What is marriage?

[CharmingOwl]

From the Lavenderist point of view marriage was bastardized and turned into an economic agreement. This is influenced by Marxism and traditional paganism where weddings were not expenses but rather events that represented the union between people. For Lavenderists there is no reason they can't practice polygamy or any reason marriage even has to be recognized by the government besides rights and things.

Various new age gurus and practitioners recommend thinking of your romance as sacred partnership instead of marriage and in our practice we encourage the same thing.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes .. but if "the state" is secular, it no longer has any real meaning.

Marriage really applies to a religious community, who takes adultery seriously.
It protects the citizens in the 'parish' from abomination such as rape, and protects the family institution.

Are you willing to extrapolate a little?

1) how does it protect from rape?
2) why do you think it requires a religious community for adultery to be taken seriously?

 

[idea]

From a religious perspective, what is marriage to you?

If you're not religious, what is marriage to you?

Nowadays, marriage is a legally binding relationship, but is that what it's supposed to be?

In your eyes, can you be "married" without the government saying you are married?

When I was a Christian, I understood marriage was an image of your relationship with God. That's why it's so sacred and no cheating is allowed.

I guess I still feel like that.

When I was Christian the "bride of Christ" was always a bit... creepy... Jesus was supposed to be a brother, NOT husband. God was supposed to be father - NOT a 3some - eeek!!

I agree, marriage is your one and only - soul mate, your other half. (Appreciate that definition now more than ever after escaping mormonism). It is bff, loyalty, support, better with age, refined through loss and challenge, in good health and in bad.

Not defined by government. Not defined by church. Just takes two people, no one else - no middlemen

 

[idea]

From the Lavenderist point of view marriage was bastardized and turned into an economic agreement. This is influenced by Marxism and traditional paganism where weddings were not expenses but rather events that represented the union between people. For Lavenderists there is no reason they can't practice polygamy or any reason marriage even has to be recognized by the government besides rights and things.

Various new age gurus and practitioners recommend thinking of your romance as sacred partnership instead of marriage and in our practice we encourage the same thing.

I worked with someone from Ghana from polygamous "family". Their description was not marriage - it was a business arrangement.

I think having kids together can really bind a couple - if they equally raise kids (both change diapers, both cook and clean, both work). For couples where one partner stays home - often lives diverge to separate paths, and marriage is more of duty / business arrangement by the end.

Sacred partnership - I like that - equally yoked. Both work, both clean, both take equal responsibility - not head and doormat - a true partnership.

 

[Twilight Hue]

....
Adultery carries a severe penalty in the Bible & Qur'an..
It makes people think twice before engaging in extramarital activity.
Naturally, that protects the family. If you can't see how, then..

Yet God got Josephs fiance Mary pregnant and didn't even marry her, or apologize to poor Joe that he knocked up his woman.

 

[Alien826]

Jesus said that there is no marriage in heaven.

The only other place that exists after death is hell.

Therefore marriage is hell.

.............................

Statistics show that married men live longer than single men.

Or does it just seem longer?

..............................

The three rings.

Engagement ring, wedding ring, suffering.

...........................

Am I joking?

 

[ppp]

I worked with someone from Ghana from polygamous "family". Their description was not marriage - it was a business arrangement.

I think having kids together can really bind a couple - if they equally raise kids (both change diapers, both cook and clean, both work). For couples where one partner stays home - often lives diverge to separate paths, and marriage is more of duty / business arrangement by the end.

Sacred partnership - I like that - equally yoked. Both work, both clean, both take equal responsibility - not head and doormat - a true partnership.

I game with people from Ohio in a polygamist relationship, and am friend with people from North Carolina in a similar relationship. Both trios are families - no scare quotes needed - with children and in the case of the first, grandchildren. All are professionals with accomplished children. All seem as happy as any content couple I know.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Are you willing to extrapolate a little?

1) how does it protect from rape?
2) why do you think it requires a religious community for adultery to be taken seriously?

Please see post #35

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

We've had this discussion before, and you get "heated"..

Likely because I take it personal since I'm in a committed relationship with kids without being married.

Adultery carries a severe penalty in the Bible & Qur'an..

First of all, it doesn't matter what the bible and the quran says when the question is "how does it protect the family". Your answer should consist of an actual argument concerning real-world phenomenon in relation to real relationships with real children and parents and cousins and etc.

Secondly, it also doesn't matter when the subject is marriage. Neither the bible nor the quran "own" marriage. They don't have any exclusive rights to it. Practically every culture ever has marriage. Not just those of abrahamic culture. Abrahamic religion doesn't get to claim a monopoly on the practice.

It makes people think twice before engaging in extramarital activity.

Third... cheating (disloyalty) isn't "worse" when it happens between married couples as opposed to between unmarried couples.

Cheating is always immoral. Regardless of marriage.

Fourth, if you require a fear of punishment in order to not cheat, then - to ironically use Jesus' words - you have already cheated in your heart. If fear of punishment is the only thing stopping you, then your family has already lost your loyalty and respect.

Naturally, that protects the family. If you can't see how, then..

Even if I would grant you that marriage makes you less likely to cheat for that reason, then it doesn't protect the family. Instead, it only keeps up appearances. But there is no loyalty there. No respect.

You know why I don't cheat?
Because I'm not interested in it. Because I respect my partner. Because I love my partner. Because I could never do that to her.

What protects the family is love and respect.
A piece of paper doesn't change that.

And, once more, if you require the fear of punishment in order to not cheat... Then already the love and respect, and by extension the whole relationship, is tainted.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No. I'm always married. I don't view marriage as you do. I don't choose my partners lightly, and when I'm with them, I am married to them, in my heart.

You should state that upfront to avoid confusion.

Same here.
I don't require a piece of paper. I too am a man who values the commitment itself, rather than the "legally binding obligation to stay committed".

 

[idea]

I game with people from Ohio in a polygamist relationship, and am friend with people from North Carolina in a similar relationship. Both trios are families - no scare quotes needed - with children and in the case of the first, grandchildren. All are professionals with accomplished children. All seem as happy as any content couple I know.

The family from Ghana was much larger than 3, it was a business. Those women worked, ran farms, so the work was good for the favorite wives.

For polygamous cults where women are not allowed to work, where girls are married young, where there are many more than 3 - not such a great thing for those women.

Read ghost of polygamy... All different situations.

 

[1213]

That's not how the law views it in the UK, nor I am guessing in the US.

What about 2 women, or two men, when they have sex what happens? What if there's three or more involved? An orgy might have huge legal ramifications if your claim were true.

In Biblical point of view, I think people are married in the case I said. But, if we continue to those other cases, in Biblical point of view also, two men that have sex would deserve death penalty. People in orgy would also deserve death, if adultery.

I don't expect that marriage is declared on basis if man and woman have had sex. Still, I think they are married in that case, I think also mental connection between them is then maid and they have that connection the rest of their life, which I think is marriage. However, this is just what I think. If you think it is wrong, please give a good reason why so. In this matter I can easily change my mind.

 

[muhammad_isa]

First of all, it doesn't matter what the bible and the quran says..

..not from a secular viewpoint, no.
That is why I said that marriage doesn't serve any useful purpose, in a secular society. It is based on a religious institution.

Cheating is always immoral. Regardless of marriage..

Cheating? Is that how you see it?

I am not monogamous. I am a Muslim male.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Please see post #35

Hmm....well...taking things one step at a time, that doesn't speak to 'rape', or how marriage protects from it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Hmm....well...taking things one step at a time, that doesn't speak to 'rape', or how marriage protects from it.

You want to know how it protects women from rape?

First of all, you would need to define it...

"Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without that person's consent."
- wiki -

To police rape, one needs to prove that the sexual assault has taken place.
In a religious community, marriage implicitly means that there is consent between them.
It is therefore much easier for the police to prosecute, as in an Abrahamic society, sexual activity outside of marriage is not permitted.

 

[Goldemar]

You want to know how it protects women from rape?

First of all, you would need to define it...

"Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without that person's consent."
- wiki -

To police rape, one needs to prove that the sexual assault has taken place.
In a religious community, marriage implicitly means that there is consent between them.
It is therefore much easier for the police to prosecute, as in an Abrahamic society, sexual activity outside of marriage is not permitted.

So are you saying it is impossible for a husband to rape his wife?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

You want to know how it protects women from rape?

First of all, you would need to define it...

"Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without that person's consent."
- wiki -

To police rape, one needs to prove that the sexual assault has taken place.
In a religious community, marriage implicitly means that there is consent between them.
It is therefore much easier for the police to prosecute, as in an Abrahamic society, sexual activity outside of marriage is not permitted.

I once had a Malaysian work colleague who tried to tell me there were no homosexuals in Malaysia, because it was illegal.

This reminds me of that.

1. It's entirely possible to have rape within marriage, and ai fundamentally reject your notion that marriage is implicit consent.

2. Sex outside of marriage isn't 'rape' where it is consensual no matter how sinful you see it, even by the definition you've provided.

 

[muhammad_isa]

So are you saying it is impossible for a husband to rape his wife?

Not in a secular society..
..but then it is notoriously difficult to police rape, in that case.

 

[muhammad_isa]

1. It's entirely possible to have rape within marriage, and ai fundamentally reject your notion that marriage is implicit consent.

If you wish to make law redundant, then yes.
What is the point of marriage law?
That is the issue being discussed..

 

[muhammad_isa]

2. Sex outside of marriage isn't 'rape' where it is consensual no matter how sinful you see it, even by the definition you've provided.

No .. it's not.
It is illegal, punishable, sexual intercourse.
Not something that is worth the risk .. in a religiously strict society.

Obviously, lots of people like their freedom .. even freedom to commit evils of various natures.
In the long run, evil does not make for a stable society.