of rights, there is a constant stuggle for what each wants, which results in 2/3 divorces. Is there any chance of marriage recovering, for heterosexuals, I mean?
(Gays are still testing the waters in their marriages, and we have yet to see whether they will have better or worse marriages than heterosexuals.)
2007-09-22 07:52:47 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
if theres no ground rules that reinforce a strong family unit then no ... it wont recover .. if everyone wants to do the same things and its a competition for equality then it wont work ... the only people that it will work for are the ones getting rich off the taxes of both ...
2007-09-22 08:01:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 6⤋
The marriages that should survive will survive under equality.
If a marriage between two people is only still barely functioning because one person has more rights than another, then it was never a worthwhile relationship in the first place.
Besides, I don't think people get divorced because they assert their rights. They get divorced because marriage is not what they thought it would be. Feminism and the fight for equality have just given women more options for getting out of bad relationships. Whether couples are now too hasty about breaking up than they should be is their business.
2007-09-22 09:03:26 · answer #2 · answered by K 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As long as people remain ignorant about exactly how much work it takes to keep a relationship going, let alone a marriage, I would say "no." Besides, a recent survey conducted by one of our local news stations points out that this next generation is "wising up" about marriage. Many people are opting just to "live together" rather than taking the plunge right away. Some of them are choosing to have kids, raise families and not do the whole church-and-preacher thing at all. The church might put the "seal of approval" on a marriage, but you can't do that with love. And not all the "I do's" in the world will reinforce the marriage of two people, straight, gay or whatever, who weren't meant to be together in the first place.
2016-05-21 00:31:57 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
On the one hand, it is true: marriage is an institution based upon the notion of women as property to be handed over from fathers to husbands. As we know longer believe women are property, then marriage as such is obsolete.
However, many in long term relationships wish to commemorate their commitment through the ritual of marriage. All committed couples, irrespective of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc., should be entitled to celebrate their union by marriage.
What needs to change is our society's archaic notions of what marriage is and means. After all, "til death do us part" works best in societies where the average age of death is 40 or less. As populations live longer, this ridiculous concept of the "lifelong partnership" breaks down simply because it is very rare to find someone who is well suited to you at 25 who is still completely compatible with you by the time you are 65. The reality is that we change and the person we are at the time we married is not the person we are twenty, thirty, or more years later. It is not a failure then that people, having sustained a relationship for some time, find the relationship no longer meets their needs and thus, they need to find someone new. We need to think clearly of marriage and free it from the "romantic delusions" and arbitrary religious dogma that so typically cloud any discussion as to the validity of this institution and how it is changing in modern society.
2007-09-24 07:54:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
do you really think that womens rights is why divorce is a problem?
really?
if you do, imo... thats sick. in my view, anyway, if you think that womens lack of rights before, is a positive reason why marriges lasted longer, then you have a disgusting, sick view of what marriage should be and is.
my parents have been married for almost 30 years, (i'm the oldest, and they had been married several years before I was born) they have been faithful to eachother, and love eachother, ... still... still living together, and everything.
too many people marry "nowadays" for the wrong reasons. too many people don't let themselves get to know eachother before marrying.
"staying married for the kids" is a horrible concept and should never be promoted. the kids can tell if their parents are miserable and it just screws up everything.
>>"Love is not forever...if marriage was all about love, all marriages would end in divorce."<<
I agree that marriage isn't all about love. but Love CAN be forever. but it isn't something that happens and maintains itself on its own. its a relationship
as they say, don't marry someone you can live with. marry someone you can't live without.
but on the other hand, I've heard of arranged marriages that lasted for lifetimes, even after the woman could have left if she wanted.
2007-09-22 08:14:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe that many marriages end in divorce due to the strain over the pressure from external financial problems, not because women want equal rights. I would suggest that a more sound economic policy in this country, and greater financial security for all Americans would see a smaller divorce rate. Also, I would have to say that so many people these days are narcissists, that dealing with someone else fairly in a relationship has become all but impossible.
2007-09-22 08:04:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities.
2007-09-22 09:30:16 · answer #7 · answered by Isolde 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The commitment supposedly represented by a marriage is not outmoded, but actually being committed apparently is.
2007-09-22 08:06:01 · answer #8 · answered by Champion of Knowledge 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only reason that marriage survived then, was because the women were looked down upon and had no place to go. They couldn't afford to live and take care of children, so they stayed. My grandmother told me that she would have left my grandfather in the 50's. So, for the reasons that I just described, she stayed.
2007-09-22 08:01:37 · answer #9 · answered by Blue girl in a red state 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Do you want to suppress the little equality we have, so that marriages will last forever? My god, what kind of reasoning is this? We could also burn books, go back to caves...'come on!
2007-09-22 08:01:12 · answer #10 · answered by remy 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
marriage "survived" in those days because women were trapped in their marriage becauase of societal pressures, and because they couldn't leave if they wanted to- women didn't work in those days so they were financially dependent on their husbands. Women were forced to stay in marriages to men they didn't love, or that beat them.
2007-09-22 08:02:36 · answer #11 · answered by lindsey p 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋