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.
Marriage should be abolished as it has become outdated, pointless, and is just religion in disguise.
What purpose does it have?
Those that want partners and family can still have them but sans 'magic piece of paper'
No real difference here.
Let's abolish this quaint old system.
agree?
I'm not really in favor of marriage, but if you want it, it should be available...period. If you no likey marriage, then don't get married...its that simple. I don't want you making that choice for me.
I personally feel that underwear are antiquated and pointless...and I prefer to go commando at times, yet I know others who wouldn't agree, ya dig !? You don't see me trying to advocate for the abolition of panties.
Why can't you just leave it alone ? Why do you think you have the right to abolish it ?
Marriage still provides the illusion of long-term stability and security aimed at reproduction.
Originally, even in the West marriage was basically all about obtaining a wife for reproduction, a wife that was more or less the property of the husband, a wife that could not do anything without her husband's consent...
Anyway, marriage has always been about religion. That we define it as one man and one women has nothing to do with nature, but has come from societal norms informed by religious texts.
You seriously believe that? Wow, you apparently have no understanding of biology at all, do you. Religion defined it as between a man and woman because that's how you create, birth and raise offspring.
It seems wasteful to pay $500 for a marriage license. And the marriage attendants all getting free food & drink costs even more. Govt & businesses profit, but what is the advantage for a couple that want to be married? We all know that a marriage license does not prevent divorce. So why do some consider a marriage license very important? Is it a status thing like "look, I've got proof of ownership!"? Should a person own another? Do people believe God will get revenge if they don't buy the piece of paper?
I really pity you if you think marriage implies ownership. If you don't understand why someone would get married, no words will make you "get it".
It seems wasteful to pay $500 for a marriage license. And the marriage attendants all getting free food & drink costs even more. Govt & businesses profit, but what is the advantage for a couple that want to be married? We all know that a marriage license does not prevent divorce. So why do some consider a marriage license very important? Is it a status thing like "look, I've got proof of ownership!"? Should a person own another? Do people believe God will get revenge if they don't buy the piece of paper?
I think in today's highly liberal and free culture marriage is pointless since most people are in need of money or in other words a capitalist country and marriage based on love is just a plain disaster waiting to happen. Marriage would be better under socialism when everyone is basically at the same level but I've seen too many failed marriages, cheaters whether motivated by financial or just plain attractness it's just a disaster waiting to happen.
Marriage in this new America just isn't going to happen. A more conservative culture and I'm all for it.
Historically marriage was a contract between the father of the bride and the father of the groom listing the duties, responsibilities, treatment of any children and disposition of any real or other property when the bride and groom eventually die. That is the part the state becomes involved with as part of its function to enforce contracts.
I believe such a contract could be drawn between the bride and the groom for the same reasons and with the same results. This contract would be registered with the state for potential enforcement through the courts.
I do not see any reason for the state to limit the sex and number of people involved. If a gay couple wished to contract with each other so be it. If any other combination of sexes or numbers wanted to form a contract so be that as well.
Religious requirements, rules and acceptable arrangements can be whatever they may but they are NOT subject to enforcement by the state and the churches may not use force to establish compliance.
You seriously believe that? Wow, you apparently have no understanding of biology at all, do you. Religion defined it as between a man and woman because that's how you create, birth and raise offspring.
In nature, we see the full spectrum of relationships, including permanent mating-pairs, temporary pairing (for the season down to just for the moment), hetero- and homo-sexuality, and so on. Hell, in some species reproduction is done, essentially, by cloning one's self, with no need for two genders.
A permanent relationship between one male and one female is not required by nature for successful reproduction.
Even in humanity, the prominence of heterosexual long-term mating pairs is a recent occurrence. Humanity has experienced a variety of relationship practices through its history, always defined by social norms of the society at that time and in that location.
No. My marriage is not pointless, and it's none of your damn business anyway. No one is forcing you into it.
I think you miss the underlying argument. Marriage as a cultural act is okay. But, as I understand the OP, it shouldn't confer upon a couple any special benefits that are arbitrarily denied to another couple.
That is to say, you should be able to get married by the terms of your culture/religion, but your culture/religion shouldn't be able to deny a couple that doesn't look like you any benefits from being married.
You can form a contract between two individuals for economic and government purposes and have that contract be entirely walled off from a religious/cultural union.
why should a married couple (ie: two individuals) have more rights than 2 unmarried people, or a single person?
now that is discrimination.
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.
