Is Marriage an Outdated concept?

I am supposed to be studying but that Spanish grade will stay the same no matter what, so you lot will have to deal with my thoughts.

Well is it?

We all know the statistics on divorce and unhappiness, we all have anecdotal evidence of our own folks (mine were much better enemies than friends :laugh4:) We all know the western version of marriage is certainly not inate to humanity.

So one may ask why continue the charade?

Now certainly I understand why. I much prefer a relationship to random sex partners. I love the way my heart beats when I hold a pretty girls hand, I love the feeling I get when I share things with someone I like rather than just getting drunk, throwing it in, and running for the penicilin the next morning.

But that doesn't mean I could spend 50 years with that person.

Of course marriage is work and its never perfect but it just seems it may not be WORTH all that trouble these days.

Of course once kids get involved the :daisy: hits the fan. Staying together for the kids is a modern day proverb

No, marriage isn't an outdated concept. Outdated conceptions of marriage are outdated.

Doing things that aren't innate to humanity is innate to humanity.

People shouldn't have kids before they really know what they want in life (might turn out to be different than partner's) and shouldn't have a lavish ceremony with a very expensive ring. Those parts are outdated.

Quote:

---

81% of college graduates, over 26 years of age, who wed in the 1980s, were still married 20 years later. 65% of college graduates under 26 who married in the 1980s, were still married 20 years later. 49% of high school graduates under 26 years old who married in the 1980s, were still married 20 years later.

---

80% success simply by being a college grad and over 26, which is like bare minimum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

I am supposed to be studying but that Spanish grade will stay the same no matter what, so you lot will have to deal with my thoughts.

Well is it?

We all know the statistics on divorce and unhappiness, we all have anecdotal evidence of our own folks (mine were much better enemies than friends :laugh4:) We all know the western version of marriage is certainly not inate to humanity.

So one may ask why continue the charade?

Now certainly I understand why. I much prefer a relationship to random sex partners. I love the way my heart beats when I hold a pretty girls hand, I love the feeling I get when I share things with someone I like rather than just getting drunk, throwing it in, and running for the penicilin the next morning.

But that doesn't mean I could spend 50 years with that person.

Of course marriage is work and its never perfect but it just seems it may not be WORTH all that trouble these days.

Of course once kids get involved the :daisy: hits the fan. Staying together for the kids is a modern day proverb

---

Actually, no, it is not a modern thing. Marriage is designed to protect women, but esp. the children. Marriage is about families, is about children.
The whole point of marriage is to provide a stable, loving environment for children to grow in. The problem with families today has nothing at all to do with the institution of marriage. The problem is with people. People nowadays are lousy, selfish, untrue, unhonorable, scared, pathetic, lazy pieces of garbage who only care about themselves and are not willing to make the sacrafices needed and to put the time into a family. Those problems would only be worse without marriage.
People need to be reformed, not the institution. (likewise I would advocate that people need to be destroyed, not the institution. ~;))

Monogamous marriage is a feature of history's most virtuous societies.

I am maybe a bit idealistic with this and have no RL experience, but this is the internet so YOU WILL HEAR MY OPINION.

Marriage as a legal entity is completely outdated, yes.

The state has no business interfering with how I choose to live my personal life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Marriage as a legal entity is completely outdated, yes.

The state has no business interfering with how I choose to live my personal life.

---

I think the idea is more that it gives an incentive for people to marry, because of the supposed social benefits of the institution.

Would you get angry at the state interfering with your life if it encouraged you to further your education by supporting your tuition fees?

I was a believer in marriage. I think I still would be again in the future.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

I think the idea is more that it gives an incentive for people to marry, because of the supposed social benefits of the institution.

Would you get angry at the state interfering with your life if it encouraged you to further your education by supporting your tuition fees?

---

If the state said I had to get one particular education; yes I would.

Being tied to one person for the rest of your life is very limiting, in my opinion. In my experience marriages have a few good years in them before acrimony, estrangement, cheating, and 'staying together for the kids' takes hold.

It was certainly different back in the day when you actually needed someone there with you on the farm in case you got sick, when you needed kids to keep the place functional, and when living past 50 was pure luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

If the state said I had to get one particular education; yes I would.

---

So if there was a particular demand for doctors, and they introduced more schemes to get people on programmes to train to become doctors, you would reject to this great intrusion into your personal life? It's the exact same thing with marriage...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

So if there was a particular demand for doctors, and they introduced more schemes to get people on programmes to train to become doctors, you would reject to this great intrusion into your personal life? It's the exact same thing with marriage...

---

Yes, I understand your reasoning, and that is why I said it's an outdated thing as opposed to just plain wrong.

A special programme to promote doctors is OK, when we are in need of doctors. If we are not, then it is not OK. And we no longer have a need for just man-woman relationships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Yes, I understand your reasoning, and that is why I said it's an outdated thing as opposed to just plain wrong.

A special programme to promote doctors is OK, when we are in need of doctors. If we are not, then it is not OK. And we no longer have a need for just man-woman relationships.

---

Well your initial justification for your opposition to marriage, was that "The state has no business interfering with how I choose to live my personal life"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Well your initial justification for your opposition to marriage, was that "The state has no business interfering with how I choose to live my personal life"...

---

No, my inital statement was that is an outdated concept ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

Actually, no, it is not a modern thing. Marriage is designed to protect women, but esp. the children. Marriage is about families, is about children.
The whole point of marriage is to provide a stable, loving environment for children to grow in. The problem with families today has nothing at all to do with the institution of marriage. The problem is with people. People nowadays are lousy, selfish, untrue, unhonorable, scared, pathetic, lazy pieces of garbage who only care about themselves and are not willing to make the sacrafices needed and to put the time into a family. Those problems would only be worse without marriage.
People need to be reformed, not the institution. (likewise I would advocate that people need to be destroyed, not the institution. ~;))

---

If it soley to have kids then..... guess I'm out. :laugh4:


I hate the thought if I marry a very pretty girl that in 50 years she will be just as ugly as me.... I want to be like Hugh Hefner!

I think marriage is outdated I think it should be scrapped as a legal concept completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

People shouldn't have kids before they really know what they want in life

---

Nature is cruel our world tells women to follow this advice Sasaki but she is likely going to be incapable of bearing children by then.

The truth is women should have there kids early but our society has given up on the lifestyle that allowed this to work.

A perfect situation will never occur.

Thus we should aim to make the best of what we get.

Man I tell that guy I want to wait a bit before we get wed and he runs crying all over the internets with some existential crisis about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

No, my inital statement was that is an outdated concept ~;)

---

It was part and parcel of your original statement, no weasling out this time!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

I think marriage is outdated I think it should be scrapped as a legal concept completely.

---

I agree with the bit about the legal issue, it was only ever made a legal issue in the mid-17th century. It was a practical move to make then, it also had a lot of value with the nuclear family as the basic social unit for much of the twentieth century. Less so now, but I still think it is of some value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Nature is cruel our world tells women to follow this advice Sasaki but she is likely going to be incapable of bearing children by then.

The truth is women should have there kids early but our society has given up on the lifestyle that allowed this to work.

---

A problem that is only going to get worse with a new generation brainwashed into thinking that "education--->career---->nice retirement--->grave" is the way to go about life.

I actually think all these latter middle-aged women having kids is more of a social problem than people having them when they are young (within reason of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Man I tell that guy I want to wait a bit before we get wed and he runs crying all over the internets with some existential crisis about it.

---

You're going after Strike?

Does that mean his sis is now fair game??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

It was part and parcel of your original statement, no weasling out this time!

---

Most certainly not! It was a follow-up statement, given that my first statement was true! ~;)

And weasling out of stuff is a proud tradition of mine, are you trying to make me deny my heritage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Most certainly not! It was a follow-up statement, given that my first statement was true! ~;)

---

Au contraire, your point about rights/your personal life was not contingent on your point about marriage being outdated.

Gah! You are going to make me turn into another Sasaki! Much as his contributions are important, one in the forum is enough! Already we're debating about how we are debating and not what we were meant to be debating about!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

I actually think all these latter middle-aged women having kids is more of a social problem than people having them when they are young (within reason of course).

---

There is often a nagging feeling of consumerism gone mad in the back of my head when I watch tv programmes on IVF and the like.

We should have supports for child rearing at a younger age so the women can return to the workforce or education later on, part of the problem seems to be the endless waiting for things to be perfect.

Yeah. I don't understand why these career focused psycho-women go on TV complaining about people giving birth in their late teens/early twenties, when it is a completely healthy time to have a child. Doing it to live off benefits is bad but they are not all like that. It ties in with what I'm saying in the education thread, for some reason now everyone has to have a career and put their children second.

And then these same women go on to have children at 45 when there is a much greater risk of complications with the pregnancy, not to mention the fact that they will quite likely be dead/incapacitated before they are grandparents. It's not even fair to their families. Doing the best for the child my ass, they just want to do their own thing in life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Yeah. I don't understand why these career focused psycho-women go on TV complaining about people giving birth in their late teens/early twenties, when it is a completely healthy time to have a child. Doing it to live off benefits is bad but they are not all like that. It ties in with what I'm saying in the education thread, for some reason now everyone has to have a career and put their children second.

And then these same women go on to have children at 45 when there is a much greater risk of complications with the pregnancy, not to mention the fact that they will quite likely be dead/incapacitated before they are grandparents. It's not even fair to their families. Doing the best for the child my ass, they just want to do their own thing in life.

---

My granny was married at 19 to my grandfather and then went on to have 7 kids and that would have been seen as a medium sized family.

The career focused psycho-women are a joke compared to her life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

My granny was married at 19 to my grandfather and then went on to have 7 kids and that would have been seen as a medium sized family.

The career focused psycho-women are a joke compared to her life.

---

Yep, those psycho-women are really just a product of their times. It's like with drug addicts, its the way they were raised. In the case of the psycho-women we're told to think it is good and liberating, but is it really?

heh, my Grandmother on my mothers side of the family had 10 sisters and 1 brother (living in Belfast at the time).

There should be no state intervention in marriage. No tax breaks for married couples, and all that other nonsense either.

It should be about love and relationships, between two people. If they want to have a service or a commitment, they can go ahead. If they are homosexual and the church they are marrying in allows homosexual marriage, they can go in. "Marriage" is up to the people involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

between two people

---

Why limit it to two?

If three people want to live together in a relationship, shouldn't they?

Typical example is two. As there is no legal involvement, there could be more as bigamy would not be a crime. However, there would not be happy church folk if you disregard their practices and did a christian wedding.

Outdated? No. But, like anything, marriage isn't for everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Doing things that aren't innate to humanity is innate to humanity.

---

This about sums it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Typical example is two. As there is no legal involvement, there could be more as bigamy would not be a crime. However, there would not be happy church folk if you disregard their practices and did a christian wedding.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

There should be no state intervention in marriage. No tax breaks for married couples, and all that other nonsense either.

It should be about love and relationships, between two people. If they want to have a service or a commitment, they can go ahead. If they are homosexual and the church they are marrying in allows homosexual marriage, they can go in. "Marriage" is up to the people involved.

---

"Typical example is two" is for one reason: children have two parents.

Marriage is a social institution all about children. It's about a stable environment for raising your progeny and protecting them.

All this guff about homosexuals and "straight" couples wanting to have their choice of "marriage" or "civil partnership is complete rubbish.

Two men together will never be married in the same way as a man and a woman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

"Typical example is two" is for one reason: children have two parents.

---

In your fantasy world, yes.

In the real world, human children have been raised by the extended family for milennia.