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.
Why do people think the duggars getting married to someone after less than a year of dating is okay but a couple in a steady relationship for 5 years having a baby outside of marriage is not? What is the difference between the duggars rushing into marriage and babies and someone getting pregnant 3 months into a new relationship? Neither of them know their partner all that well..
Seems like most people on this board are pro marriage. Most of the people i know under 30 (I'm 19, no kids) aren't married and don't plan to be but have children with their partner. I live in canada so when you live with a partner and have kids you become common law and are considered basically legally married by the gov anyway. Maybe it's the people I'm surrounded by but i don't think it's a big deal to decide not to get married? I've never been particularly religous so maybe that's part of the reason.
Can someone explain the difference between my above example (the duggars getting married after months of dating vs a couple of 5 years having a baby outside of marriage) marriage makes in this situation to me?Educate me don't belittle me lol
A couple of years ago I listened to a really good "Planet Money" podcast on this subject. The researcher had measured how well kids in the US were doing (I forget all the measures but one was performance in school) between kids from homes where the parents were married and those where they weren't. The ones in the homes with married parents did better. She thought that maybe the difference was economic- that kids with unmarried parents lacked some opportunities and advantages because they had lower incomes- but then she looked at what happened in areas in Ohio where incomes went up due to the fracking industry. Even with the economic improvements, kids in households with married parents did better. What was interesting was that when she looked for similar differences in the countries in Scandinavia, there were none.
So- there was something intangible in the US that she hadn't figured out that meant kids were better off in a household with married parents.
As for the Duggars- they're not my kind of Christian, but I can tell you as the mother of a conservative evangelical Christian son that in those circles they take marriage very seriously. One-on-one dating is acceptable only if you've agreed that it's likely to lead to marriage if it works out. DS and DDIL started dating around June of 2012, married in April 2013 (their wedding vows included "I will never divorce you") and they had their first baby a year later. They're expecting their 3rd in June (how many you have and when is a matter of personal conscience- no prohibitions against BC). I couldn't be happier- DS chose well and they seem like a very good team. The people in their church do believe that in some cases, such as abandonment or domestic violence, divorce is the only reasonable thing to do, but they want people to go into it truly intending "till death do us part". I can see where it can be healthier for a child to live in a home where the parents have that level of commitment to each other.
Why do people think the duggars getting married to someone after less than a year of dating is okay but a couple in a steady relationship for 5 years having a baby outside of marriage is not? What is the difference between the duggars rushing into marriage and babies and someone getting pregnant 3 months into a new relationship? Neither of them know their partner all that well..
Seems like most people on this board are pro marriage. Most of the people i know under 30 (I'm 19, no kids) aren't married and don't plan to be but have children with their partner. I live in canada so when you live with a partner and have kids you become common law and are considered basically legally married by the gov anyway. Maybe it's the people I'm surrounded by but i don't think it's a big deal to decide not to get married? I've never been particularly religous so maybe that's part of the reason.
Can someone explain the difference between my above example (the duggars getting married after months of dating vs a couple of 5 years having a baby outside of marriage) marriage makes in this situation to me?Educate me don't belittle me lol
It's not "difference;" it is "judgment" you sense from others. And, truly, it is not for them to say. You live your own life and disregard people's judgment of you, and your life will be exponentially more peaceful if you do that. So long as you are not opportunistic or harmful toward others, ignore what they say you "should" do and be. You sound pretty darn level-headed and smart to me. Carry on!
A couple of years ago I listened to a really good "Planet Money" podcast on this subject. The researcher had measured how well kids in the US were doing (I forget all the measures but one was performance in school) between kids from homes where the parents were married and those where they weren't. The ones in the homes with married parents did better. She thought that maybe the difference was economic- that kids with unmarried parents lacked some opportunities and advantages because they had lower incomes- but then she looked at what happened in areas in Ohio where incomes went up due to the fracking industry. Even with the economic improvements, kids in households with married parents did better. What was interesting was that when she looked for similar differences in the countries in Scandinavia, there were none.
So- there was something intangible in the US that she hadn't figured out that meant kids were better off in a household with married parents.
As for the Duggars- they're not my kind of Christian, but I can tell you as the mother of a conservative evangelical Christian son that in those circles they take marriage very seriously. One-on-one dating is acceptable only if you've agreed that it's likely to lead to marriage if it works out. DS and DDIL started dating around June of 2012, married in April 2013 (their wedding vows included "I will never divorce you") and they had their first baby a year later. They're expecting their 3rd in June (how many you have and when is a matter of personal conscience- no prohibitions against BC). I couldn't be happier- DS chose well and they seem like a very good team. The people in their church do believe that in some cases, such as abandonment or domestic violence, divorce is the only reasonable thing to do, but they want people to go into it truly intending "till death do us part". I can see where it can be healthier for a child to live in a home where the parents have that level of commitment to each other.
Exactly, Athena.
Courtship, marriage, and the rearing of children is taken very seriously in those circles. They only date others of a similar mindset, often knowing one another and each other's families through church and/or homeschooling functions before beginning the courtship process.
They also tend to have a huge amount of family support and often have had a lot of experience in caring for children long before they marry and have babies of their own. A nineteen-year-old, for example, in those circles tends to be more mature than is now typical and is capable of running a household of her/his own.
Being what they call "equally yoked," i.e., having similar beliefs and values, is a big deal when it comes to success in a relationship with or without the religious connotations of that phrase. How potential partners view money/money management, the rearing of children, the importance of family and community, career(s), sex, and work ethic is just as important if not more so than "being in love" is to the long-term success of a relationship--especially marriage.
People can say what they want about marriage versus living together, but there *is* a difference in how big the commitment feels once that piece of paper is involved.
Last edited by Formerly Known As Twenty; 01-20-2019 at 07:02 AM..
It’s not a popular opinion here but marriage is an economic union. The path to economic success is to get your education, get your career launched, meet someone with similar socioeconomic status, get married, then think about reproducing. And then stay married. Violate any of that and the odds of a good outcome for you or your offspring having a good outcome drop dramatically.
I’m not talking some reality TV couple popping out a dozen kids. I’m talking 0, 1, or 2 kids, what your economic picture looks like after 35 years working, and how any kids end up.
It’s not a popular opinion here but marriage is an economic union. The path to economic success is to get your education, get your career launched, meet someone with similar socioeconomic status, get married, then think about reproducing. And then stay married. Violate any of that and the odds of a good outcome for you or your offspring having a good outcome drop dramatically.
I’m not talking some reality TV couple popping out a dozen kids. I’m talking 0, 1, or 2 kids, what your economic picture looks like after 35 years working, and how any kids end up.
If you don't see any value in marriage and are comfortable having kids outside of wedlock, than there is nothing really to educate you on. Marriage is a social contract of sorts where two people agree to be in it together to the end. It's the endgame for dating and courtship, where two people decide they want to be with each other for the rest of their lives (this is a very basic explanation). Off course, this hasn't really been the case in the Western world in the past 40 years or so.
The idea of permanence is why many consider marriage to be the ideal relationship state for having children. Who better to have and raise children with than a life long partner?
Being what they call "equally yoked," i.e., having similar beliefs and values, is a big deal when it comes to success in a relationship with or without the religious connotations of that phrase. How potential partners view money/money management, the rearing of children, the importance of family and community, career(s), sex, and work ethic is just as important if not more so than "being in love" is to the long-term success of a relationship--especially marriage.
Totally agreed- my second husband and I had such similar values in the important things that in our nearly 20 years together we never had an argument. Really. Sometimes we came at things from different directions but we knew the truth was somewhere in the middle and neither had to "win".
Having agreed that marriage is beneficial when you're raising children, I have to admit that as a 65-year old widow who's started dating again, I'm wary of it. The legal and financial entanglements that can come with it (especially if one person is wealthy and the other is planning on Medicaid if they need LTC) are scary and they can't all be resolved with a prenup.
It’s not a popular opinion here but marriage is an economic union. The path to economic success is to get your education, get your career launched, meet someone with similar socioeconomic status, get married, then think about reproducing. And then stay married.
The foundation of early society was based on that. It's why the government recognizes it.
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.
