Its seems like now a days there are more divorces than succesful marriages. Out of those "successful" marriages only a few give the participators what they need. we are social animals how can we keep together without the word married. is it possible?
2007-02-21 08:57:17 · 12 answers · asked by alrRGV 1 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
I don't believe marriage was meant to be "redefined". Humans have a way of changing things to fit our own wants, and over time, people have done that with the marriage arrangement. That doesn't make it right, though. Marriage was meant to last; not to end for the silly reasons that most people end it.
2007-02-21 09:01:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your premise of the nature of marriage is too contemporary. Marriage is not a civil statute that legitimates a co-habitive living arrangement. It is much older. Marriage is an institution that blends procreation and religion. A couple's union to create a family that will continue the worship of the Godhead. Today it is evident in Christianity as marriage is considered a sacrament.
Civil Authorities started recognizing marriages when they needed the Church to legitimized their rule (Middle Ages Europe). Today with governments separate from any specific religious sect, marriages are recognized by civil statute. In the last two decades, there has been pressure to amend the traditional civil statutes on marriage, to afford cultural benefits that married couples had enjoyed to everyone. Hence, it is re-defining the institution of marriage to include all co-habitive relationships. This will recognize "homosexual marriage", but in time be forced to include polyamory marriage (bigamy, just for starters). "Civil Unions" is a term introduced as to avoid the re-definition.
If you are judging the "success" of marriage by the questions and response on this site, you are using the wrong benchmark. Remember that this site is call Marriage and DIVORCE.
2007-02-21 09:14:49 · answer #2 · answered by zax_fl 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Define Antiquated
2016-10-04 02:15:18 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I still think marriage is necessary. One of the reason marriage has become so laxed is because it is easier in today's society to get divorced then in was in previous generations. Years ago, it was taboo to get divorced. Women were not as educated or welcomed in the work world; therefore, many women stayed with their husbands b/c they had no other choices.
I think are society is changing and I don't think it's a bad thing. Sometimes divorce is necessary and women, as well as men, have the right to be happy in their lives. Toxic marriages lead to toxic individuals.
With that said, I think marriage is still sacred and for the few couples that do stay together, it is well worth it.
2007-02-21 09:03:22 · answer #4 · answered by Answer Girl 2007 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Marriage is antiquated in the sense that it is an institution restricted to the straight and the bi fortunate enough to have found a hetero relationship. Personally, I feel that the ties of family go far beyond blood; as the book Illusions by richard bach states simply, "Your true family will know you better in 5 minutes than your friends will in a lifetime." Hope that all makes sense and is pertinent.
2007-02-21 09:01:56 · answer #5 · answered by Jorell 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our big problems over marriage are all about our little confusions between how we think a marriage ought to be defined and how the law actually defines it.
I suggest that you'd be better off to know what you're getting into before you get into it. If you write your own 'marriage' contract you'll be better prepared to agree with your future mate on a few essential and shared intentions which are both achievable and realistically palatable.
If you want monogamous sex and romance only... put it in writing. If you want to share property .... say so and say how. If you'd like an automatically renewable contract or a predetermined annual termination date, (an escape clause), add that right in there, too.
Going to visit a lawyer to say "I won't..." before heading off to the judge to say "I will..." could be the best favor you'll ever do for your proposed future (or even your for your current lawfully-wedded security plans) of having a 'happily-ever-after" marriage.
It's on my drawing board anyhow, but of course, it's only there for collecting dust until I decide on a really good reason to look for a future marriage partner.
[][][] r u randy? [][][]
.
2007-02-21 10:25:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
From the book "Living Free In An Un-Free world" the author makes a lot of sense. He says "you can get married to each other, you can get married with your friends and family around you, you can get married in the eyes of God, but when you get married legally through the State, it is only set up for the fact that you may divorce, this allows them to have a say in who gets what and how custody of yur children is settled.
Do you know why in the state of California it takes six months to finalize a divorce? Incase of reconcilliation, so why doen't it take six months to get a marriage license?????
2007-02-21 09:11:40 · answer #7 · answered by j2juli 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's possible, but you need to remember that a lot of marriages that are now resulting in divorces would have, in prior years, be held together by religious edict. And no one would have been happy. Is that better?
2007-02-21 09:00:37 · answer #8 · answered by tony1athome 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wow - another questioner of the "institution". Love it, love it, love it!
Marriage is indeed antiquated - but alas I believe here to stay. Our culture heavily promotes it - the media, our churches, our govt., our parents, our friends etc.
How would you go about starting a movement to change it?
2007-02-21 09:19:23 · answer #9 · answered by Ker Plunk 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Society, makes it's own changes on that point. It's always been up to the individual, on what terms a marriage, anyway.
2007-02-21 09:00:36 · answer #10 · answered by Goggles 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋