So I've been doing a lot of thinking. It seems that we have more "moral values" we hold today that no longer seem to be logical. At one point in time, every taboo we now have seems to have had logical grounds. For instance, we wash out hands after going to the bathroom. We didn't wipe ourselves with our unprotected hand, but we wash anyways, which is logical, as a backup measure to prevent the spread of... well, you get the point. My question is, is marriage the same way? Or premarital sex? In the past, prevent pregnancy was much more difficult than it is now. Marriage seems to have been a method to guarantee that there would be at least one adult to take care of the young, and on adult to provide for the young and the other adult. But nowadays, sex does not necessarily lead to the creation of young which would need caring for. Also, in most marriages nowadays, both couples work, seemingly defeating the purpose of marriage.

I'm not saying we should abolish marriage, but I do think we should see it for what it is. Also, this is looking at marriage through a philosophical, theoretical, logical, non-religious standpoint. What do you guys and gals think?

you must like dogs........

Hmmmm I think I didn't need to be married to raise my sons but having 2 parents so they could have the male and female role models in the house would have been nice.. At this point if I married it would be for love and nothing more... The question for me is "does love last forever"...

It seems to be obsolete for most people considering that just about everyone gets divorced now day. Thats why I never married any of my girlfriends.If you don't get married, you don't have to pay for a divorce.I figured it would just save money.

Huh? I must like dogs? What do dog have to do with anything?

That's just what WM always says..

marriage is nothing more than a slip of paper in the county clerks office...it's the relationship behind that slip of paper that really matters...

I still believe in marriage and I think he was kidding about the dog thing. Smiles

Thats right

oh I know it is...I go married when I was 20...by the time I was 25 we'd divorced...the relationship just wasn't there...

LMAO

Peachie that doesn't always mean it isn't going to be right with someone else or that it can be whittled down to a piece of paper... Sometimes we make mistakes and that's all it is.. I think that for me to get married it's the final step of my committment which I haven't been willing to do in 13 yrs.. But that is only how I feel, we all feel our own way about things

OH I know that too...I haven't given up...it's just an illustation. I totally believe in marriage, when the relationship is there...

I think the concept is somewhat archaic....dating back to a time when a woman became something of a "possession" and was never really expected to be an equal.

I never understood the whole point of a woman having to change her name when she got married. She stops being Mary Jones and is now Mrs. Mary Smith. That speaks of a loss of identity, to me, anyway. Why change her name at all? She's still the same person.

But this is just a way of removing her "separate" identity, and casting her in the role of being an adjunct to another person, and not an individual in her own right. It makes no sense to me. If I ask "Who are you?" and you say "I'm John's wife," you have told me nothing about yourself. All you've told me is that you have a connection to some other person. I know nothing at all about your thoughts and beliefs and goals and dreams and fears and history and interests. To me, those things define "who you are," not the fact that you're an adjunct to another person.

I've been married, and I hated it. But the problem was never with the CONCEPT of marriage; I just chose the wrong person.

I probably wouldn't do it again (although there is one possible exception) --

But some people want to be married, and I have no problem with that. Two of my best friends are married (although not to each other), and I see and hear the kinds of things they deal with on a daily basis. Most of it I don't find appealing. But some find comfort in the concept and the rituals.

The relationship behind that slip of paper matters quite a lot, but that slip of paper is a statement saying you want to make sure the other person is taken care of should you die before them. A domestic partner, significant other (which ever title you prefer) is not entitled to medical benefits should they get sick and not have them on their own. They do not get pensions their partners have paid into during their careers.

So to me, the idea of marriage is to make sure that the person you love is to be taken care of even after you are not there to protect them. The love and the relationship bring you together, but the marriage should show off that you love and want the best for your mate, even after you have passed on.

Just my opinion though......

your analogy of restroom/marriage has me worried about you seriously though marriage is not valued like it once was,some peoples vows to certain beliefs no longer hold their honor and dignity and moralistic and ethical beliefs together any longer at least that is a lot of it,hopefully they will find their way back and show others the way it is supposed to be,the old ways are not so drab,I like old fashioned.

Ok I don't know how I messed that up but basically I said "Bravo Peachie"...

That's a fairly new addition to the concept of marriage...the original idea is the same as that of a hand-fastening...it's the bonding of two hearts, two souls, two lives into one...it's not the loss of an individual's identity...but gaining an entirely new one...

If marriage is to ensure that your loved ones are taken care of if you should pass, then why is polygamy illegal? Unless you are trying to say that you can only love one person, which bring to wonder why some people choose to marry again after their spouse passes on.