Marriage is an outdated instituion. What do you think about this?

I don't think that the instituion of marriage is out of date. I just thank that the way people think is. I believe that marriage should be a commited loving relationship between two people. Dose not matter if it is a man and woman, man and man, woman and woman. I don't thank that someone whould be banned from marriage because of who they are with or what goes on behind closed doors.

I still believe in Marriage. For me it is still very essential in the longetivity of a relationship. just think about your future children and the family you'll build? It is more of a selfless act rather than a selfish one.

Well i respect your view but i did get married i loved my hubby but it was more the thing to do then and my parents would have gone ape if i had lived with him and my dad wanted his little girl doing the fairytale wedding lol What i really wanted was just to share my life with someone i loved and who loved me i didn't need the piece of paper but i got it, i haven't regretted marrying him thou, if i had to do the marrying bit again thou it would be more my way just the 2 of us somewhere beautiful without all the relations who i never knew existed.

I am not yet married, but am patiently waiting to be joined in the holy institution of matrimony. I lived with a man once, for nine years and I have no attention of ever doing that again. I feel like those were wasted years at best. Without marriage, there can be no real definition of family, without family, there is no security, and without security, there is no safety, and without safety, how can we ever remain or become united? We can't. Marriage is the center of it all.

I have done both. I lived together with my partner for 5 years and then we got married, but I remember thinking "why bother" at the time. But we did it and 6 years later split up -but I don't think it was because I felt in any way trapped or anything, we just sort of drifted apart. I then met somebody else, lived together for a year and then married, and we have stayed married for the last 20 years. We both feel contented and have the space to be our own person. I see it as a state of mind. As you say, it's only a piece of paper, which is true, but there again, as a therapist I have realised that when a ritual is created (religious ceremony) is has an effect at a subconscious level. To some people, this will mean commitment, to other it could mean entrapment and something to "escape" from. So at the end of the day, if you do what feels right to you, then it will work accordingingly. :-)

Hi Rosie I am very new here but your discussion is really a nice way to start me in here:) Like yourself I am living together with my partner for many years and we do not intend to marry, even though the idea has crossed our mind we chose not to do it. Not only the excessive cost of marriages but the fact that we don't have children - so who needs it anyway? We do have 6 cats however :) And we are living in The Netherlands, so I have to agree that in Europe the old ways are dying, and many of the old prohibitions and lifestyles too - & thanks God for that.

In this day and age I certainly agree with you, what's a marriage? Just a piece of paper, nope, correction, two pieces of paper one's the marriage licence the other is a credit card statement going into thousands! Marriages cost a fortune and why go all through that, if you love one another then what different does a bit of paper matter? Love is all that matters not a day for getting into serious debt, the prices for weddings now, OUCH! You need a mortgage for one nowadays!

While I don't think that marriage itsself is outdated, I do believe that there are some traditions that are. I think the custom of the bride taking her husband's name is outdated. The bride is not the groom's property, and I think she deserves to have her own name. I think the children should have the mother's name, since she is the one who carried them and gave birth to them.

I am the same as you. I have been with my partner for nearly 19 years, have 2 children and am as fully committed to my relationship as if I were married. I personally feel there is a stronger united bond between us because a ring or piece of paper does not hold me to my partner. Old traditionalists can see marriage as a way of controlling a woman and I have heard of many couples, after living together for many years, get married and then only last a year together. I for one do not want to risk that. Marriage basically comes down to a religious or tax commitment. Although I am sure partners are beginning to have more rights, plese fill me in if I am wrong. I have been to weddings and for a little while I get all emotional and want to get married myself. However, after the honeymoon period, what is the difference, as I would not take my partners surname, even though our kids have. Luckily in the UK it is acceptable now to have kids out of wedlock and women's rights have come a long way. Personally I do not see it as a bad thing as years ago many women were stuck in marriages they hated but had no rights to leave. The few will tar it for the majority, but as you say, if you are committed to someone, a ring or a marriage certificate is not going to make any difference. The only difference is that we do not have to go through a messy and expensive divorce like so many do today.

I think it is totally up to the individuals in the relationship, and not up to "society's" views, whatever those are. As long as the two people have an agreement and it works for them, then that is great. I'm so over people like from my mom's generation, who judge people for living together without the institution of marriage, and say things like "oh, they had that child out of wedlock". Puh-leeese! That is so dated and lame. I commend you for taking a stand and doing things the way they fee right for you!

well here in the US- people are getting married at an older age and opting to not have children. Take me for example I didn't get married till I was 35 and the only reason we did it was for our parents- we had been together 17 prior to our getting married 8 years ago- we rushed to do it becuase my father and his father were both in the hospital extremely ill, my father didn't make it but his father was able to be there, I was glad we did it- our parents were so happy- my husband said my dad's face lit up when he went to see my dad to show him the ring and ask his permission to marry me..in a way I am sorry we waited so long - if i hadn't then my dad would have been there. There isn't much difference between living together and being married - although I do hear a lot of people saying that the piece of paper has changed their spouse, I suppose in some ways it has changed Darren and I but it must have been for the better cause we don't argue any more then we did before....LOL...maybe less then we did before... who knows- it depends on what you as a couple are more comfortable with, whatever makes the both of you happy is all that matters- cause those people who always have something to say are not the ones you have to live with!!!!!

You have said it all well and I totally agree with you. I don't understand the essence of getting married nowadays either. Marriage is not for everyone and only a handful were able to have their marriage stay intact for decades. It's all about loving, honesty, trust, accepting the flaws and weaknesses of each other that truly makes a relationship work. Some society may still frowned upon the live-in couples. It all lies in the couple's decision whether to go through a piece of paper or not.

Hi, Rosie! I think marriage as a secular institution is about as relevent as primogeniture - it's a carryover from an outmoded way of thinking. In the US, it is also doomed. Sooner or later, the morons who are pushing for gay marriage bans will force the Supreme Court to find that the rules for an institution that confers civil benefits under the law cannot be defined by religious strictures, when such definitions deny those rights to legal, competent adult citizens arbitrarily. In the end, there is no other way to interpret the Constitution on this matter. Then EVERYONE will have civil unions, and marriage will be a ritual of the church. Frankly, that's how it should be, if you ask me. Just because the country was founded by Christians, it doesn't give them the right to prevent me from seeking to pursue life, liberty and happiness because I won't do it their way. I was surprised at the statistics from the UK. Several friends have made reference to the largely secular nature of British society today, I just didn't realise the extent. Well, if you Brits can put God back in Heaven (where he belongs!) without the government collapsing or being taken over by Satan, why in the world can't we? Sorry I got a tad political, I just can't help it, sometimes....! Memo to all defenders of marriage: if you want to protect marriage, attack divorce! I'm not hurting it! Leave me alone! OK, I'll shut up and go back to my rocker now.

I agree that marriage is an outdated institution. especially given its history of women and children as property. That doesn't mean people can't or don't have relationships with commitment and respect if they aren't married. I much prefer the concept of some kind of agreement between partners who chose to raise children, that they will abide by the best interests of the children and that means conducting themselves in civil discourse and respect with their children's other parent.

Heres my view : did it once It was a huge mistake that changed my life forever and thank god I learn from my mistakes !! I will never do that againmarrage used to be a promise to love charish forever now its something yyou do when you get bored then you divorce cause that bores you too

I agree that marriages are getting weaker and weaker nowadays. But that being the trend doesn't mean it's a good thing. I still believe that good, loving families are the basic foundation of a harmonious society. I still believe in marriage.

Believe it or not marriage was never a "big" thing with me...I'm not married, nor at the moment have a parnter,....yet...but I see nothing wrong with two people living together with the benefit of a marriage certificate--sometimes those relationships can be just as long lasting as people who ARE married...maybe longer...Look at your relationship...how many people who are married stay together nowadays for so long...not many...in fact, most married couples usually divorce within the first five years!

I guess I was raised old-fashioned. I got married and have been married for 22 years. I guess it just depends on the couple. I was no angel when I was younger. I was not a virgin when we married. I already had a child, in fact. It just seemed like something drew us together. And from our experiences, it seems I've found my soulmate.

Agree to 100%. Mariage was institution created for survival of old society. Still has some value in some parts of world. but for most of the economically advanced countries its of no importance as women has become economically independent. Marriage has been given unduly importance as Religion groups survives on existence of marriage as institution. Two independent minds staying together in living relationship is better choice than legally bound marriage. Ofcourse marriage are sometimes useful in forcing individuals to accomodate each other for sake of their children. Point of argument there would be whether one should sacrifice their life for someone else, especially their children. i suppose most of the parents mya agree to some amount of leniancy for better upbrining of their children.

hmmn..gud article..nevertheless i still believe marriage is essential to long term stabiliy..more oftehn that not mariiage is that binding factor which keeps relations togther..more than ny other thing..so me totally in favour of marraiges.!!