Is the institution of Marriage still relevant?

[Al Gorefiend]

I couldn't do it. Open marriage I mean. Something about knowing the mother of my children is getting pounded by some douche would make me insane.

We pre-approve eachother's advances. If I don't like the guy, she won't try anything and vice versa.

[May90]

I'm thinking you and him (and myself) give the word oath different amounts of reverence. For some people, oath is a very serious thing. You don't take one lightly and you don't break it under nearly any circumstance. For someone that treats an oath that way, taking one for marriage will cause a large amount of reflection of the choice. Basically you don't marry someone on a whim or because "it may work, it may not. Let's try and see"

I understand it. I just don't think that one needs to give an oath to be totally devoted to something. Regardless of how you see an oath, being completely devoted to your partner is just a matter of making a conscious decision. Like with everything in life, if you believe in something deeply, then you will act accordingly, regardless of anything.

I couldn't do it. Open marriage I mean. Something about knowing the mother of my children is getting pounded by some douche would make me insane.

Open marriages do not have to involve douches.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

I'm not sure I understand the point you are making. In my eyes, an oath in itself shouldn't affect a relationship in any way, since, the moment you've decided you love your partner and want to spend a lifetime with them, you have already bound yourself to the person. The only difference between it and marriage is that marriage makes you proclaim it officially, in the eyes of society... But since you are going to try your best to make your relationship great and your partner happy anyway, then what does officializing it change?

When you give an oath in the military, you do it so the society knows it can count on you, since its well being depends on your actions and they cannot just take your word on it. But in a relationship, the only person whose well being depends on you is your partner, plus yourself - both should be able to trust you completely without any oaths, otherwise the relationship is not genuine, and even if an oath prevents it from falling apart, it only worsens the problem, in my opinion.

I think you are arguing for the same position I expressed earlier, just in different words. I see the strength of marriage in it being a deep societal tradition. When you marry someone, it feels like your relationship is now complete; just purely because of our culture, until you've done that, it feels like a necessary step, and before it is done, the relationship still is considered to be on its preparational stage. While once it is done, people feel a strong sense of relief and commitment. However, the way I see it, it has nothing to do with the oath, it is just our culture creating a bias.

Some people, like me, see cultural things as very relative and do not rely on them much when making a judgement. As such, I can have a perfect life with a partner without ever marrying them: I don't see marriage as a necessary final step in establishing an "eternal" relationship. However, I wouldn't mind doing that, since it is likely that it will make my partner and a lot of people who care about me happier.

I think our disagreement can be summarized in that you don't believe speaking an oath has any particular power over your actions or the way you feel about something, and I do. I've given three sacred oaths in my life, my oath of enlistment/office, my wedding vows, and my baptismal vows. These oaths center around the three defining areas of my life. They have incredible power over me. I've changed my personality, altered my beliefs, acted against my own interest and ultimately built my life around these words I've spoken. When you believe in keeping your word so fiercely, you can say with real confidence that you will not break it when the going get's tough.

I will not divorce my wife. If she completely lost her mind, became a completely different person, started becoming abusive to myself and our children, my affection and regard for her would certainly suffer, but I would not divorce her. I might become estranged from her if necessary to protect the kids, but I would not divorce her. I would be celibate, and lonely, but I would still be her husband, and I would work tirelessly to heal the wound between us. That is what an oath requires. Fortunately that is not the case. I'm blessed with a wonderful wife who rewards me every day by filling my life with ease and children. I'm mentally and emotionally prepared though for the "or worse" portions of my wedding vows.

[Alydael]

I think our disagreement can be summarized in that you don't believe speaking an oath has any particular power over your actions or the way you feel about something, and I do. I've given three sacred oaths in my life, my oath of enlistment/office, my wedding vows, and my baptismal vows. These oaths center around the three defining areas of my life. They have incredible power over me. I've changed my personality, altered my beliefs, acted against my own interest and ultimately built my life around these words I've spoken. When you believe in keeping your word so fiercely, you can say with real confidence that you will not break it when the going get's tough.

I will not divorce my wife. If she completely lost her mind, became a completely different person, started becoming abusive to myself and our children, my affection and regard for her would certainly suffer, but I would not divorce her. I might become estranged from her if necessary to protect the kids, but I would not divorce her. I would be celibate, and lonely, but I would still be her husband, and I would work tirelessly to heal the wound between us. That is what an oath requires. Fortunately that is not the case. I'm blessed with a wonderful wife who rewards me every day by filling my life with ease and children. I'm mentally and emotionally prepared though for the "or worse" portions of my wedding vows.

I am with you. My word means something. I won't take an oath if I do not mean it.

[Revi]

Marriage isn't dead though. Whether it's worth it is totally subjective.

It's less of a big thing than it was generations ago, but it's still relevant and important to people.

[Shadowferal]

To me marriage is part of responsible parenting.

[Spectral]

I think our disagreement can be summarized in that you don't believe speaking an oath has any particular power over your actions or the way you feel about something, and I do. I've given three sacred oaths in my life, my oath of enlistment/office, my wedding vows, and my baptismal vows. These oaths center around the three defining areas of my life. They have incredible power over me. I've changed my personality, altered my beliefs, acted against my own interest and ultimately built my life around these words I've spoken. When you believe in keeping your word so fiercely, you can say with real confidence that you will not break it when the going get's tough.

I will not divorce my wife. If she completely lost her mind, became a completely different person, started becoming abusive to myself and our children, my affection and regard for her would certainly suffer, but I would not divorce her. I might become estranged from her if necessary to protect the kids, but I would not divorce her. I would be celibate, and lonely, but I would still be her husband, and I would work tirelessly to heal the wound between us. That is what an oath requires. Fortunately that is not the case. I'm blessed with a wonderful wife who rewards me every day by filling my life with ease and children. I'm mentally and emotionally prepared though for the "or worse" portions of my wedding vows.

You may want to keep in mind when explaining these things to May that he has no meaningful experience with any of this. That tends to result in a skewed view of what healthy, normal marriages look like.

[Deleted]

I think our disagreement can be summarized in that you don't believe speaking an oath has any particular power over your actions or the way you feel about something, and I do. I've given three sacred oaths in my life, my oath of enlistment/office, my wedding vows, and my baptismal vows. These oaths center around the three defining areas of my life.

This is contradictory. Jesus was very explicit about the fallacy of oath-taking.

[Lillyth]

The tax benefits are nice and some other things as well

Other than that, it is downright useless and just a way to lose your money to stupid disagreements.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

This is contradictory. Jesus was very explicit about the fallacy of oath-taking.

I don't want to derail this thread and turn it into a theological discussion about oath-taking, but suffice it to say many theologians and fathers of the Church have wrestled with the implications of Matthew 5:34 and Jeremiah 4:2 and have come to a widely held consensus that oath-taking is licit, and an act of virtue, under certain conditions. Those conditions being the gravity of the issue being sufficient to require the witness of God, The affirmation being truthful, and lastly, the oath must require some obligation on the part of the oath-taker.

[Deleted]

You may want to keep in mind when explaining these things to May that he has no meaningful experience with any of this. That tends to result in a skewed view of what healthy, normal marriages look like.

I do have the experience of this and I venture a better understanding of the issue than some people in this thread who are offering a quasi-stoic and utterly miserable attitude towards the concept. If marriage was actually that depressing then it should be done away with: it isn't.

It is sometimes necessary to sacrifice one's happiness for the greater good. Marriage should not be one of those things. If that is how you are doing it you are doing it wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't want to derail this thread and turn it into a theological discussion about oath-taking, but suffice it to say many theologians and fathers of the Church have wrestled with the implications of Matthew 5:34 and Jeremiah 4:2 and have come to a widely held consensus that oath-taking is licit, and an act of virtue, under certain conditions. Those conditions being the gravity of the issue being sufficient to require the witness of God, The affirmation being truthful, and lastly, the oath must require some obligation on the part of the oath-taker.

Theologians and Fathers of the church have said many contentious and occassionally flat-out crazy things. I place greater reliance on primary sources.

[Deleted]

I couldn't do it. Open marriage I mean. Something about knowing the mother of my children is getting pounded by some douche would make me insane.

Seeing your post in the other thread

What your wife or girlfriend doesn't know won't hurt her. Smash that slut from work and don't ever tell your chick. Life is too short not to bang everyone you can.

She could do it; she just should do it behind your back and not tell you. I mean, life is too short to just stick with one person, right?

[ArguesWithStrangers]

I do have the experience of this and I venture a better understanding of the issue than some people in this thread who are offering a quasi-stoic and utterly miserable attitude towards the concept. If marriage was actually that depressing then it should be done away with: it isn't.

It is sometimes necessary to sacrifice one's happiness for the greater good. Marriage should not be one of those things. If that is how you are doing it you are doing it wrong.

Therein lies the basic philosophical difference between you and I. You see self-sacrifice as an obstacle to your personal happiness and fulfillment. I see them as the source of mine.

Theologians and Fathers of the church have said many contentious and occasionally flat-out crazy things. I place greater reliance on primary sources.

You are welcome to do so. Just realize that your interpretation is just that, an interpretation. Sola Scriptura dies the moment your eyes hit the page.

[Shadowferal]

Theologians and Fathers of the church have said many contentious and occassionally flat-out crazy things. I place greater reliance on primary sources.

If I can't take a man at his word, why should I take yours? Especially if you place no value on it.

[Kapadons]

Seeing your post in the other thread

She could do it; she just should do it behind your back and not tell you. I mean, life is too short to just stick with one person, right?

If I didn't know about it, I couldn't be crazy about it. My feelings on sex and cheating likely differ from yours.

[Lady Dragonheart]

Seeing your post in the other thread

She could do it; she just should do it behind your back and not tell you. I mean, life is too short to just stick with one person, right?

Seriously... I noticed this as well. Such a hypocrite. :|

[ArguesWithStrangers]

If I didn't know about it, I couldn't be crazy about it. My feelings on sex and cheating likely differ from yours.

That is clear beyond any doubt.

[Aggrophobic]

Pretty much had to marry or my girl friend would get nothing if I died.
It's a silly system and I wish I could just state in my will, who gets what but nope.

[Deleted]

The institution of marriage is advantageous to women and harmful to men. Take a guess who'll be evicted from the family home he paid for when the time to divorce comes. Being a so-called 'manchild' is in every way superior to marriage.

[Shadowferal]

If there's a time when divorce happens...then it's obvious that you married the wrong woman.