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.
Here's another concept you're not going to like, the term for a child born out of wedlock is a bastard. What parent would want to purposely do that to a child? If you fear commitment, don't have children.
I've always sort of resented the child being call a bastard.
The child is the innocent party here.
What an oddly mean thing to say on this particular day as well.
Being married doesn't have to be about religion. I'm not religious at all but I believe in commitment and I believe in legally binding myself to my husband.
I also believe in commitment and I don't believe that legally binding myrself to someone is necessary for that. I'm not criticizing those who do, but it isn't true that everyone who doesn't believe in marriage just wants to make sure they have "one foot out the door".
What I don't get is the idea that if one is in a long-term relationship with children and shared housing and possessions and maybe finances, that if things go bad not being married is somehow going to make the dissolution quick and clean and easy.
I believe in commitment and I don't believe that legally binding yourself to someone is necessary for that. I'm not criticizing those who do, but it isn't true that everyone who doesn't believe in marriage just wants to make sure they have "one foot out the door".
I'm not saying that they do - I'm simply responding to your post about not understanding why people who aren't religious would get married. You don't have to be religious to want to make a legal commitment to someone. It's a lot harder to get a divorce than it is to just walk out the door. I need someone in my life who is wiling to make a legal commitment to me.
What I don't get is the idea that if one is in a long-term relationship with children and shared housing and possessions and maybe finances, that if things go bad not being married is somehow going to make the dissolution quick and clean and easy.
I think it's easier but not easy. But I wouldn't be with someone that wanted to make sure things would be easy when we split up.
How would the break-up of a long-term partnership with kids, one that your state defined as marriage (common-law) whether you, yourself, do or not, one to which state law according 50% of the total assets to your partner applies, be any different than a divorce? Did you think that if a Justice of the Peace doesn't perform a quickie ceremony and give you a piece of paper, that you could just walk away and leave your partner and your kids in the lurch? Did you think that there would be no "emotional drain" if a long-term committed relationship with kids were to rip apart and a court-ordered settlement of accounts and responsibilities took place?
If so, you're ignorant of the law, and you're not thinking clearly. Study your state's laws re: common-law marriages and asset allocation pertaining to that type of marriage.
You're not sure you believe in monogamy? So you're ok with the mother of your kids getting it on with another guy?
What I don't get is the idea that if one is in a long-term relationship with children and shared housing and possessions and maybe finances, that if things go bad not being married is somehow going to make the dissolution quick and clean and easy.
He probably feels more comfortable holding onto the fear if they don't marry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewdrop93
I think it's easier but not easy. But I wouldn't be with someone that wanted to make sure things would be easy when we split up.
Me neither. And that's why I avoid men who exhibit that fear.
I'm not saying that they do - I'm simply responding to your post about not understanding why people who aren't religious would get married. You don't have to be religious to want to make a legal commitment to someone. It's a lot harder to get a divorce than it is to just walk out the door. I need someone in my life who is wiling to make a legal commitment to me.
I was referencing this post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewdrop93
I just like to hear people say it. Because if you are really vowing to raise a family with someone and spend your life with them - making the commitment of marriage shouldn't be a big deal - unless you want to have one foot out the door "just in case." In which case, I would be upfront with the person and let them know that you don't trust them enough to marry them but you still want them to have your children.
If you want the legal commitment, that's fine but not everyone needs that. If someone is thinking about leaving me I'd rather them stay because they want to, not because it's too inconvenient for them to leave. (Ending a LTR in which kids, a house, and other shared things isn't really that convenient though, with or without marriage)
I've always sort of resented the child being call a bastard.
The child is the innocent party here.
What an oddly mean thing to say on this particular day as well.
I'm not the one planning to have a child out of wedlock. I'd never do that to a child.
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.
