic love and marrying for that reason is not all that old. Marriage used to be based on more practical considerations (and still is in many parts of the world.)
The book Brave New World explored these things. I still can't believe I didn't throw that book at a wall.
I thing to remember is that having a world full of people that you could have sex with does not automatically turn you into a rabbit. There is a matter of time, energy, and mood. There are people that aren't physically attractive to each other, or aren't compatible personality-wise, or they hate each-others' scent. Maybe part of the culture is a belief that you have no longevity unless you specifically mold a child's upbringing. Maybe people with failing vigor find their pleasure in taking care of the next generation.
Monogamy exists for a reason. A lack of marriage means a lack of fatherhood, which in the past had more than emotional consequences - it meant a greater chance of starving to death. Jealousy also has its evolutionary roots. If a man is going to take care of a child, instead of just impregnating as many women as he can and leaving them, the he wants to be certain the child is really his. Now with aliens like mine, who turn from male into female, having no marriage and no fatherhood makes perfect sense. You don't want kids raising kids, so the aliens are only responsible for the offspring they bear, not those they sire.
That's a pretty big leap. I mean, I don't know if I trust your cause-and-effect relationship about failed adoptions (it occurs to me that for an adoptive family to 'reject' a child, the child must have had some SERIOUS issues, so I don't think the kid is messed up b/c of a failed adoption so much as the adoption failed b/c the kid was messed up), but even if I accept that failed adoptions mess kids up, I can't see the connection to "how important it is for a child to know their biological parents." There are lots of very happy adopted kids who never know their birth parents. My brothers were both adopted - one decided to seek out his birth parents and is in loose contact with them; the other never bothered. He's got one set of parents, and doesn't need two. Both brothers seem equally happy and well-adjusted.
I think your last paragraph is the only one that's really relevant. The rest of it, about how to make a marriage work, is only useful if we start with the assumption that marriage is a good thing and should be worked at. I know a divorced woman who still gets along with her ex who hates it when people refer to her failed marriage. Her marriage didn't fail, as far as she's concerned. It worked quite well for as long as they wanted it to, and then they moved on. A couple generations ago people got a job with a company and expected to work there their whole lives. Now, it's more common to move around more, to explore options and be mobile and try new things. When someone leaves a job, it's not because the job failed. There was just something better somewhere else. If people want to be married, I agree that they're probably going to have to work at it. But the OP was about people NOT wanting to be married.
I've actually never heard of anyone thinking divorce was a neutral thing. That's interesting. Well, new perspectives are always good! Why not to get married - well, I'd say if you're not sure in any way. I do think marriage should be forever - what's the point of marrying otherwise? I understand sometimes people make mistakes, sometimes the spouses in question give up, sometimes for whatever reason it just doesn't work out and a divorce is necessary and may be the better thing. But you marry with the intention of forever. Otherwise, why not just live together without all that official and legal faff? Your job analogy is a good one - it does give me some understanding of how some other people's thinking works. However, you do not make vows to your employer of staying together "for better for worse, in sickness or in health, till death do we part". (assuming you use the traditional vows, of course) I must say, I have no sense of "job loyalty" or whatever it's called. I'll freelance for as long as I can lol.
For the official and legal faff. Health insurance. Inheritance. Automatic legal parentage of any kids. Social security. Next of kin for health care and other legal matters. If you trust a person and share your life with them, why give up on all the safeguards that society provides just because you might someday change your mind?
My understanding is that that's the average life expectancy, not the median or usual one. If three people die at age one, and another dies at age fifty, that's an average life expectancy of 53/4=13. But that fifty year old still raised their kids to adulthood. Edited to add: OK, somebody probably already said this; I didn't realize how far back the post I was responding to was.
For the record, I was just joking about the life expectancy. I didn't think people would take it literally.
My views are as follows: - Human haven't evolved for lengthy, monogamous relationships; and love is merely lust that turns into familiarity. If people did not feel societal pressures to make a lasting commitment, spend the equivalent of a deposit on a house on some gratuitously showy wedding, and stay with someone even when that person makes them unhappy; then we would all probably feel far more contented.
I was about to reply to this as if it is a debate thread, when I just noticed it's just a setting question XD Oh well, another debate for another thread *hinthint* Anyway, like many others reiterated, marriage is not about true love or all that fanciful movie crap. It's really about many other factors--the social values, the moralistic values, one's viewpoint on the purpose and direction of life, desire for a family/legacy, etc. So, in a society which decides to do away with the institution of marriage, it would not only mean $3X RulZ B!@tCh but also that there is a paradigm shift in how people view their purpose and direction of life, their contribution to the next generation of their kind, and the overall socioeconomic structure. Also, as many others iterated, unless there is a communal approach to bringing up the children (like in lion prides or elephants), there is likely to be a lot of psychological trouble for the children, who might feel confused, detached and unloved.
You'll find the answer to your question in a book by Aldous Huxley, Brave New World. Strongly recommended. In the universe, marriage and any kind of deeper emotional bond is wiped out; if a person is having one sexual partner for an extended period of time, they are hold in contempt and scolded. Cheating is explicitly promoted. On the onset it sounds like a true Hippie-free love paradise but as you go deeper to the bottom of things, you realize such world would be one hell of a clusterfuck, literally. I sincerely hope I'll never live in such a world.
@Andrae Smith The Church has had a monopoly on sex for centuries, and it was not until just over a hundred years ago or so that we realized sex is 100% natural. The Church doesn't say it's unnatural. It says it has to be framed within borders - of marriage. That's what it says. and they would have many aunts and uncles and cousins to call "family." And no-one exclusively close to attach to. I'm sorry you disagree, but marriage itself has problems. People rush into it. The fact that people rush into it from often whimsical motives is but one and only problem I see in marriage. Immaturity. Unwillingness to fully understand, as you say, the nature of the contract, its impact, etc. Those factors need to be fully understood.
