The 'whats the point in marriage?' debate :)

[pulse2]

First off, let me stress, I have nothing against people and their holy matrimony, in fact I have a profound respect for those who have managed to stay in a marriage for several years. My parents have been together for 26 years now, so to me that's impressive. So I'm only bringing it up for debate value. I like looking at the opposite perspective of things.

Anyway, the point is, is there a real need for marriage? First off, I was under the impression marriage was religeous related, correct me if I'm wrong, thus the usual inclusion of the church, if so, how come atheists and others make use of the church in order to ensure their wedding is 'perfect', to me that comes across kind of hypocritical.

Secondly, I've been told its for the sake of 'love' (you can do that without being married), 'togetherness' (can also be done without marriage) and to avoid being 'lonely', seriously? You would be lonely if you weren't married? So does that mean that from birth up until marriage you've been lonely? Someone else asked me if I would rather die alone, well, to be honest, we all die alone :/ No matter how you look at it, the only way you could avoid that is if you happen to kill yourself before your time to go with the person you love, whatever 'go with' means, as if dying means you go somewhere when if fact it could just mean you rot and become part of other life on Earth, much like insects, plants, animals etc, there is no descrimination, but that's another topic I'll probably bring up

And okay, hypothetically, if I desregarded that, you would still potentially die alone, because your lover could die before you do or such. Morbid yes, but its natural.

There were other points, but I'll leave those aside to see what you guys come up with Convince me marriage is worthwhile ^^

 

[Dyp100]

There is no point in marriage, it was made as a contract to sell your son/daughter for lands and wealth and such, but now since the idea of free-choice love has appeared it's more just a traditional thing. You know how humans love their tradition.

Either way, you can love someone, or spend the rest of your life with someone without marrying. To be fair, it's better if you do marry since it has some economical benefits to you and your family.

 

[Yx0que]

In modern times there is no real use for marriage. Everything that marriage used to do can now be taken care of outside of marriage. Most people marry out of religious beliefs, out of habit or out of some sense of romance. Some people believe that marrying someone means something great, but I don't see this. I told my girlfriend I want to stay with her forever, and I don't need a contract and large ceremony in order to hold that promise.

 

[bdcjacko]

Eh...if you don't get it, you won't get it.

 

[supermariner]

to me marriage seems pointless
it's a great gesture to someone you love to signal to them and give them absolute faith in how committed you are to them

but there are other ways of doing that and marriage seems irrelevant and pointlessly complicated now that basically nobody is religious anymore (and by that I OF COURSE mean compared to previous generations, not literally nobody)

 

[bdcjacko]

This is just me, but whenever I see someone arguing against marriage, I assume they are a teenage boy, or they have the maturity level of a teenage boy.

*And after checking the age of everyone else that has posted, and finding the oldest of you is 22, I kind of stand by that.

 

[Mittens The Kitten]

i think that a declaration of marriage can occur, but not be a legal obligation, that way we dont have to reverse the deep cultural beleif in marriage while removing most of its more dangerous aspects.

 

[Nalesnik]

Well, first off, marriage is not strictly related to religion. People have been getting married before Christianity even existed for example. Non-religious people usually don't have a religious ceremony in a church, they have what's called a civil ceremony. And they can chose where they have this ceremony, ei. City Hall, outdoors etc.. So they don't employ the church's services at all. I don't know where you got the idea that marriage has to go through the church.

Second of all, from your post, I'm going to assume that you don't know that marriage is actually a legally binding contract that the government recognizes. There are a couple benefits to this: like certain social services, certain tax breaks, also can make a joint bank account that can come with lots of other financial benefits.

And thirdly, and this is probably the most important point of marriage, is that it's a commitment. When you marry someone, your basically telling them in a fancy, and elaborate way that you will love, and support them, and be faithful to them for the rest of your life. If you think of marriage in a cold, rational way, then you will never understand. You have to use your emotional side. I really hate to pull the age card, but how old are you? It's likely that you'll understand this concept when your older.

 

[Monkfish Acc.]

It's not just religious. It's legal, too. A little piece of paper officially recognises that the two of you are rutting it regularily.
PERHAPS NOT SO REGULARILY IN FUTURE THOUGH DOHOY

No, but really, it's as much about the romance as it is about the religion and tax benefits. It's sort of like the highest point a relationship sans children can go. You've hit the final stage and it's all very exciting.
Getting past the engagement stage is like the final boss, newlyweds are so proud to have beaten it that they spend like the first month constantly fucking. Only then it turns out it wasn't the final boss and you have so much more game to go and it only gets harder.

This analogy could get pretty convoluted.

Anyway, that's why it's still around. There is all this romantic significance surrounding it.
I don't think any amount of logic will put a damper on that.

 

[Gaz6231]

This is just me, but whenever I see someone arguing against marriage, I assume they are a teenage boy, or they have the maturity level of a teenage boy.

*And after checking the age of everyone else that has posted, and finding the oldest of you is 22, I kind of stand by that.

Speaking then as a 25 year old, marriage is about as useful as just saying to someone 'I want to spend the rest of my life with you', then actually going through with it. The latter is also free, both in initial costs and potential costs if it turns out you didn't really mean it. You don't have to get the church or government involved either.

 

[bdcjacko]

This is just me, but whenever I see someone arguing against marriage, I assume they are a teenage boy, or they have the maturity level of a teenage boy.

*And after checking the age of everyone else that has posted, and finding the oldest of you is 22, I kind of stand by that.

Speaking then as a 25 year old, marriage is about as useful as just saying to someone 'I want to spend the rest of my life with you', then actually going through with it. The latter is also free, both in initial costs and potential costs if it turns out you didn't really mean it. You don't have to get the church or government involved either.

That is nice, but not going through with some sort of ceremony isn't going to impress your girlfriend.

 

[vehystrix]

Since in some countries married people already have the same benefits as couples legally living together, getting maried seems to be nothing more then an expensive tradition.

There is of course a reason people still do this, and that's because they still believe in this tradition, which is fine, I guess. I for one couldn't care less about getting married or not, and would in fact rather not as I can find other things to spend the money on that would be eaten by this tradition. My GF however still holds firm in them traditions, so this is the subject of many a debate between us.

As Nalesnik has said before me, if you think of marriage in a cold, rational way, then you will never understand. You have to use your emotional side.
For me I will never understand it, as my emotional side isn't quite up to par, but I can understand why some people still want this (And on occasion try my hardest to convince them otherwhise).

EDIT:

This is just me, but whenever I see someone arguing against marriage, I assume they are a teenage boy, or they have the maturity level of a teenage boy.

*And after checking the age of everyone else that has posted, and finding the oldest of you is 22, I kind of stand by that.

Speaking then as a 25 year old, marriage is about as useful as just saying to someone 'I want to spend the rest of my life with you', then actually going through with it. The latter is also free, both in initial costs and potential costs if it turns out you didn't really mean it. You don't have to get the church or government involved either.

That is nice, but not going through with some sort of ceremony isn't going to impress your girlfriend.

Is impressing your girlfriend really what matters? If you really cares for her, and she cares just as much for you, then you don't have to impress her, and saying that you'll be with her forever should mean just as much when said casually as it would be when said with a big ceremony.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Honestly, there's no vital reason to get married anymore but if I was with the right person I probably would...for the awesome dress!

Even if you don't have to get married to be with someone you love I think it's a nice gesture.

Did I mention the dress?

 

[Odbarc]

Marriage basically burdens you with legal restrictions that seems to mostly benefit women as a means of relationship-insurance to prevent you from or to legally punish you if you cheat on them.
Particularly if you have kids.

This seems to be the simplest explanation.

 

[Mittens The Kitten]

Well, first off, marriage is not strictly related to religion. People have been getting married before Christianity even existed for example. Non-religious people usually don't have a religious ceremony in a church, they have what's called a civil ceremony. And they can chose where they have this ceremony, ei. City Hall, outdoors etc.. So they don't employ the church's services at all. I don't know where you got the idea that marriage has to go through the church.

Second of all, from your post, I'm going to assume that you don't know that marriage is actually a legally binding contract that the government recognizes. There are a couple benefits to this: like certain social services, certain tax breaks, also can make a joint bank account that can come with lots of other financial benefits.

And thirdly, and this is probably the most important point of marriage, is that it's a commitment. When you marry someone, your basically telling them in a fancy, and elaborate way that you will love, and support them, and be faithful to them for the rest of your life. If you think of marriage in a cold, rational way, then you will never understand. You have to use your emotional side. I really hate to pull the age card, but how old are you? It's likely that you'll understand this concept when your older.

whatever connection marriage does or doesnt have to religion is purely academic, it is what it is.

the legal benefits are actually the worst part of marriage, the government shouldn't be giving people tax breaks based on what kind of relationship they want, social services can be provided for people who sign up for child-raising benefits and joint back accounts can be made regardless of married or nonmarried status.

Also, the raw emotional commitment provided by marriage can still occur without the legal mumbo jumbo. Weddings can a occur with all the ceremony that they used to and still be just as emotional, however, the legally binding contract can be scooted out of the equation and the marriage will be non-the-worse.

 

[SimuLord]

My mom and stepfather have been together for 21 years. They never bothered to get legally married. Marriage just didn't make any real sense to either of them (my mom was widowed at thirty when my dad died young and my stepfather went through the Divorce From Hell? from his ex-wife, so I guess the institution doesn't have any real sentimental value.) Financially, tax-wise, the whole nine yards, they'd actually be worse off if they combined their assets.

Of course, they also don't have any kids together (my mom has my brother and me, my stepfather has a son from his marriage, and that's enough for the both of them.)

Personally, I'd get married again (despite having been divorced) if marriage made sense for me, which means one-income household with kids where the marriage tax benefits actually show themselves. Otherwise, why complicate a good thing with a bunch of ceremony and legal complications?

 

[bdcjacko]

Well, first off, marriage is not strictly related to religion. People have been getting married before Christianity even existed for example. Non-religious people usually don't have a religious ceremony in a church, they have what's called a civil ceremony. And they can chose where they have this ceremony, ei. City Hall, outdoors etc.. So they don't employ the church's services at all. I don't know where you got the idea that marriage has to go through the church.

Second of all, from your post, I'm going to assume that you don't know that marriage is actually a legally binding contract that the government recognizes. There are a couple benefits to this: like certain social services, certain tax breaks, also can make a joint bank account that can come with lots of other financial benefits.

And thirdly, and this is probably the most important point of marriage, is that it's a commitment. When you marry someone, your basically telling them in a fancy, and elaborate way that you will love, and support them, and be faithful to them for the rest of your life. If you think of marriage in a cold, rational way, then you will never understand. You have to use your emotional side. I really hate to pull the age card, but how old are you? It's likely that you'll understand this concept when your older.

whatever connection marriage does or doesnt to religion is purely academic, it is what it is.

the legal benefits are actually the worst part of marriage, the government shouldn't be giving people tax breaks based on what kind of relationship they want social services can be provided for people who sign up for child-raising benefits and joint back accounts can be made regardless of married or nonmarried status.

Also, the raw emotional commitment provided by marriage can still occur without the legal mumbo jumbo. Weddings can a occur with all the ceremony that they used to and still be just as emotional, however, the legally binding contract can be scooted out of the equation and the marriage will be non-the-worse.

I don't know what country you live in, but speaking as a tax accountant, there are no marriage tax breaks. If file married joint tax returns, then you get twice the standard exemption and deduction that of a single person, which makes since because their are two of you. Now if you filed married separate, you actually get punished.

 

[Gaz6231]

That is nice, but not going through with some sort of ceremony isn't going to impress your girlfriend.

Frankly if that's all you're getting married for, you probably won't have much to do after the marriage.

 

[Gigano]

It offers legal benefits (and obligations, though generally nobody discover those until it's too late), it's a (secular) cultural and traditional rite of passage, and there's the option for some religious stuff too for those who care about that.

As a legal concept it should be made gender neutral though, and many of the benefits should be granted based on "cohabitation" or "parenthood" anyway.