Author pkn06002 Posted March 30, 2009 Author Share Posted March 30, 2009 LOL!!!! Spelling and grammar comments are the last ditch weapon of those that know they are wrong. clv0116 I guess the MILLIONS of people around the globe that have affairs or divorce disagree with you. Maybe all those folks are just wrong huh? Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Just got tired of reading it, but the point stands. Link to post Share on other sites
PinkKittyKat Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I used to be indifferent towards marriage. I've never been married. Then, at 21, I got a bf who started pressuring ME about marriage. Yeah, crazy huh? I put up with it for a bit and said "Maybe, I don't know" etc. I compromised and we got matching "promise rings", but I wore it NOT on my wedding band finger. But finally he started REALLY going on about marriage and I had to come right out and say that before I was indifferent towards marriage, but now, after all of his pressuring, and me thinking about it seriously, I was pretty anti-marriage. And that I did not want to marry him, and I never would. He decided to stay anyway. I tried to convince him he wasn't going to get what he wanted but he's sort of silly that way. Anyway, that relationship died for other reasons. Three months into my relationship with my current bf I knew I wanted to marry him. What the heck!? LOL Holy change of heart, Batman! Anyway, we discussed it, and we've not made it "official", but we got promise rings, but they look like wedding bands and we wear them on the ring finger. He wants to do a big proposal, diamond ring and all, sometime in the next couple of years, and we even know our venue. Haha. We've been together for 2 years now, so we aren't rushing into anything. But it sure is weird how I thought marriage was a pointless religious ceremony. Me and my bf are technically common-law married from cohabiting for so long, and have many marriage rights anyway. But there's something about having a big thing, and making it official, making that big of a commitment in front of everyone that appeals to me now. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 But there's something about having a big thing, and making it official, making that big of a commitment in front of everyone that appeals to me now. Congrats on your happiness, and you've got nothing to feel odd about, marriage IS a big deal but it's not the only way to have a satisfying life. Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I've not bothered to read this whole thread...so I'm chiming in WAY late, without reading the pages of previous arguments...but I'll throw my opinion out there. What makes a marriage "different"? The vows. The promise of commitment to each other. The difference between a 48 year live in relationship and a marriage? The promise that was made at the beginning. But I'd also add that the 48 year long relationship undoubtedly picked up the "implied promise of commitment" somewhere along the way. Other than that, I'm not sure what specifically the OP was looking for. Was there something "magical" about marriage that's supposed to prevent it from encountering the same problems that a long term non-marriage would have? Not that I can think of. At the end of it all...the only differences between a marriage and the "other" relationships were the promises exchanged on the wedding day. The AGREEMENT of commitment that each other gave. That is the difference. Link to post Share on other sites
Author pkn06002 Posted March 30, 2009 Author Share Posted March 30, 2009 Was there something "magical" about marriage that's supposed to prevent it from encountering the same problems that a long term non-marriage would have? Not that I can think of. At the end of it all...the only differences between a marriage and the "other" relationships were the promises exchanged on the wedding day. The AGREEMENT of commitment that each other gave. That is the difference. You got the question right and also threw in a good response. Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 A couple can't make those promises to each other without putting it in writing? If it HAS to be put in writing to solidify the promise, that isn't much of a promise. Who said it had to be "in writing"? Didn't I say that a long term relationship generally has that same "implied" agreement? A marriage makes that agreement up front, and it's not implied, it's a formal agreement between the two of them. But...that agreement has to be there. And having it "formally" recognized and agreed upon between the two...regardless of in writing, in front of witnesses, or between the two of them alone together on a mountaintop...marriage is the formal the AGREEMENT TO COMMITMENT. But it's that commitment that matters over anything else. Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I guess I'd add... As long as both parties agreed to that commitment...and both parties truly took the effort to maintain their relationship and adhere to their promises...then it's very likely to be a wonderful relationship. It doesn't matter if you call it a marriage or a swap meet...the foundation and end result is the same. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I guess I misunderstood. The "in writing" part is the formality of the marriage. Some places, but not in others. Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I guess I misunderstood. The "in writing" part is the formality of the marriage. There's the license, then the certificate (binding contract). There are technically 2 aspects of marriage... The "relationship" side, which is what I was talking about when I was discussing things like commitment, promises, etc... And the "legal" side, which is the government and/or church recognized aspects...such as the marriage licenses, tax form changes, legal name changes, etc... Of course those latter can vary greatly state by state, culture by culture. Link to post Share on other sites
PinkKittyKat Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 And that's fine Pinkkittykat, and I'm sure all the LS'rs would be happy for you, but how could one say your married relationship would mean less than someone's 48 year committed UNMARRIED relationship involving a shared home, children, grandchildren, etc. etc. etc.? Well, the rotten part is that many times people assume that marriage somehow MAKES a relationship serious. Look at it this way, my younger brother is marrying his gf. They live in my dad's crappy basement in a low-rent area of the 'burbs. They are quite young, have both cheated in the relationship and seem really blasé about each other anyhow. The girl picked her ring out and he just bought it for her without any prior discussion. Think "Oooohh, pretty ring, let's get married!", "*shrug* Okay." Walked into the store and bought it and now they're engaged. He told me and my mother about the engagement by TEXT MESSAGE. P.S. My brother is also a high school drop out. Anyway, I live in the city in a nice apartment with my bf, we have discussed our level of commitment and boundaries, I went to college, me and my bf have never cheated, we are planning for the future, we both have actual careers, we have started planning to buy an apartment together etc. etc. We also don't go to drunken high school house parties on the weekends, as they do. But all that aside, when I say "my boyfriend" people are going to make different assumptions than if I say "my husband". And when my brother calls his gf his "wife", people WILL simply assume their relationship is more serious than mine. It's already started happening, even though they aren't married yet. Them getting married, while it won't make their relationship more serious, it will give the surface impression that it is. It's crappy but true. Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I would say that people shouldn't marry UNTIL the relationship is serious. Most people likely agree with me, so they make the assumption that if it's a marriage, it's serious. They assume that the two people in the relationship are working under that same premise. Hence, most people assign more value to a marriage rather than a bf/gf type relationship. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Well, the rotten part is that many times people assume that marriage somehow MAKES a relationship serious. Some people, usually from a more traditional time, won't accept shacking up as a legitimate alternative. My personal view is that many relationships shouldn't lead to marriage (look at the divorce stats) but if a person is in a strong enough relationship it's the logical end game for that relationship. Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Many non-married relationships involve much stronger emotions and a willingness to understand each other and compromise, thus making THESE relationships more genuine and lasting. Yes, so true. I know for me, I was completely dedicated and committed to my marriage, but the guy I lived with for over 7 years....I worked HARDER at that relationship when we were started having issues. I can't say it's because I loved him more than I loved my husband; I think it was because that relationship meant more to me than the one I was in when I was married. Link to post Share on other sites
taylor Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 You know as I read through the threads here on LS something popped into my head. Why is a marriage considered so different than other relationships? You read thread after thread of how people (like me) lose that love, passion, desire for their spouse. Which in a normal (pre-marriage) relationship would be a signal that you move on. But divorce is ugly so people cheat or just stay and are unhappy. I know you see those "special" couples that are that perfect match that last forever, but those seem more like the exception than the rule. But why is marriage supposed to be so much different? Marriage is a step a couple chooses to take to confirm their committment to each other. They make a promise to each other, to their friends, family, and community, and to GOD (a Christian ceremony) to commit to that other person for life, with all intent and purpose. It is just a step..a formal step..telling the world it is their intention to commit to this other person for life. This step brings with it a sense of security. Of course time will tell all as to whether that security is false or true; whether the actual commitment is false or true; whether the love is actually false or true. But the point is at the time the step of marriage is taken the couple believes the love is true, the commitment is permanent and the security is there. This step also brings with it a sense of responsibility not only to your spouse, but to your friends and family and to God since you made this promise in front of them as well. Not everyone feels the need to marry and they choose not to. It's just a choice. Don't choose to marry if you don't need a marriage ceremony to feel secure..and if you don't want the obligation of upholding your promises before your spouse, AS WELL AS family, friends, community, and religious power. I think the marriage committment appears to be "stronger" than the committment co-habitating adults make only because the marriage committment requires additional steps - legal document, wedding, profession of committment before those who hold you accountable for your actions. But I don't think there is much difference between a relationship in a marriage and one in a cohabitation. Thoughts and feelings change the same in both. But I do believe partners in troubled marriages do think a little harder before throwing the towel in. Because they KNOW they made a commitment to stay together forever and they know they did it before everyone that matters to them. Changing their mind means breaking a formal vow and letting down everyone who believed they were going to keep it. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 But I do believe partners in troubled marriages do think a little harder before throwing the towel in. Because they KNOW they made a commitment to stay together forever and they know they did it before everyone that matters to them. Changing their mind means breaking a formal vow and letting down everyone who believed they were going to keep it. I agree. Indeed, if the OP was shacked up I bet he'd be out the door already. Link to post Share on other sites
Author pkn06002 Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 I agree. Indeed, if the OP was shacked up I bet he'd be out the door already. Oh if it was not for my child I would already be out the door, marriage vows or not. Lets not forget the small fortune it costs to get out of this promise. See I find the vows thing WORTHLESS without the real relationship behind those vows actually being worth something. I am not beholden to the approval of others for my worth in life. If people find me less because I broke those vows so what. Taylor you bring up a good point in the idea of security. Which is something very different than a non-marriage relationship. I do think that security is a plus and a minus to a marriage relationship. Security allows you to do things you would never do in a "normal" relationship since someone is free to walk away. So you have to play nice and be loving to keep that person. Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I guess, knowing NOTHING about a couple's relationship, one might jump to that conclusion. However, since no one knows what goes on behind closed doors, to assume a relationship is strong BECAUSE of marriage is overlooking the obvious - that SOME marriages are a farce. Many non-married relationships involve much stronger emotions and a willingness to understand each other and compromise, thus making THESE relationships more genuine and lasting. Right... And what prevents these relationships from BECOMING a marriage? Nothing. It sounds like you've got something against the idea of marriage...and have decided that a relationship that isn't a marriage is somehow better? A good relationship is a good relationship...marriage or not. As Taylor said...a MARRIAGE is one that is "formalized"...and one in which those vows to each other are ALSO "formalized". What's the issue with that? What makes a relationship in which those vows AREN'T "formalized" better? Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I didn't say a NON marriage relationship was better. I'm simply saying neither is better than the other. Neither is more SERIOUS than the other. It's what the two people in either situation MAKE of the relationship that is important. You can have a marriage that totally SUCKS and a non-marriage relationship that ROCKS, and SOME posters would say the sucky married relationship is more valid; better; more "real." You are right. A good relationship is a good relationship, marriage or not. See, what I bolded is what is beginning to be the crux of this conversation: because people are saying that they support marriage and others are saying they are in support of non-marital relationships, that means they think one is better over the other when it is really just a preference between the couple - the 2 people involved decide which situation works better for THEIR relationship. If someone doesn't 1.want to have children, if they 2. don't need the other benefits such as health/financial security, if they 3. don't feel that Ithey need to be bonded in a spiritual/religious way, if they 4. don't care to have a public "ceremony", then why is marriage necessary? Isn't the love, respect, words of affirmation and commitment to one another enough to bind you to each other? This is rhetorical. As for me, I'm happy to have a commitment between just the two of us; if we both end up being on the same page where we want to add a spiritual component to it, I'd consider exchanging vows. Just the two of us, the officiant, and God. Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 As for me, I'm happy to have a commitment between just the two of us; if we both end up being on the same page where we want to add a spiritual component to it, I'd consider exchanging vows. Just the two of us, the officiant, and God. ...and a pre-nup! I don't want any man I love to ever think I want him for what he has or for what I can get. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I didn't say a NON marriage relationship was better. Fair enough, not all relationships are destined for marriage and some marriages are worse than some non-married relationships, however ... in a relationship that can sustain a marriage, marriage is the highest and final level of commitment. There no relationship I'm aware of where getting a divorce is ever considered as a means to advance the relationship, whereas plenty advance from other stages INTO marriage. . Link to post Share on other sites
PinkKittyKat Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 ...and a pre-nup! I don't want any man I love to ever think I want him for what he has or for what I can get. Yeah, I'll trade the gods/goddesses out and trade in a pre-nup as well. Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 in a relationship that can sustain a marriage, marriage is the highest and final level of commitment. There no relationship I'm aware of where getting a divorce is ever considered as a means to advance the relationship, whereas plenty advance from other stages INTO marriage. . No, it is not. According to Merriam Webster, a commitment is: the state or an instance of being obligated or emotionally impelled. According to psycholoogists a commitment is: as an individual’s intent to maintain a relationship and to remain psychologically attached to it. I don't see marriage in either definitions. Know why? Because commitment is a state of being, not a stage. I think if you try to understand this concept, you will understand what some of us here are trying to say. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Because commitment is a state of being Within any given relationship, it takes a greater "state of being committed" to consent to enter marriage, and leaving marriage signifies a reduced "state of being committed". That is Universal for all practical purposes. Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Within any given relationship, it takes a greater "state of being committed" to consent to enter marriage, and leaving marriage signifies a reduced "state of being committed". That is Universal for all practical purposes. Now you are turning what you said around. You said commitment is in stages, now you want to say that marriage is a "greater state of being committed". Really? I know you won't answer this, but I will ask you anyway: who or which people, are saying it's a "greater state"? Please back up your "theory" with actual facts. Until then, it's just a personal preference to CLV, which is fine and dandy. I predict I will not get an answer that is supported by fact. Or statistic. Or study. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts