Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Parents who insist on fighting in front of their children are bad parents. Plain and simple. So, it sounds like these people never should have been parents to begin with. Which is a problem in and of itself.
Children who believe that their parents NEVER fight then expect their relationships to be without friction. When disagreements occur, they think the relationship has failed. They don't have the skills set to deal with disagreements. It's important for kids to witness healthy relationships. And healthy relationships include people working out boundaries, negotiating, and dealing with the fact that their partner is a separate individual, and that living together involves compromises.
My husband wanted to get married, so I did. It was not some life affirming, necessary thing for me. It was a great party, a nice representation of our love, but not something necessary for us to have a good relationship.
Just because being married works for me, doesn't mean it HAS to work for other people. When it comes down to it, it really is just a piece of paper. Why on Earth would my marriage be a sham simply because I can see that different things work for different people? Obviously my friends who are not married are happy people, and great parents, so why the disdain towards them?
Marriage confers no rights onto children whatsoever... it most certainly does not prevent either parent from walking away.
The point is, happy, loving parents are what's important when raising children, not a marriage certificate.
Yet the two of you did do it. That tells me you do not really believe your second sentence. And that debunks the rest of your statement, but as a courtesy I will answer.
No, it certainly does not have to work for other people. I think way too many people get married for the wrong reasons and that might explain the divorce rate. Fine with me. Do not get married. And please do not have kids either.
Personally, I did not get married until I was 38. To be blunt, I wanted to travel, further my education, and chase a lot of women. I succeeded and then some and finally met my soulmate. We were married and have one kid. Two best moves I ever made.
That is nice your friends are happy. I already explained what was wrong with that picture. You chose not to offer a rebuttal and instead have repeated the same platitude. That tells me I may be right.
Finally, your statement about marriage and childrens rights is not only quite incorrect, but very disturbing. I would recommend you find a family lawyer, pay him an hourly fee, and just jaw a bit about things like child support, inheritances, etc. You will learn a few things for the hell of it. And if you have or are intending to have children, the knowledge will be imperative. Such children are not termed "illegitimate" because people are trying to be mean.
I'm doing well, and don't tend to change anything. To be honest, I don't want to get married. As mohawkx stated, 51% of marriages end in divorce. I don't see the need to set myself up for failure. We are doing just fine and all the baby-boomers need to realize times are changing, and maybe we should too. (As Matt Damon put it in Invictus. )
That's just stupid, selfish, and an act of cowardice.
I sure as hell would rather have 2 unmarried parents that love each other, than 2 miserable married parents who despise each other but "stay together for the kids".
But it does affect the kids.
The message that it send to the children is that "Daddy thought that Mommy was good enough to set up house with, split the bills with, have sex with and pop out a few kids with.....but just not good enough to marry."
All too many people in these types of common law relationships are so wrapped up in "proving the system wrong" and declaring "our kids are smart so see its working for us" that they fail to take an objective look at the broader picture and the effect on the children.
The bottom line is that most of these types of "arrangements" benefit the men - the ultimate not buying the cow scenario. The women are dumb enough to go along (usually hoping that one day the man will decide to marry her).
And whether the children of these "arrangements" express it to their parents or not....they would prefer that their fathers marry their mothers.
Maybe you were too young to be having sex if you were not able to properly use birth control AND condoms.
I do not believe in abortion but I do believe in personal responsibility. Maybe it would have been better to have a "shotgun wedding" - the man you having sex with wasn't good husband material? If not, maybe having sex with him wasn't a mature thing to do.
In my personal opinion, if the man was good enough to have sex with he should have been good enough to marry and raise the child in a 2-parent household. At that point, the child comes first.
How many men will your child be exposed to between birth and age 18? How many of those men also won't be "marriage material"? And further, how many of those will could potentially be dangerous to your child.
I think that the "normalization" and even "celebration" of being Single Moms (on purpose) is a great tragedy for our nation.
Nice to see someone having the same views on sex & marriage as I do. Big thumbs up to you.
The message that it send to the children is that "Daddy thought that Mommy was good enough to set up house with, split the bills with, have sex with and pop out a few kids with.....but just not good enough to marry."
All too many people in these types of common law relationships are so wrapped up in "proving the system wrong" and declaring "our kids are smart so see its working for us" that they fail to take an objective look at the broader picture and the effect on the children.
The bottom line is that most of these types of "arrangements" benefit the men - the ultimate not buying the cow scenario. The women are dumb enough to go along (usually hoping that one day the man will decide to marry her).
And whether the children of these "arrangements" express it to their parents or not....they would prefer that their fathers marry their mothers.
I need to explain this? Are you not married? If you know all these people who are not and you think its so cool, then why are you? Indeed, if you are married, then why are you also a cheerleader for irresponsibility? If I knew you better, I might declare your marriage a sham. But I don't so I won't.
Sorry if I offend your hipster sensibility. The way I see it, if my parents could never have solidified their committment to each other, what kind of committment would they have with me? Children are not some kind of novelty. They are the most important job anyone will ever have.
Marriage confers rights upon the children. It prevents either parent from walking and shirking their responsibility. Now, don't even try contesting that point because you brought up divorce- the way to legally dissolve said marriage while preserving the childrens' rights and the parental responsibility with a mechanisms for enforcement. You know the details.
So to sum it up, if two people taken on the incredible (and rewarding) job of raising children, if they decide to not only bring human beings into existence, but also to love, nurture, and raise them to adulthood, and to make their children the first priority, then why in the name of hell can they not sign a simple piece of paper affirming all of this?
Exactly! Why not just confirm it? After all, it's just like you said -- it's only a piece of paper!
I see marriage is being cheapened these days as it's just a "piece of paper". It used to mean a lot more.
I think that if you look at countries with low rates of out of wedlock birth, they are generally considered repressive as a result of the state and or religious orthodoxy. I think that this trend is the consequence of “individualism” and freedom. As the old saying goes, if you give someone enough rope, they will hang themselves. With individualism, there is no “shame” and with freedom, there is no consequence to one doing what is best for the individual, even it hurts others, as long as it is not illegal.
Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Men want variety and women provide it. To be married is to be constrained and limited. If a man knows that he is going to continue to sleep around with many different women, he most likely will be reluctant to get married. If he is pressured into getting married because he likely will continue his cheating and the women will simply not put up with it in this day and age.
If a man’s options for sex are limited to marriage, more men will seek to be married and stay married. However, there are too many women out here who freely give of themselves on the first date. I don’t know about most men, but the more sexual partners a women has had the less desirable she is as marriage material, in my opinion. I don’t think a descent man want to call his wife someone who has slept with 50 men or more by the age of 25. I think that a consequence of women becoming more male like in their sexual exploits results in fewer men desiring them as wives.
The reason that fewer men are marrying, in my opinion, is due to the decline of “good women” or what men define as “wife material”, which is correlated with increased promiscuity, which creates all these options for men to have sex outside of marriage, which in turn becomes an incentive for men not to get married because they don't want to give up all those options. This is why marriage is declining in the West.
By the way....I am a happily married man to a Nubian Queen, with kids, and faithful.
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 06-17-2010 at 02:41 PM..
I see we have a right wing, Christian, judgemental, morality class going on here. Jesus said to go out into the world and spread the word of God. If what you say is all true, wouldn't you be better served by going to the neighborhoods where single motherhood is rampant and carrying signs and proclaiming "all unmarried mothers are slovenly abusing the system and their children are all bastards" than venting on a City Data forum? At least until a bunch of homies surrounded you and kicked your ass back to the suburbs? I mean show some conviction for your principals rather than moralizing behind a keyboard.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
If you know all these people who are not and you think its so cool, then why are you? Indeed, if you are married, then why are you also a cheerleader for irresponsibility? If I knew you better, I might declare your marriage a sham. But I don't so I won't.
