[maquiscat]

That's fine with me...as long as @maquiscat agrees with me!!

I'll agree that there are a lot of factors that are simply not tracked. It's not like we track who live together and break up without marriage, like we do marriage and divorce. So honestly she has no way to support her claim.

 

[maquiscat]

Where did I say they left because they have nothing better to do? Please don't put words into my mouth.
People have no staying power or perseverance. They will leave because they are bored. Or they want to 'find themselves'. Or because they want to date others. Usually very selfish reasons.

Pretty much the same thing. That's not putting words in your mouth. Be more specific, otherwise you leave your self open to this type of valid rephrasing.

 

[maquiscat]

My preference is that no government be involved in marriage..... at all.

Marriage is a vow to one or more people depending on how one sees things. Obviously, the various religions and traditions will fill in those vows for you and for the most part, those work very well for me. I promise to give myself to you and only you through good and bad for the remainder of my life. Then, I expected my spouse to give to me the same thing.

While traditional works for me, I think universally there should simply be some vows said. A solemn promise you intend to keep with one person if you are monogamous or to multiple people if you are poly. Regardless, a promise one intends to keep for life. I mean, if the stakes aren't high, then what's the point? I think the high stakes (assuming one takes them seriously) forces someone to work hard to make the marriage work.

Would you think a marriage less valid if it was not for life? Given the rises in life expectancy, especially compared to what we used to have, could not life be an excessive expectation? I'm not sure if you've ever read Heinlein, but one of the things in his future universe is that people live at least a couple of centuries. And they have term marriages, where the couple is only married for a given number of years. Does that make their marriage any less valid?

 

[maquiscat]

I would say that
previous generations had much more staying power and perseverance generally. Not just in Marriage. Much more of a sense of keeping promises made and of taking responsibilites seriously.

Did they have staying power or did they simply not have a way out? There is a major difference. Especially when you look at how affairs were not uncommon, especially among the upper class. Hell, they didn't even marry for love, but for practical matters, or business or even politics.

 

[Diana7]

I'll agree that there are a lot of factors that are simply not tracked. It's not like we track who live together and break up without marriage, like we do marriage and divorce. So honestly she has no way to support her claim.

There have been studies done.

 

[MarmiteC]

Interesting question.

I've read many of the other points, and I believe marriage is about holding you accountable to the other person. I guess it's like going to a diet club and getting weighed every week rather than saying you're dieting and instead slipping in a few cream cakes and wondering why the weight isn't coming off. The fear of stepping up to those scales infront of everyone each week keeps you on track. 😆

 

[LATERILUS79]

Would you think a marriage less valid if it was not for life? Given the rises in life expectancy, especially compared to what we used to have, could not life be an excessive expectation? I'm not sure if you've ever read Heinlein, but one of the things in his future universe is that people live at least a couple of centuries. And they have term marriages, where the couple is only married for a given number of years. Does that make their marriage any less valid?

lol. That's a damn good question, maquiscat.

I don't know how to answer that one. I don't think I can put myself in the mindset of a person that would live that long. It's hard for me to conceptualize.

Can't say I've read the books you've mentioned, but then again, I don't read books. I have a hard time paying attention to anything. Regardless, I could see a term marriage working. Some set amount of time where the stakes are still high. Does that make sense? Make the term be a very significant portion of the person's life so that they truly understand they are making a commitment to one other person (or persons).

 

[maquiscat]

There have been studies done.

Point me to them, then.

 

[oldshirt]

I think most of us know others who divorced for selfish reasons. I certainly do. And yes, you did put words into my mouth.
People have far less of a sense of responsibility or committment. No staying power. No putting others first. Its all about me me me.

I think the options available today shows that people never had that much staying power or perseverance. Previous generations simply didn't have the choices we have today.

What Al Bundy said.

In previous generations people were often simply stuck no matter how miserable they were. For most people divorce simply wasn't financially feasible. The upper classes always had divorce (or just lopped off their heads if you were the king of England) but the masses couldn't afford to.

And the social and religious persecution were such that people were simply trapped in all but the most dire and life threatening circumstances.

It's not that recent generations are less moral or less responsible. Its that they have seen the folly and harm of your system and have rejected it and declared that system the greater evil and that it is less moral and less responsible, They are rejecting a system where people are trapped in a union against their will and are unable to get out of it.

 

[oldshirt]

I would say that
previous generations had much more staying power and perseverance generally. Not just in Marriage. Much more of a sense of keeping promises made and of taking responsibilites seriously.

Or are they simply smarter and can step out of a building that they can see is burning down around them.

 

[Ragnar Ragnasson]

Or are they simply smarter and can step out of a building that they can see is burning down around them.

Combined with it seems the fire grows hotter faster today, with social media communication immediately available as at least one accelerant.

 

[oldshirt]

Would you think a marriage less valid if it was not for life? Given the rises in life expectancy, especially compared to what we used to have, could not life be an excessive expectation? I'm not sure if you've ever read Heinlein, but one of the things in his future universe is that people live at least a couple of centuries. And they have term marriages, where the couple is only married for a given number of years. Does that make their marriage any less valid?

A work colleague and I had a similar discussion awhile back on whether divorce necessarily means failure of the marriage.

If my wife were leave today, yes I would be sad and I would mourn the loss of the relationship and mourn the loss of the future I had expected.

But would it have been a "failure?" Or as you put it, would it have been invalid or less valid?

To invalid I would say no, not at all. It accomplished many of the things marriages are meant to do. We created a home of love and support, we raised children. We supported each other in sickness and in health, supported each others careers, I can go on and on. Those things would not be null and void if we divorced.

Would it be less valid??? Well, that's more debatable. It would have been nice if it had continued forever and forever was our original intent so in that sense we would have fallen short.

But the reason for the divorce would also have to be taken into account. If we simply no longer like each other and no longer wish to be together, then staying together because we said we wanted to 26 years ago, really doesn't make any sense NOW does it.

Unlike @Diana7 , I do not believe most people divorce for no reason or for frivolous reasons. Divorce is hard and costly and always comes with a degree of sadness and consternation. I don't think people actually take it lightly and I do not believe the reasons she thinks are frivolous actually are frivolous. If someone does not like someone and does not want to be with them, I think that is a valid reason.

If the other person still likes them and still wants to be with them, yes they are going to be very sad initially. But in the end, do we really want to be with someone that doesn't like us and doesn't want to be with us??

I would rather someone leave me that did not like me and did not want to be with me, vs having that person feel forced and obligated to stay with because the said they'd stay with me decades ago back when they did like me.

I may have tears in my eyes as I sign my name on the divorce papers. But I'd rather do that and wipe the tears and move on vs being stuck with someone that didn't want to be with me because they weren't allowed to leave.

 

[oldshirt]

Combined with it seems the fire grows hotter faster today, with social media communication immediately available as at least one accelerant.

Truth.

 

[Married but Happy]

I think there are two groups of marriage types: the official, and the unofficial. What matters for success, IMO, is that couples should seek to satisfy their partners in whatever manner seems comfortable, making the effort to learn what desires and needs may be unaddressed or latent. Marriage and deep emotional-bonding isn't about laying down rules—it's about fulfilling your lover's wants and needs to the best of your abilities. Some people will never be satisfied, and will still cheat, or at least take and not give back. It requires TWO giving people for a good marriage, IMO.

 

[sokillme]

By this I am not asking what makes it successful or anything like that. What I want to know is what makes it an actual marriage?

Is it being registered with the government? And yes, to receive the legal benefits you do have to be registered. But do those legal benefits make the relationship a marriage? Can you have a marriage without that piece of paper (virtual as it might be nowadays).

Is it only a marriage if one had a ceremony done by a cleric of one's chosen deity? Or does only your own deity count, and theirs doesn't? Can atheist be married outside of government recognition?

What are the criteria that makes any given relationship the status of marriage?

Or are there various types of marriages that each have their own criteria?

The vows you give to each other and God in my mind.

 

[maquiscat]

The vows you give to each other and God in my mind.

So then those who only marry before the state and not your God are not actually married?

 

[sokillme]

So then those who only marry before the state and not your God are not actually married?

You asked what my opinion is. I believe God exists whether you believe or not, just like atheist believe God doesn't exist whether I believe or not.

My point was the vows, State, Church, back yard BBQ. At it's core marriage is about vows. Vows that I think God is listening too, but even if I am wrong. You know you said them.

 

[LATERILUS79]

Would you think a marriage less valid if it was not for life? Given the rises in life expectancy, especially compared to what we used to have, could not life be an excessive expectation? I'm not sure if you've ever read Heinlein, but one of the things in his future universe is that people live at least a couple of centuries. And they have term marriages, where the couple is only married for a given number of years. Does that make their marriage any less valid?

Sooooooo..... you gonna keep me waiting? How long are these marriage terms where people live for centuries?! 🤣

 

[maquiscat]

You asked what my opinion is. I believe God exists whether you believe or not, just like atheist believe God doesn't exist whether I believe or not.

My point was the vows, State, Church, back yard BBQ. At it's core marriage is about vows. Vows that I think God is listening too, but even if I am wrong. You know you said them.

I did ask your opinion and you initially gave me something that left other questions. You have now expended on that. Thank you.

So to further expand, is it your position that some sort of vows need to be exchanged before it's a marriage? Or can the marriage be a state of being, vows of action to turn a phrase? I am further guessing that you would say that even if the couple said their vows to Thor (which is a deity some pagans still worship to this day), given your belief in your God, He hears it and it is still a valid marriage?

Again, I am not criticizing your opinion, but exploring it.

 

[maquiscat]

Sooooooo..... you gonna keep me waiting? How long are these marriage terms where people live for centuries?! 🤣

Sorry, either I missed the question or got distracted by family matters.

Well in the stories I've read, they have been as little as a year to as long as a set number of decades. There were aspects of couples talking about renewing the marriage, and others who departed on good terms when it was up. It would definatly require an entire different legal system for such things.