|
| Thread: Questions about marriage? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV |
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
posted February 21, 2013 01:20 AM |
|
|
As requested in the feedback thread, I have deleted off-topic posts. As a reminder, this is not a thread about the history of religion, the evils of atheism, or evolutionary theory. The topic is marriage. I understand that religion will necessarily become part of the discussion, but whole diatribes about how atheists are baby killers or whether monothesism predated polytheism does not belong here unless it is directly linked to the topic of marriage. I will delete further off-topic posts without warning and punish repeat offenders with impunity.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2013 03:11 PM |
|
|
|
marriage work for a few people. what is stupid is that everyone wants to marry. maybe because of the advantages? maybe they think they have to, because everyone else does it? and I guess that's even worse with religious people, with their dogmas probably leaving them no choice.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2013 03:36 PM |
|
|
See it that way, that marriage is a way to organize responsibility for its not so "able" members. The only alternative is a society without family ties where it doesn't matter who is the mother or father of a child - which actually means that the whole tribe/society is one big family.
Marriage is establishing the legal family ties in combination with responsibility, not only with a look to children but also with a look to the old people.
Today, with dna testing and all, this sin't strictly necessary anymore, since a mother can always name a father and society can always prove fathership, still, there is nothing wrong with commitment.
I DO think, though, that our society should now be prepared to accept other forms of "family"; gay marriage (with the right to adopt children for men or to have artificial insemination with women) is just the start. People should have the right to legally organize themselves into all desired kinds of entities - with all rights and obligations, and this would include obviously not only polygamy but also marriage of pairs.
I'm quite sure, that we will see that in not so long a time, probably first in Scandinavia.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 21, 2013 03:37 PM |
|
|
Is a pity such threads are discussed mostly by the unappropriated age group. I see either 20' talking about what they have no clue yet, or fred's type, using such violence in words that I can only suppose he got frustrated in relationships.
Marriage is not stupid, if you think it is, go ahead, talk to your pet, become grouchy, die alone, leave your money to the state and accept that your name will vanish along with you. Marriage is an almost essential experience to live and apprehend, not a concept to bash in few words. It is between you and another person and it feeds itself from all that makes us humans, tolerance, love, thrust and conservation instinct. It does not always work and by this becomes an primordial challenge: when it works, you know you can define happiness.
Call me grumpy now, but had to be said 
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted February 21, 2013 04:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
marriage work for a few people. what is stupid is that everyone wants to marry. maybe because of the advantages? maybe they think they have to, because everyone else does it? and I guess that's even worse with religious people, with their dogmas probably leaving them no choice.
Nah, religious people don't have to marry. I guess you've never heard of nuns. Some people chose to remain single so they can more fully dedicate their lives to the service of Christ. And there are religious people who chose to remain single for other reasons.
People marry because they chose to marry. People chose to marry for various reasons. Hopefully they love the other person and want to spend the rest of their lives with that person.
Quote:
See it that way, that marriage is a way to organize responsibility for its not so "able" members. The only alternative is a society without family ties where it doesn't matter who is the mother or father of a child - which actually means that the whole tribe/society is one big family.
Marriage is establishing the legal family ties in combination with responsibility, not only with a look to children but also with a look to the old people.
Today, with dna testing and all, this sin't strictly necessary anymore, since a mother can always name a father and society can always prove fathership, still, there is nothing wrong with commitment.
Heh, I certainly don't share your viewpoint of marriage.
I know when I asked my wife to marry me I did not say, "Hey woman it is time for you to give me some kids and to make sure I won't be a deadbeat dad you'd better get me in a legal contract." Somehow I just don't picture that as a proposal she would have accepted.
Yeah, society can't really be a mommy or a daddy so there is no good "alternative" to marriage, even discounting the religious aspect that makes a real marriage. It takes an actual individual to fill the role of a parent. Man + Woman in Marriage is the best place for a kid to be raised. Kids need both a mommy and a daddy and need to feel like mommy and daddy love each other and their children. Marriage is vital for family.
Quote:
I DO think, though, that our society should now be prepared to accept other forms of "family"; gay marriage (with the right to adopt children for men or to have artificial insemination with women) is just the start. People should have the right to legally organize themselves into all desired kinds of entities - with all rights and obligations, and this would include obviously not only polygamy but also marriage of pairs.
Well, of course I don't marriage should be redefined to suit certain small special interest groups. Marriage has a particular meaning. No, I'm not ready to accept man + woman + horse + dog as a marriage. Maybe new words should be used to designate new types of relationships rather than trying to cram all relationships into the word "marriage."
____________
Revelation
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2013 04:57 PM |
|
|
Elodin, you miss the point. There are basically two kinds of "marriage": one is a PERSONAL form or bonding; whether that is in compliance with the rules and teachings of a religion, whether it's simply a kind of declaration of love, and whether it's been a between a man and a woman, or more or different combinations of person doesn't matter: it's a completely personal thing, which also means, it's as personal as you want it to be, and you can call as many witnesses to it as you like or want, including any number of gods.
However, the other form of "marriage" is one that must be a legal obligation valid for the whole of the society and independent from any kind of personal beliefs or rites that put things on an equal footing for everyone in a specific society.
On the first kind of marriage, Christianity has no exclusive monopoly. Every culture and religion has their own rites and it makes no sense to give them a different name when they are essentially the same thing.
The second kind of marriage has to be independent from everything.
So it might be correct to call the second type a "civil union" - the open commitment to an obligation with the whole of society as a witness -, while the first type can be called whatever people want to call it, because it's a personal thing.
|
|
fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2013 05:08 PM |
|
Edited by fauch at 19:22, 21 Feb 2013.
|
Quote:
I DO think, though, that our society should now be prepared to accept other forms of "family"; gay marriage (with the right to adopt children for men or to have artificial insemination with women) is just the start. People should have the right to legally organize themselves into all desired kinds of entities - with all rights and obligations, and this would include obviously not only polygamy but also marriage of pairs.
yeah, I think that makes more sense
Quote:
Is a pity such threads are discussed mostly by the unappropriated age group.
but that age group is the one who is going to get married next, so I suppose it's better to ask yourself some questions instead of doing it without thinking.
Quote:
Marriage is an almost essential experience to live and apprehend, not a concept to bash in few words. It is between you and another person and it feeds itself from all that makes us humans, tolerance, love, thrust and conservation instinct. It does not always work and by this becomes an primordial challenge: when it works, you know you can define happiness.
I think you are talking about the relationship and not marriage.
Quote:
No, I'm not ready to accept man + woman + horse + dog as a marriage
can you marry animals if they can't give their consent?
|
|
fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2013 02:24 AM |
|
|
|
I was thinking of a link with work (more exactly with time). with all the time we spend working, we have little time left for friends and family, especially if we want to keep a bit of time for ourselves. so forming a couple would be a way to ensure you can form a strong emotional bond with someone?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2013 09:47 AM |
|
|
I suppose, Fauch just wants to say that being organized as a couple is a time-saver when it comes to developing deeper relationships with a view on time being limited for example by work.
On the other hand, being organized in a couple means, there are certain expectations concerning the quality of a relationship as well which may develop into a serious problem, when work is getting in the way.
My opinion here is, that if a person has a demanding, interesting job, that may even dictate frequent business travels, a conventional marriage with a wife and two kids at home makes no sense at all. What you need, is a partner that you can work with and share the business travels and so on, otherwise you cannot meet the expectations of such a relationship, and the relationship is doomed.
|
|
fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2013 03:21 PM |
|
|
what I was thinking is that it's not always easy to meet with friends and family because of lack of time (most of the time, work seems to be the reason)
on the other hand, being married ensures that someone is waiting you at home, so you normally spend more time with her/him.
in another hand, if we had more time to form meaningful relationships with friends and family, would it be that important to find a love partner?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 25, 2013 05:41 PM |
|
|
Quote:
ah, but then you get on the other end of the "bad" spectrum. if they are together all the time, they will see every little thing they dislike about that person. what was once a mystery, will be quickly solved, and interest in each other will wane. they will start to get on each other's nerves, and, not having a break from each other, the relationship will fail. not only that, but both of their jobs might take a hit as well, being that they could no longer work together. who would want to work with their ex? not to mention the nit-picking people do over each other's shoulder. that would be really intensified being that they are in a relationship, and are supposedly able to "meet each other in the middle". so you are doomed either way. like i said, marriage is the devil. casual flings are much more healthy for your system, as long as you strap up, both to protect from std's, and to prevent more kids.
That sounds as if you would try to sell a thought of yours as fact.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 26, 2013 09:04 AM |
|
|
That sounds as if you would try to sell a not-thought of yours as equally impeccable as the theory of evolution, additionally offending everyone who's not buying.
Consider yourself ignored.
|
| |
|
|
