Marriage, is it an outdated institution?

Makro- Congrats on your decade, I hope you have many more to come.

Did I say that? As a facilitator for this discussion, I would not like to delve far into my own opinion.

PS I am happily married by the way for almost a decade

In marriage, it seems to imply a binding for life without an exit clause but divorce. In previous times, now less common, cohabiting often referred to as 'living in sin'. The reason I mentioned the religous aspect is because marriage is an institution in most religions, moulded by customs and traditions dating throughout the ages. Why is it then, that when most calamities fall upon a nation, that nation goes into fear, and the rate of praying to God goes up? This subsequently also increases the people who feel who need to marry rather than cohabitat. Why do people fear marriage, or why do people fear committment ? And what of people who get up in the morning and decide thats it, is this possible in marriage?

Marriage is a legal contract, nothing more. It doesn't make your relationship more valid, it won't make you more committed and it doesn't guard against failure or disappointment. Divorce was only uncommon before because women were subjugated and did not have the option to get an education, get their own job or live their own life. They were pushed to get married early to find a man to take care of them. If anything went wrong, oh well, you're stuck. Only the flint women had the guts to call it quits and get out of a bad situation and stand on their own. And even before that, divorce never happened because marriage was originally instituted as a sale of women. That why there were arrangements and dowries. Women were sold for the betterment of their family and were intended to carry the bloodline of their husband, which is also why virginity was exalted because if a woman wasn't a virgin, you couldn't validate the paternity of the children. And also where the tradition of "giving the bride" comes from. The woman changed from the ownership of her father to the ownership of her husband. As for religion, not everyone is religious. Religion is not a requirement in life. And prayer goes up when the people who are religious but lazy, get scared when bad things happen. Which is also why people are more likely to get more religious in old age. Doesn't mean they were magically converted or that religion becomes more popular. These are all completely antiquated ideals that have no real place in the world anymore. As far as fear, neither have anything to do with the other. Just because someone doesn't want to or won't get married doesn't mean they're afraid of commitment. Plenty of people simply disagree with what the institution of marriage was based upon, has become, or what most people think it means. Of course you can decide it's over and walk out when you're married. People do it all the time. Why should you live your life unhappy, unsatisfied, or even miserable? No matter what anyone says, no one can tell the future. Things happen, things change, people change, you shouldn't be trapped because of it. Married or not, EVERYONE has the right to be happy. If that means breaking up, so what?

Very informative, thanks for that. Everyone has the right to have a peaceful and happy life equally men and women. But your arguments and centering around sexism, rather than marriage and you are applying degrading of women and their role in this institution to justify your stand. The institution of marriage gives far more rights to women than they do men. For example, courts settlements give in general half of the wealth from the marriage to the woman from the man. This on top of children support payments. This is assuming the tradition of men working and women at home. Except, when women do work, men are still required to pay half, and upkeep of the children is also a responsibility of the male financially. The man may work all his life and provide for his family, and suddenly the woman wants a divorce and she has built a good career. Who wins financially? But that aside, cohabiting, often entails to some extent common-law rights if you can prove living together for more than six months and alot of the assets go to the woman. So this is not an argument for women, but a marriage itself.

It is good to here from people sharing their experiences, and I thank you for that. But if you had guaranteed love and security for the rest of your life, (impossible I know)but if you did, would it change your mind? I think financially, you hit the nail on the head : its costly and messier. But would this not be an advocate for, rather than against, a contractual arrangemen?

Thank you for that respone, very passionate and some great points. You are obviously for marriage, and you argue your case well. Soul is a very deep word, and if all peoples would look as far as that, they would probably see the seriousness of the institution of marriage. This is why, in developed countries where faith is increasingly taking a backseat, this institution along with its values are not appreciated in their religous, or soul inspiring values, hence the compromise of the institution. That said, without moral value of 'living in sin' present, then people see cohabiting as less effort and cost effective just to be together.

A promise that is written in stone is supposed to be able to handle change- that is something you know going into a relationship such as marriage. But if I read what you are saying correctly- you don't think any marriage or relationship can survive based on this ever changing theory is that right? If so, your data concerning 51% should include relationships that aren't bound by marriage. Wouldn't you agree?

This is what happens when a society builds itself on telling lies and false promises because it has the freedom to get away with it, and a lack of inner fear.

The Ten Commandments (written in stone)have not, and will not change! This is something you Know walking into the Church. When walking down the isle you should also know that the promise you and your spouse are about to make is not worth the Paper its written on. Read my response again, and consider that Nothing can Possibly remain the same in a world of Constant and Continual Change. A promise demands that Nothing changes for a lifetime, whether it be a promissory note or a marriage contract. A relationship,on the other hand, is not based on a Promise, and both partners are free at any time to walk away. Life in the 21st century demands freedom. Gone are the days when religion hung around the neck like a millstone.

A bit like having their cake and eating it! Wouldn't you agree?

Makro- you make a very interesting point that is very thought provoking. I would say yes that a decline in faith has led to the decline in marriage and the increase in divorce. Great Point!!! Now I wish I could give you the best response.

here you are talking in respect of the religious aspect. If you have strong faith, usually people tend to marry rather than cohabit. I wonder whether the decline of faith has any correlation to the decline in marriages in the developed world?

why thank you, nice to hear kind words from time to time

Love is a great thing, isn't it? What about security? Interesting pick point in the 11th century though.

Yes but to some people that label provides security if things should go wrong. A sense of legal and moral responsibility is argued by others. But your right, it is just a piece of paper, and nowadays, the mortgage certificate seems to have more significance of committment than the marriage certificate.

Marriage doesn't manifest commitment. That's part of the relationship that should already be established. Getting married won't create it and not getting married doesn't mean you don't have it. And how does a child fulfill "emotional needs" from a legal contract? How do they even know the difference?

Thank you for the best response. I believe strongly in my marriage and think that my relationship with my husband is amazing. Sure we disagree at times but for us its all part of the package. For me there is no truer love than that of a man and woman standing before their friends, family, and God and saying- yep I choose him/ her for the rest of my life, no matter what. Thanks again.

I think you highlight the love point very well and the union of two people, and then distinguishing from cohabiting. Hence, you get the best response

Hi, I wonder if people crave for that zone you are in which is getting more scarce and idealistic and thus simply give in because they opt for the next best thing?

I think the fact that marriage still takes place today proves it isn't a failed anything. Good Luck to you.

Why?

@dncmanning mam,,if you are living together happily,,then it is because of love b/w you and your husband,,not because of the bond. most of the couples i see around me are living compromised lives. i love freedom and i dont want to take the risk of marriage. if two people love each other i dont know why would they set a bond,dont they have trust between them?????? i hate the rules of this society. thanks.