In Sweden, registred partnership is viewed as equal to marriage in all social and emotional regards, there are some differences juridically though such as heretage when one person in the couple dies, etc. These are easily fixed with a little paperwork, though.
Few people in my generation in Sweden view marriage as a religious institution, instead, it's a personal symbolic act of love between the couple. It is very common not to marry however, and some people marry long after they have moved together and got children, some not at all.
Did you know btw that the large sociological studies carried out here show no decline in health or well-being for kids with divorced parents? Sweden has long been the country in the world with the highest divorce/separation rates, and since the 1970's it has been much discussions about the effect this would have on the children. However, longitudinal comparative studies of children with separated and married parents, show no differences. Instead, the studies show that when society has an unaccepting view of single parenting and single parenting is coupled with finacial problems, the kids will suffer. But when sociocultural taboos is removed, and single parents have similar socioeconomic standards as couples, as is the case in Sweden nowadays, there are no negative effects on the children.
Originally posted by frogus
The majority of people I believe, if the world started afresh tommorow, with no religious, historical or social pressure then most people would not want to commit to a life with another partner. It goes against all biological reason. Spread your gene pool, sleep around. You don't think it's just a coincedence that sex loses it's appeal for long-married couples do you? That's Darwin telling people that they've made the wrong choice.
I suppose you by Darwin mean "evolution", we know incredibly much more now about evolution than Darwin had the chance to find out.
I agree with your first statement here Frogus, but like me, you will learn that here on SYM there are some posters who believe evolution is not a fact, but a false theory. You're a Brit, I'm a Swede, and the idea that the earth was created 6000 years ago and the species separately created by god is probably as unfamiliar to you as it was to me since it's highly unusual outside the US. Other people might accept the scientific dating of the earth, but not evolution. The reasons for this is because scientific data are viewed as conflicting with the word of the bible.
Many scientists in different areas speculate in what sort of societies humans are were originally. Views differ depending on what perspetive we look at - but one thing is important to note: Studies of genetics, evolution biology, psychology, antropology or what have you, will perhaps tell us how man originally lived and what we are
genetically suited for. This might be viewed as
natural, but it says nothing about what is
good for us. Man has made his own environment to a much larger extent than any other animals, and at the same time, we are the creatures who are most depending on learning and interaction with the environment. So even if we, like some scientists, come to the conclusion that 4-year relationships is what is "natural" for humans this is the same as saying "dying from pneumonia or measels is natural". Ie, it doesn't mean it's good, acceptable or the way it "should" be.
However, even if "Darwin telling people they have made the wrong choice" is an oversimplification and probably not correct in most cases, I believe Frogus is aiming to express that humans genetically and biologically are set not to life long monogamous relationships. This view coincides with the current consensus in the scientific community as well, although I must stress that "spreading our genes" is not believed to be what we were genetically made for either. Instead (I could go into detail and explain why if somebody is interestested) it is thought that humans are genetically set to live in groups, that the rising of a child should involve at least one man and one woman, and that "couple relationships" should last for about 4 years. So "serial monogamy" when it comes to child-producing sex is the name of the game
However, just like many other animals, humans also have sex for other reasons than reproduction - we should not forget that sex is thought to have an important evolutionary value as "bonding" between group members, and stress/anxiety relief. Just look as our closest relatives the chimps
I should also mention that the above hypothesis about human nature has been highly unpopular among christians and conservatives especially in the US. For anyone interested in the area, the science journal Nature had a great summary of the field in an issue just before christmas.
