Yes.. Marriage is a decent symbol of having a family. You can live together as much as you want, but I think that is what dogs and cats do. There is a difference between living together and marriage. The latter is commitment. You need to commit yourself to be married to someone. It is not a licence to have sex with your partner and move around.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Marriage
- Thread starter cablescavenger
- Start date
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
So in that case, why are you such a proponent of same-sex marriage rights?
if it goes against human instinct, then why allow it?
Quit pretending to be stupid.
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
nothing like patting yourself on the back now is there
.....heh, heh !marriage used to have some kind of positive status no doubt - today it's just a free-for-all grab for financial benefits - hence a sham.
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
that is a good comment, and I am still waiting for the day when single people can get married, or at least have the same rights and benefits.
banning this for single people is the same as banning same-sex marriage.
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
Instinct is the name of the game here, as you have mentioned.
Instinct is what makes the desire for the woman and child to be protected by the father, and hence marriage.
No child, no need.
It's a celebration of nature's work.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Zoe Doidge
Basically a Goddess
If it didn't, it would die off of its own accord. Regardless of whether people see it as a commitment with a divine blessing and mandate or simply a legal contract society in general definitely seems to want it around.
It is outdated in the sense that its very limited, most countries permit only one partner and place various restrictions on who that partner can be. Thats a fault of government rather than marriage itself though, and is very slowly getting better.
It will likely still be around in 100 years. Its such a big part of most cultures that it would only disappear if it was causing major problems in society and the people demanded its removal, and I think it would take something pretty massive before that happened.
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
I mean single people to marry themselves.
in reality this would mean for single people to have exactly the same benefits as married couples.
how about adoption rights for a start?
I think this was in response to something I said in another thread wasn't it? And I think then I said I agreed. But rather than thinking about it this way, and getting our torches for the lynch mob ready to go and destroy the "outdated" concept of marriage, how about we think about it more rationally.
It's impossible to deny the role marriage continues to play in our society today. It marks a certain legal status, affects the course of one's life and on top of all that is part of the cultural make-up of the majority of nations. However, it IS inherently unfair that one can only have certain benefits after being married. Therefore, what the system needs is some fine tuning. I'm tired of reading all these hardcore abolitionists on here just wanting to smash up all the established systems.
If there are benefits to being married, then there should be benefits to remaining single too. I believe single people should get certain tax breaks, and enjoy certain rights. The system needs to take more kinds of living arrangements into account. For example, why should childless couples, or single people with no kids, be paying taxes that go towards local schools that they don't even use? It's just an example. But, I believe that tweaking the system a little in this kind of mindset is the best way to make things fairer.
Can we all put down our smashy hammers and stop with our lust of revolution and other nonsense. A steady, level-headed approach to reform is always the best policy.
Me and my fiance are both catholic. We are just baptized when we were still a baby as a catholic but we are not actually practicing catholic teachings. Our insights are more of a Christian we just didn't have the chance to get baptized as a christian. Could we still get a Christian ceremony for our wedding?