Spending your life with someone ...isn't the same as marriage.

[BettyDraper]

Marriage is a contract between 2 people and the government. It isn't a lifetime commitment otherwise you wouldn't be able to dissolve it through divorce. Any meaning one adds to it, beyond it being a contract, is something you do on your own but in no way can it be enforced by the government.

 

As a high income earner who isn't religious and doesn't want kids, I'll never marry. In a few years I'll be able to pay off my house and well that'll be nice but I'll never put myself in a position where I could make another mortgage payment.

 

 

 

I'm unmarried and healthy. A lot healthier than a lot of overweight, married men I see at work or the grocery store. If I gained 50lbs, getting married magically wouldn't fix that, my own desire to maintain a healthy, active lifestyle, married or not, would.

 

How would getting married make me make more money? My career is maxed out and I have no desire to level up. I'm happy with the $145K/year I make. My salary would have increased at the same rate it did, whether or not I was married, because it was based on my effort alone that I put in at work.

 

I never said that being unmarried means that you will be unhealthy.

 

Married men tend to be healthier only because they often have wives looking after their diets and encouraging them to see the doctor.

 

Marriage would earn you more money if your wife had a career. Most married couples share income and assets, so you would have more money by default of marrying a woman with a career of her own. There are also tax breaks that come with being a married couple.

 

My husband and I are not religious and we do not want kids. We just wanted to solidify our relationship with a legal commitment.

[underpants]

In a sense, it is if YOU BELIEVE it is.

 

Personally I just couldn't invest in someone emotionally or financially as much if we weren't married.

 

That, and frankly, I'd lose my church membership if I insisted on co-habitation. I don't "blame the church" for that. I knew what I signed up for when I became a member. I just personally feel pretty "usery" about cohabitation. And on more than one occasion I've have seen men use it as an excuse to cheat "we're not married."

 

Totally respect you DOT, but didn't your H cheat on you 'within the confines of marriage'? If I read your posts you recently introduced a second being (child) into this dynamic? Is this a reconciliation child?

[underpants]

I never said that being unmarried means that you will be unhealthy.

 

Married men tend to be healthier only because they often have wives looking after their diets and encouraging them to see the doctor.

 

Marriage would earn you more money if your wife had a career. Most married couples share income and assets, so you would have more money by default of marrying a woman with a career of her own. There are also tax breaks that come with being a married couple.

 

My husband and I are not religious and we do not want kids. We just wanted to solidify our relationship with a legal commitment.

 

Yes, a married person I know refers to some of this as a 'marriage penalty'. Perhaps I have not looked into my sitch enough. As a single person I will have to pay income/capital gains taxes on any real estate sale over 250k. My house / paid for by me alone is worth 300-500 k or more because of location (improved over time). If I were married the cut off goes from 250k to 500k. So what is to stop me from paying a guy 10k to marry me (or granting him citizenship) so I can take advantage of this. Then I think let it go, why trust someone to be satisfied with that, because....trust. The whole married get perks, single has to carry a load. I also pay for your kids to go to school and I don't have any, but I'm cool with it, because I believe in educating our youth. It is awkward however to be judged for your status. Society is weird that way.

 

I don't think you should get 'perks' for marriage, besides stupid commitment gifts 'a toaster, coffee maker...;. If you love each other stay together, want to break up, fine. Keep God and the government and my taxes out of it quite frankly.

 

Earth is weird.

[dreamingoftigers]

Totally respect you DOT, but didn't your H cheat on you 'within the confines of marriage'? If I read your posts you recently introduced a second being (child) into this dynamic? Is this a reconciliation child?

 

Yes my husband cheated. Arg.

 

Such is the rub. However, I married outside my religion abdvthevrusk runs much greater that way. Only 13% of people in my religion end up divorcing.

 

But further to that, it was prior to the birth of my first child six years ago. Tons of counseling, EMDR therapy, DV courses and treatment for him have happened since. We still attend weekly marital counseling. We both find it beneficial.

I believe his current efforts reflect what I would expect from a spouse. I would also say that his self-esteem has grown in leaps and bounds in the same time period. The blowouts ended a long time ago.

 

As for my kid on the way, NO, this is not a "reconciliation child." Dear God, children aren't a "marital bandaid."

 

I will admit this one was a surprise, due more to the fact that getting me pregnant takes an alignment of all of the planets in a certain order or something of that caliber.

 

We are both looking forward to a new little person coming along.

[dreamingoftigers]

Yes my husband cheated. Arg.

 

Such is the rub. However, I married outside my religion abdvthevrusk runs much greater that way. Only 13% of people in my religion end up divorcing.

 

But further to that, it was prior to the birth of my first child six years ago. Tons of counseling, EMDR therapy, DV courses and treatment for him have happened since. We still attend weekly marital counseling. We both find it beneficial.

I believe his current efforts reflect what I would expect from a spouse. I would also say that his self-esteem has grown in leaps and bounds in the same time period. The blowouts ended a long time ago.

 

As for my kid on the way, NO, this is not a "reconciliation child." Dear God, children aren't a "marital bandaid."

 

I will admit this one was a surprise, due more to the fact that getting me pregnant takes an alignment of all of the planets in a certain order or something of that caliber.

 

We are both looking forward to a new little person coming along.

 

Plus anyone who dares to get me pregnant knows the way the hormones mix with me.......

Also knows that they take their life in their hands.

I am a totally MISERABLE pregnant person. So miserable that on week 2 of my pregnancy I was already getting moody and H asked me to take a test LOL. A "reconciliation child" would be the absolute undoing of everything if that's what the goal was LMAO.

[dreamingoftigers]

Plus anyone who dares to get me pregnant knows the way the hormones mix with me.......

Also knows that they take their life in their hands.

I am a totally MISERABLE pregnant person. So miserable that on week 2 of my pregnancy I was already getting moody and H asked me to take a test LOL. A "reconciliation child" would be the absolute undoing of everything if that's what the goal was LMAO.

 

Husband just joked "its an 'Anchor Baby' so I get to stay in my house."

[wmacbride]

A marriage is not a commitment. People end marriages and get multiple marriages. People are also not punished in any way for adultery. Marriage is simply a financial contract. It is not a commitment.

 

If you want someone to be commited to, you need to find that relationship. A financial contract/marriage will not make something into a commitment. The people do.

 

\and in this statement, we get to the real root of your problem.

 

you don't view marriage as a commitment that goes far beyond any financial arrangement ever could. t involves every aspect of a persons life, binding them together in ways that I don't think you understand.

 

When one gets married, it's a symbol of their agreement to stay together throughout their lives, if at all possible.

 

I lived with someone for several years, and had few problems ending that relation ship, as there was no real commitment to it. We simply divided up our stuff and went our separate ways.

 

I think that lack f any real, formal commitment provided n "escape hatch" that kept it form ever really getting really deep. Why bare your soul , so to speak, to someone who you don;t care enough about to truly commit to them?

[Woggle]

\and in this statement, we get to the real root of your problem.

 

you don't view marriage as a commitment that goes far beyond any financial arrangement ever could. t involves every aspect of a persons life, binding them together in ways that I don't think you understand.

 

When one gets married, it's a symbol of their agreement to stay together throughout their lives, if at all possible.

 

I lived with someone for several years, and had few problems ending that relation ship, as there was no real commitment to it. We simply divided up our stuff and went our separate ways.

 

I think that lack f any real, formal commitment provided n "escape hatch" that kept it form ever really getting really deep. Why bare your soul , so to speak, to someone who you don;t care enough about to truly commit to them?

 

Plenty of people get married and plenty of them break that commitment. Marriage doesn't symbolize anything other than a piece of paper.

[central]

Marriage is a symbol of commitment, but it is not necessarily commitment. You can have commitment without marriage, and marriage without commitment (except for the symbolism).

 

 

I am married - and it's a truly great marriage - but it would be an empty marriage without the commitment. On the other hand, we were as committed for years before marrying, and only married for some practical benefits.

[scrapbooker]

It's interesting. A healthy person knows how to disagree with others' life choices without denigrating them. If one wants to get married, great. If one doesn't want to get married, great. I'm not sure why the need to express such vitriol for a different choice than the one we would make. And funnily enough, it isn't those in favor of marriage who are being denigrating and condescending. It's the anti-marriage crowd. If you don't believe in marriage, don't get married. Why the adolescent hatred for others' choices?

 

Sweeping statements like "marriage isn't commitment" just show ignorance. It's an opinion, not a fact. For many, marriage IS a commitment.

 

That said, the only reason I can think of someone wouldn't marry someone they want to "spend their life with" is so they will have an easier out. Kind of like renting a house month to month instead of buying it.

[carhill]

This morning I was watching Jeb Bush speak at an Iowa campaign function on this day of caucusing in that state and, in his comments, he often referred to his wife, his family and his marriage and I paused to reflect on, hmm, when was the last time we elected an unmarried person to the office of POTUS. I don't think we have in my lifetime, now ten presidents and soon to be eleven.

[Woggle]

Marriage is a commitment to many but it is the commitment that gives meaning to those vows. Without it the institution really is a worthless piece of paper. Plenty of people cheat on their spouses, go through multiples marriages and divorce at the first sign that it isn't a 24/7 romance novel so clearly the legality of marriage does not mean commitment to many people.

[Lobouspo]

This morning I was watching Jeb Bush speak at an Iowa campaign function on this day of caucusing in that state and, in his comments, he often referred to his wife, his family and his marriage and I paused to reflect on, hmm, when was the last time we elected an unmarried person to the office of POTUS. I don't think we have in my lifetime, now ten presidents and soon to be eleven.

 

I believe James Buchanan is the only bachelor President we've ever had

[Doublegold]

I believe James Buchanan is the only bachelor President we've ever had

 

Yes, unless you count Bill Clinton. Oh wait--he was/is married

[carhill]

I found that to be an interesting factoid on how society views marriage, since society determines who is popular and we, generally, decide who we concentrate wealth and power in. We may not think we do but we do. They wouldn't be where they are without us.

 

While we may laugh at Bill Clinton's marriage, he has a real good chance of being the first 'First Man' of the land. Hillary wouldn't be where she is right now if not for all that 'stuff' marriage, in particular, to Bill, brought to her life, regardless of the personal health of the marriage. Same for Bill. In our society, marriage and family has social power. Will it always? IDK, can't predict the future.

[scrapbooker]

Marriage is a commitment to many but it is the commitment that gives meaning to those vows. Without it the institution really is a worthless piece of paper. Plenty of people cheat on their spouses, go through multiples marriages and divorce at the first sign that it isn't a 24/7 romance novel so clearly the legality of marriage does not mean commitment to many people.

 

Great info. Still doesn't mean it is necessary for those who are anti-marriage to denigrate it OR those who want to marry.

[Woggle]

I am married myself but the marriage is more for her than me. If we weren't married I would be just as committed.

[wmacbride]

Plenty of people get married and plenty of them break that commitment. Marriage doesn't symbolize anything other than a piece of paper.

 

that is your opinion of it.

I happen to have a very different one. I didn't go into it lightly.If you view it as just a piece of paper, then I would suggest, and no offense intended, that you don't marry.

 

To me, it has nothing to do with religion, tax breaks, financial reasons, government regulations or anything else. It is a real and deep commitment. Otherwise why bother doing it at all?

[wmacbride]

Marriage is a commitment to many but it is the commitment that gives meaning to those vows. Without it the institution really is a worthless piece of paper. Plenty of people cheat on their spouses, go through multiples marriages and divorce at the first sign that it isn't a 24/7 romance novel so clearly the legality of marriage does not mean commitment to many people.

 

 

I can only speak for myself. To me, it is a huge commitment. You may feel differently,as is your prerogative.

[Woggle]

I can only speak for myself. To me, it is a huge commitment. You may feel differently,as is your prerogative.

 

It is for me as well but that is because we make it a huge commitment. There is nothing whatsoever legally that prevents us from breaking that commitment. The divorce rate is huge plus many people cheat and treat their spouses like crap. I realize that the wedding ring hold deep meaning to many people including myself but we give it that meaning and not the piece of paper.

[carhill]

Good point on the commitment being defined by the partners, not the label on the relationship. I recall, as a young man, older, generally married, folks, condescendingly referring to couples living together without being married as 'shacking up' and other unflattering terms, like it was a sin or unhealthy or something. Heh, just remembered they also called it 'living in sin'. Times have changed.

[wmacbride]

It is for me as well but that is because we make it a huge commitment. There is nothing whatsoever legally that prevents us from breaking that commitment. The divorce rate is huge plus many people cheat and treat their spouses like crap. I realize that the wedding ring hold deep meaning to many people including myself but we give it that meaning and not the piece of paper.

 

 

i think I understand what you are getting at.

 

In my situation, we could have lived together, but to the step of getting married, because to us, it symbolizes something.

 

Where i live, two people that live together can file a joint tax return, and be considered "married common law", so the actual ceremony of getting formally married wouldn't chnage much, except to the two people involved.

 

My sister in law lived with a guy for 19 years ( not common law married though). They have kids together. As soon as they were adults, he left her. She is understandably very hurt, and told me that he told her that not being formally married made it much easier mentally to walk away, and he never would have married her anyway.

[BettyDraper]

Good point on the commitment being defined by the partners, not the label on the relationship. I recall, as a young man, older, generally married, folks, condescendingly referring to couples living together without being married as 'shacking up' and other unflattering terms, like it was a sin or unhealthy or something. Heh, just remembered they also called it 'living in sin'. Times have changed.

 

You'd be surprised how many religious people and those over 50 still use those terms.

 

When I was engaged, I was turned away from a Catholic Church because my husband is a Protestant and we were "living in sin".

 

It didn't matter that I was raised Catholic.