Page 19 of 27
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 4:55 pm
by Xandax
Originally posted by Sailor Saturn
Marriage, however, requires you to be committed. If you’re too much of a coward to seriously make the commitment, not only should you not get married, but you shouldn’t even sleep with her.
Actually it dosen't.
The *idea* behind marriage does, but so does the *idea* behind any "partnership" where 2 people are involved.
There are plenty of examples where married couples stay together - not because they are comitted to each other, but out of other reasons. (Children; "keeping up appearce"; financial; whatever)
And there are plenty of expamles of people commited to each other whom are not married( I need just draw in my uncle who is not married to his partner, but they have been together for 25+ years).
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 5:09 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Xandax
Actually it dosen't.
The *idea* behind marriage does, but so does the *idea* behind any "partnership" where 2 people are involved.
Marriage is not as easy to get out of and there is more difficult involved when you try to get out of a marriage. I do not know the details of these, so I won't try to say what they are. Divorce should never happen, though. If you're not able to be committed enough to the person to stay with them forever then you do not truly love that person and you should never have gotten married in the first place. My dad was married and divorced before he met my mom. He was able to make the commitment to her and he never went back on his commitment, but she chose to not remain committed and divorced him. She should not have married him in the first place since she was one who could not remain committed.
Marriage is not a decision to be taken lightly. There is a lot involved in marriage, a lot more than in these so-called "partnerships."
I have a complaint about thist thread's title. Marriage is a partnership.
If this were a perfect world, marriage would be a perfect union. However, this isn't a perfect world and because of that marriage does not always work out the way it should. However, this is by no means reason to not get married. What this is is reason to be more critical about whether or not you truly love the person before you decide to marry them. And no, sex does not have anything to do with whether or not you love a person.
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 5:46 pm
by Nippy
Originally posted by Sailor Saturn
I’m not sure I understand your question, Nippy, but I’ll try to answer it anyway.
When I read something, I read it critically. I form my opinion on the veracity of something based on previous experience with things, previous knowledge of the subject, whether or not the thing being read claims to be truth, how accurate the majority of information in it is, and what other people think of the thing being read.
If I am still unsure after this point, I do more reading on the topic, then compare and contrast it with the other sources.
Does that answer your question? 
I would continue SS, but my line of reason has been put to end, namely, my prepared post has been deleted...
I would have continued, but I wrote that about 3 days ago and I can't remember what I wrote! Sorry!
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 5:57 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Nippy
I would continue SS, but my line of reason has been put to end, namely, my prepared post has been deleted...
I would have continued, but I wrote that about 3 days ago and I can't remember what I wrote! Sorry!
Yikes! This is why I've started typing up long posts in Word and saving regularly. Perhaps you should do the same.
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 6:07 pm
by Nippy
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 6:37 pm
by Georgi
Originally posted by Sailor Saturn
Marriage is not as easy to get out of and there is more difficult involved when you try to get out of a marriage.
See, IMO the fact that unmarried couples don't get the same financial benefits and so on, the fact that they aren't acknowledged as committed partnerships equal to marriage does
not lead me to the conclusion that these people should get married. Rather, I draw the conclusion that there is a need for social and legal reforms in order that those people who don't choose to marry are not discriminated against.
There is a lot involved in marriage, a lot more than in these so-called "partnerships."
The only evidence I've seen of that is that we still have outdated laws which are forcing people to marry just for the legal benefits.
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 7:16 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Georgi
The only evidence I've seen of that is that we still have outdated laws which are forcing people to marry just for the legal benefits.
But if the laws were redefined to make these 'partnerships' equal to marriage in all the legal aspects, what then would keep people from moving in together and claiming to be "partners" just for the legal benifits?
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 7:31 pm
by fable
Originally posted by Sailor Saturn
But if the laws were redefined to make these 'partnerships' equal to marriage in all the legal aspects, what then would keep people from moving in together and claiming to be "partners" just for the legal benifits?
Perhaps some conditions could be attached to such laws--joint ownership of properties for a certain number of years, for example.
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 7:33 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by fable
Perhaps some conditions could be attached to such laws--joint ownership of properties for a certain number of years, for example.
That is a possibility, but that could also lead to actual couples having problems like ones that they have now if something happens before that certain number of years ends.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 12:11 am
by Ode to a Grasshopper
Originally posted by SS
If you go back and read some of my earlier comments, you’ll see that I have said that a not-married couple can have just as much commitment for each other. The problem is that there isn’t a requirement for commitment if you’re not married. You’re not truly committed. You’ve left things open so that you can easily leave the relationship whenever you want with no hassles. How is that committed? To me, it shows nothing but fear and cowardice. You afraid of being “tied down” so you make up an excuse saying that living together and having sex together is enough to be “married” so that you don’t have to really make the commitment. And let’s not forget the fact that if you choose to sleep around, you’re not committing adultery. What’s wrong with that? That’s another plus isn’t it? Absolutely not. If you’ve committed your life to someone, whether married or not, having sex with other people is wrong. Oh, but it’s not that big a deal if you’re not actually married. I mean, what’s the worst she can do to you? Pack up and leave? Or maybe make you pack up and leave? Big deal, you’ve already got another girl anyway, so just move in with her.
Myself, I would think that all of these considerations make a successful non-marital partnership all the more precious. The fact that there's nothing to stop either partner leaving besides their feelings for the other person and yet they still stay together seems, to me, to make it that much more committed than marriage, where there are legal and social preventatives to stop you from leaving.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 12:20 am
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Ode to a Grasshopper
Myself, I would think that all of these considerations make a successful non-marital partnership all the more precious. The fact that there's nothing to stop either partner leaving besides their feelings for the other person and yet they still stay together seems, to me, to make it that much more committed than marriage, where there are legal and social preventatives to stop you from leaving.
And so I must ask, if you're able to make such a commitment and follow through with it, why then are you so afraid of getting married?
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 1:17 am
by Xandax
Originally posted by Sailor Saturn
But if the laws were redefined to make these 'partnerships' equal to marriage in all the legal aspects, what then would keep people from moving in together and claiming to be "partners" just for the legal benifits?
The same that stops people from marrieing just for legal benifits - wich some still do though.
A pathership is *not* more "right" because some religion "okays" it - it is only right if people love each other, and that is the bascially of it - I don't care how many quotes and statictisc can be put out, as long as 2 people love each other, they should be able to live together as a couple, married or not.
One is not more right then the other if people love each other, that is the only thing that matters.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 4:14 am
by Georgi
Originally posted by Xandax
The same that stops people from marrieing just for legal benifits - wich some still do though.
Exactly. Besides, the kind of benefits we could be talking about - legal guardianship rights of children, to give one example - are mostly going to be the kind of thing that only people who are living in a committed relationship will want anyway.
And SS, that's missing the point anyway. Can you show any reasons other than the legalities why marriage is better than non-marital partnership? You haven't done so yet, all the other reasons anyone has mentioned are equally applicable to an unmarried partnership. Maybe we should conclude from this that the only reason people should get married is because of the legalities.
A pathership is *not* more "right" because some religion "okays" it - it is only right if people love each other, and that is the bascially of it - I don't care how many quotes and statictisc can be put out, as long as 2 people love each other, they should be able to live together as a couple, married or not.
One is not more right then the other if people love each other, that is the only thing that matters.
Hear hear.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 5:14 am
by frogus
I have said that a not-married couple can have just as much commitment for each other. The problem is that there isn’t a requirement for commitment if you’re not married. You’re not truly committed. You’ve left things open so that you can easily leave the relationship whenever you want with no hassles. How is that committed? To me, it shows nothing but fear and cowardice. You afraid of being “tied down” so you make up an excuse saying that living together and having sex together is enough to be “married” so that you don’t have to really make the commitment. And let’s not forget the fact that if you choose to sleep around, you’re not committing adultery. What’s wrong with that? That’s another plus isn’t it? Absolutely not. If you’ve committed your life to someone, whether married or not, having sex with other people is wrong. Oh, but it’s not that big a deal if you’re not actually married. I mean, what’s the worst she can do to you? Pack up and leave? Or maybe make you pack up and leave? Big deal, you’ve already got another girl anyway, so just move in with her.
So you believe that marriage does not bring any positive elements to a marriage other than giving someone no choice in staying with the person they're with?
Anyway, I think it is obvious to see that if you're having sex with other people, you shouldn't be with your long term partner. That relationship is bad and had better end. Being frightened into not having sex with other people by the 'until death do us part' absolute no escape tying down of marriage is not a good thing. Being scared into doing something is absolutely useless if you still don't want to do it. It destroys one's liberty. For that reason marriage is bad.
You are saying that marriage is good because it gives us a way of properly punishing adulterers rather than letting them get away scott free. You are referencing yourself in a way. You are saying 'because because because'. You cannot say that marriage is good because it puts a lock on having sex with many people, when we haven't even concluded that having sex with many people is bad yet.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 5:32 am
by Beldin
Originally posted by frogus
You are saying that marriage is good because it gives us a way of properly punishing adulterers rather than letting them get away scott free. You are referencing yourself in a way. You are saying 'because because because'. You cannot say that marriage is good because it puts a lock on having sex with many people, when we haven't even concluded that having sex with many people is bad yet.
@frogus: I'm sorry to admit that, but you've completely lost me there, but it's quite possible that I'm just tired...
No worries,
Beldin
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 5:47 am
by Mr Sleep
Originally posted by frogus
You are saying that marriage is good because it gives us a way of properly punishing adulterers rather than letting them get away scott free. You are referencing yourself in a way. You are saying 'because because because'. You cannot say that marriage is good because it puts a lock on having sex with many people, when we haven't even concluded that having sex with many people is bad yet.
I think you are looking at this in a logical context when it is more of an emotional situation. What are the ramifications of dumping one woman and movingonto the next, surely that is an unacceptable situation.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 5:56 am
by frogus
if we don't look at it in a logical way we cannot hope to find the undeniable truth....anyway that doesn't really matter...and that's jsut what I think...
The ramifications of someone leaving a relationship and then starting a new one are known by us all I think. Come on, if having more than one relationship in your lifetime was a really big deal then I think we would be discussing it, but it isn't. Everybody does it. I think it is accepted by everyone that staying in a marriage with no love (or even hatred) is about as bad a thing as one can do, while leaving a bad relationship can cause pain, but not much.
My point is, if a relationship is of the right type, it will stay commited and neither person will sleep around etc. if it is not of this type then it is just not if this type. It is not a commied relationship, and institutions which force it into prolonged existance are agents for bad, not good.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 6:16 am
by Mr Sleep
Originally posted by frogus
if we don't look at it in a logical way we cannot hope to find the undeniable truth....anyway that doesn't really matter...and that's jsut what I think...
Logic is all well and good but people's feelings have to be taken into account, as part of the logical process, if one doesn't take them into account you leave out an important part of the equation. Since marriage and relationships are commitments of emotion not logic.
The ramifications of someone leaving a relationship and then starting a new one are known by us all I think. Come on, if having more than one relationship in your lifetime was a really big deal then I think we would be discussing it, but it isn't. Everybody does it. I think it is accepted by everyone that staying in a marriage with no love (or even hatred) is about as bad a thing as one can do, while leaving a bad relationship can cause pain, but not much.
I didn't say anyone should stick to one relationship, i merely think that a society that does not have a standardised method of relationship can not work, in the same way as anarchy can not work as a government. There has to be a balance, i don't think that marriage works anymore because it has become a maligned institution and diluted from it's original intention.
My point is, if a relationship is of the right type, it will stay commited and neither person will sleep around etc. if it is not of this type then it is just not if this type. It is not a commied relationship, and institutions which force it into prolonged existance are agents for bad, not good.
Perhaps you are right, but then there are divorce courts, there is actually very little keeping couples together if they decide to split. My opinion is I have to find the person that complements me, i am not going to sleep around to find that person because i think it is irresponsible, in the end I would rather die a virgin than have a child brought into this world that is unwanted and unloved.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 8:43 am
by Ode to a Grasshopper
Originally posted by SS.
And so I must ask, if you're able to make such a commitment and follow through with it, why then are you so afraid of getting married?
I don't have a problem with getting married. If getting married is important to my eventual partner then I will be happy to do so- if it makes her happy. It's simply that I don't think it is all that important, myself. What I
am against is the notion that I should be pressured into marriage because society/God/whoever thinks I should. If I love someone and they love me then that should be good enough in itself.