Reflection on Marriage

So you think everyone who gets married should stay married no matter what? I
don't agree with vows that are apparently unattainable. Apparent by the high
divorce rate. Why not make a commitment to stay committed as long as both
parties want to?

My approach is that of a generation who has watched their parents be
miserable, all in the sake of staying married. One that has watched
Grandparents die unhappy with the life they had lived with a spouse they
didn't love but stayed together for the sake of the vows.

I would never suggest someone stay miserable in order to keep to the vow.

T
Kenneth S. wrote in message
...
Tiffany:

You reject the idea that people should honor vows they have freely
made. You reject the notion of commitment. So you are rejecting
marriage.

Your approach isn't of course unusual. Unfortunately, it's exhibited
by most of the politicians who make the laws on marriage and divorce.
That's one reason why I argue that, to all intents and purposes,
marriage as a meaningful institution has already been abolished in the
U.S.

When people want to -- or are forced to -- handle change in themselves
and in others, they always find ways of doing so.

Tiffany wrote:

Kenneth S. wrote in message
...
Tiffany:

Have you ever heard the story about the clock that struck thirteen?
That single event cast doubt on all that had gone before.

You are now telling us that the vows made in a marriage ceremony are
"basically bull****." So I think we know how much attention to pay to
everything else you have said.

As for your shallow "growing apart" argument, I think you will find
that spouses in successful long-term marriages say that their marriage
went through several phases, and they adjusted to those changes.

That is because they are able to handle change. Not all folks can.


The bottom line is that you think that the institution of marriage
should be abolished. You should simply come out and say so.



Initially I stated that couple should wait until they are older and more
settle in life to marry. Some people aren't able to adjust to change in
their lives, others can. If you wait to get married till you are older
then
atleast you will know if you or your partner can deal with the changes
that
have taken place.

Yes the old vows are bull****. I don't think one should make promises
like
that. Every couple should make their own vows as to what is important to
them. Those old vows might work for some, so by god, use them.

T

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
We all know the typical vows used in marriage ceremonies so I am sure
those
were the vows used. Those vows are basically bull**** in my eyes and I
would
never use them. No one can make a promise to that extent. But is it
not
true
that two people can grow in different directions as they progress
through
life?

You are expressing the casual attitude toward marriage that scares men
away
from it. If marriage vows are only valid until one partner decides to
renege on the vows, they are meaningless. And the concept of growing
apart
is a unilateral feelings based decision about the state of the
relationship
made without the other partner's input.

So how would you change the marriage vows to cover reality? I am
committed
to you until someone better comes along? I will love you until I decide
we
are growing in different directions? I will cherish you until I have a
child who will then become more important to me than you? I will stay
with
you until I decide to leave and take your children and half your assets
with
me?



So there you assume all women are after money. It always ends with the
money. I can not say what would be in a wedding vow. It should be a
personal
thing. I am not in the process of marriage so its nothing I sit and think
about. My view about marriage aren't casual. If I were that casual, I
would
already been married a few times. I take marriage more seriously and with
an
honest attitude then most do.

The point that seems to be ignored in all of your responses is in over 70%
of marriages that breakup, the marriage vows are terminated and the joint
relationship is ended by unilateral decisions made by the wife over her
husband's objections. I doubt you will find a man in this NG who doesn't
understand there is a huge difference between the emotional decision to
initiate divorce and the financial outcomes from divorce. Women initiating
divorce is the stimulus. Men paying money is the response.

Women are hard wired to be the keepers of the status in a relationship.
They constantly analyze it, make judgments about it, determine changes that
need to be made, and focus on how men are impacting the relationship. One
of the problems husbands encounter is wives rarely consider their own role
in a relationship and how what they are saying or doing might have an impact
on the results. The whole concept of "growing in different directions"
feeds right into this pattern of thinking. Women say things like "He has
not grown up" (meaning I have grown but he hasn't) or "He is a different man
than the one I married" (meaning he has changed for the worse) without any
analysis that maybe they are setting unreasonable, unilateral expectations
for men that are unattainable.

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
We all know the typical vows used in marriage ceremonies so I am sure
those
were the vows used. Those vows are basically bull**** in my eyes and I
would
never use them. No one can make a promise to that extent. But is it
not
true
that two people can grow in different directions as they progress
through
life?

You are expressing the casual attitude toward marriage that scares men
away
from it. If marriage vows are only valid until one partner decides to
renege on the vows, they are meaningless. And the concept of growing
apart
is a unilateral feelings based decision about the state of the
relationship
made without the other partner's input.

So how would you change the marriage vows to cover reality? I am
committed
to you until someone better comes along? I will love you until I decide
we
are growing in different directions? I will cherish you until I have a
child who will then become more important to me than you? I will stay
with
you until I decide to leave and take your children and half your assets
with
me?



So there you assume all women are after money. It always ends with the
money. I can not say what would be in a wedding vow. It should be a
personal
thing. I am not in the process of marriage so its nothing I sit and think
about. My view about marriage aren't casual. If I were that casual, I
would
already been married a few times. I take marriage more seriously and with
an
honest attitude then most do.

The point that seems to be ignored in all of your responses is in over 70%
of marriages that breakup, the marriage vows are terminated and the joint
relationship is ended by unilateral decisions made by the wife over her
husband's objections. I doubt you will find a man in this NG who doesn't
understand there is a huge difference between the emotional decision to
initiate divorce and the financial outcomes from divorce. Women initiating
divorce is the stimulus. Men paying money is the response.

Women are hard wired to be the keepers of the status in a relationship.
They constantly analyze it, make judgments about it, determine changes that
need to be made, and focus on how men are impacting the relationship. One
of the problems husbands encounter is wives rarely consider their own role
in a relationship and how what they are saying or doing might have an impact
on the results. The whole concept of "growing in different directions"
feeds right into this pattern of thinking. Women say things like "He has
not grown up" (meaning I have grown but he hasn't) or "He is a different man
than the one I married" (meaning he has changed for the worse) without any
analysis that maybe they are setting unreasonable, unilateral expectations
for men that are unattainable.

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
We all know the typical vows used in marriage ceremonies so I am
sure
those
snipped

The point that seems to be ignored in all of your responses is in over 70%
of marriages that breakup, the marriage vows are terminated and the joint
relationship is ended by unilateral decisions made by the wife over her
husband's objections. I doubt you will find a man in this NG who doesn't
understand there is a huge difference between the emotional decision to
initiate divorce and the financial outcomes from divorce. Women
initiating
divorce is the stimulus. Men paying money is the response.

Women are hard wired to be the keepers of the status in a relationship.
They constantly analyze it, make judgments about it, determine changes
that
need to be made, and focus on how men are impacting the relationship. One
of the problems husbands encounter is wives rarely consider their own role
in a relationship and how what they are saying or doing might have an
impact
on the results. The whole concept of "growing in different directions"
feeds right into this pattern of thinking. Women say things like "He has
not grown up" (meaning I have grown but he hasn't) or "He is a different
man
than the one I married" (meaning he has changed for the worse) without any
analysis that maybe they are setting unreasonable, unilateral expectations
for men that are unattainable.



Why would men initiate divorce when they know they will pay out the ass in
alimony, if the wife is so inclined to pursue that. They would much rather
stay married, having someone doing all their laundry and cooking and raising
of the kids. Run out once and a while and get some strange too. Not a bad
deal, eh? I hardly think that stat of 70% is relevant. Would women initiate
divorce as easily if it weren't for the money incentive? Probably not but
time progresses and more women are career oriented, money is not going to be
the incentive. They will have their own money. In my dealings with men and
women, that last paragraph is true only in the sentence of how women
analyze, ect. They do. But men also don't realize their role in the
relationship and say some of the same things women say about their spouses,
only in different ways.

T

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
We all know the typical vows used in marriage ceremonies so I am
sure
those
snipped

The point that seems to be ignored in all of your responses is in over 70%
of marriages that breakup, the marriage vows are terminated and the joint
relationship is ended by unilateral decisions made by the wife over her
husband's objections. I doubt you will find a man in this NG who doesn't
understand there is a huge difference between the emotional decision to
initiate divorce and the financial outcomes from divorce. Women
initiating
divorce is the stimulus. Men paying money is the response.

Women are hard wired to be the keepers of the status in a relationship.
They constantly analyze it, make judgments about it, determine changes
that
need to be made, and focus on how men are impacting the relationship. One
of the problems husbands encounter is wives rarely consider their own role
in a relationship and how what they are saying or doing might have an
impact
on the results. The whole concept of "growing in different directions"
feeds right into this pattern of thinking. Women say things like "He has
not grown up" (meaning I have grown but he hasn't) or "He is a different
man
than the one I married" (meaning he has changed for the worse) without any
analysis that maybe they are setting unreasonable, unilateral expectations
for men that are unattainable.



Why would men initiate divorce when they know they will pay out the ass in
alimony, if the wife is so inclined to pursue that. They would much rather
stay married, having someone doing all their laundry and cooking and raising
of the kids. Run out once and a while and get some strange too. Not a bad
deal, eh? I hardly think that stat of 70% is relevant. Would women initiate
divorce as easily if it weren't for the money incentive? Probably not but
time progresses and more women are career oriented, money is not going to be
the incentive. They will have their own money. In my dealings with men and
women, that last paragraph is true only in the sentence of how women
analyze, ect. They do. But men also don't realize their role in the
relationship and say some of the same things women say about their spouses,
only in different ways.

T

Tracy wrote:
I arrived home around 12:30 pm today after spending the last 26 hours
prior to that time doing the following:

more than 11 hours driving
about 4 hours at a wedding
about 4 hours just "relaxing" at a hotel
about an hour eating breakfast this morning
and about 6 hours sleeping

During the drive home my mother and I had a chance to talk about
marriage overall. We seen a bumper sticker which read "I think
therefore I'm not married". I found this bumper sticker sad. As I
sat in the church witnessing my nephew get married to a wonderful
young lady, I observed her family. All were non-supportive in her
choices of a husband. It brought memories back to my mother of my
sister & brother-in-law getting married, and how his family was not
supportive of their marriage. They just "knew" their marriage
wouldn't last, but my sister and brother-in-law recently celebrated
their 25th wedding anniversary. So back to the bumper sticker and
why I found it sad. The bumper sticker shows how some are truly
non-supportive of marriages. It is sad, and wrong, that there are
those who are unable to practice what they preach (support choices).
So why can't we, as a society, support marriages? Don't these people
realize we can considerably decrease the divorce rate if we support
other people's choices of being married? If I could I would have
held up a sign to the woman driving the car with that bumper sticker
that read "people like you is the reason we have such a high divorce
rate". In my opinion, she wouldn't have gotten the point - because
she isn't thinking. How can she, or anyone else like her, expect
others to support her choices when she isn't supporting theirs?
Marriage is the foundation to a strong family. Family is the
foundation to any society. It teaches us how to relate to others,
how to interact with each other, and how to get along with others.
People who are non-supportive of a marriage is shaking the foundation
of that marriage. It will cause a weaker family, and hence increase
the chances of divorce - heartache - and trouble with our kids. If
only people understood what they are causing by not being supportive.
If only people could look beyond themselves and see how they -
themselves - could impact others.

I'm very happy for my sister. She has a successful marriage. Her
marriage will last. My nephew, who recently turned 22, has grown up
considerably since the last time I seen him. He views life
differently now that he is married, and yes - he is going to be a
father by the middle of August. Him and his wife wanted to be
married last year, but her parents first tried to talk her out of it.
Then they kept postponing their marriage in hopes she would leave
him. They only agreed to participate due to her being pregnant...
oh, the medical community told my nephew's wife she could get
pregnant. She doesn't ovulate... obvious they were wrong. I'm very
honored to be an Aunt to my nephew. He is turning out to be one very
responsible and thoughtful young man. He reminds me of his father at
his age. I wish both of them well, and I'll be very supportive of
their marriage.

I understand what you're saying, and have similar thoughts quite often.
I wonder how seriously we as a society really take marriage. Sometimes
it seems we put more value, and will fight harder, for friends or even
our job than we will our partner or spouse. In a general sense, I mean.

I find the sentiment of the bumper sticker sad, also. Is life really
that hopeless? I'd rather be a jilted romantic than to have that level
of cynicism, and I can be very cynical.

Tracy wrote:
I arrived home around 12:30 pm today after spending the last 26 hours
prior to that time doing the following:

more than 11 hours driving
about 4 hours at a wedding
about 4 hours just "relaxing" at a hotel
about an hour eating breakfast this morning
and about 6 hours sleeping

During the drive home my mother and I had a chance to talk about
marriage overall. We seen a bumper sticker which read "I think
therefore I'm not married". I found this bumper sticker sad. As I
sat in the church witnessing my nephew get married to a wonderful
young lady, I observed her family. All were non-supportive in her
choices of a husband. It brought memories back to my mother of my
sister & brother-in-law getting married, and how his family was not
supportive of their marriage. They just "knew" their marriage
wouldn't last, but my sister and brother-in-law recently celebrated
their 25th wedding anniversary. So back to the bumper sticker and
why I found it sad. The bumper sticker shows how some are truly
non-supportive of marriages. It is sad, and wrong, that there are
those who are unable to practice what they preach (support choices).
So why can't we, as a society, support marriages? Don't these people
realize we can considerably decrease the divorce rate if we support
other people's choices of being married? If I could I would have
held up a sign to the woman driving the car with that bumper sticker
that read "people like you is the reason we have such a high divorce
rate". In my opinion, she wouldn't have gotten the point - because
she isn't thinking. How can she, or anyone else like her, expect
others to support her choices when she isn't supporting theirs?
Marriage is the foundation to a strong family. Family is the
foundation to any society. It teaches us how to relate to others,
how to interact with each other, and how to get along with others.
People who are non-supportive of a marriage is shaking the foundation
of that marriage. It will cause a weaker family, and hence increase
the chances of divorce - heartache - and trouble with our kids. If
only people understood what they are causing by not being supportive.
If only people could look beyond themselves and see how they -
themselves - could impact others.

I'm very happy for my sister. She has a successful marriage. Her
marriage will last. My nephew, who recently turned 22, has grown up
considerably since the last time I seen him. He views life
differently now that he is married, and yes - he is going to be a
father by the middle of August. Him and his wife wanted to be
married last year, but her parents first tried to talk her out of it.
Then they kept postponing their marriage in hopes she would leave
him. They only agreed to participate due to her being pregnant...
oh, the medical community told my nephew's wife she could get
pregnant. She doesn't ovulate... obvious they were wrong. I'm very
honored to be an Aunt to my nephew. He is turning out to be one very
responsible and thoughtful young man. He reminds me of his father at
his age. I wish both of them well, and I'll be very supportive of
their marriage.

I understand what you're saying, and have similar thoughts quite often.
I wonder how seriously we as a society really take marriage. Sometimes
it seems we put more value, and will fight harder, for friends or even
our job than we will our partner or spouse. In a general sense, I mean.

I find the sentiment of the bumper sticker sad, also. Is life really
that hopeless? I'd rather be a jilted romantic than to have that level
of cynicism, and I can be very cynical.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
AZ Astrea:

Your comments below seem to fit many of the situations everyone
encounters in the present-day U.S. However, consider the following
questions. Did these situations happen anything like as frequently
30-40 years ago? I don't think they did. So what changed during that
period? Was it people, or was it the institution of marriage?

The implication of what you say is that people changed, but the
institution of marriage remained the same. You seem to be saying that
what is needed is that people need to think more before getting married.

However, the plain fact is that predominantly what changed was the
institution of marriage. The main factor in the changes in marriage was
the influence of feminist special interest groups. No-fault divorce got
started in California under the influence of these groups. The
continuing changes in domestic relations law -- virtually all of which
are disadvantageous to men -- are promoted by these groups. And that
process in turn has produced reactions among men.

Of course, you are right to say that people should think before getting
married. However, suppose someone DOES think, and then decides to get
married. Thereafter, that person is in the situation of Ford customers
in the very early days of the automobile: "You can have any color you
want, so long as it's black."

There is only kind of legal framework for marriage available -- the one
where the rules are made by the government, and where the rules are
forever subject to ex post facto change, under the influence of (mostly
anti-family) special interest groups. You never know what you're
getting into until it's time for the divorce.

Some say the answer is to rebuild marriage by doing things like
abolishing no-fault divorce. That would be a step in the right
direction. However, as indicated by the experience of the few states
that have considered covenant marriage, the special interest groups
don't go away when you do this. They remain to start again on the
undermining of marriage.

The better solution is to privatize marriage, and make the legal
framework serve no purpose other than to enforce individual
comprehensive prenuptial contracts. That way, government and the
special interest groups no longer would be able to intrude into the
private affairs of individual families. People would be FORCED to think
before getting married, if for no other reason than that they would have
to agree on the terms of the prenuptial contract.

-------------------------
I agree, the institution of marriage has changed dramatically with the
no-fault divorce and such. I think marriage is way too easy to get into and
out of. People need to really think before they get married because
marriage should be something that last forever. And as for having kids,
people need to realize that just beause they want to marry that doesn't mean
that they HAVE to have kids. It doesn't have to be the default setting.
Only people who have truly thought things out, including the expense of kids
and whether they are willing to commit themselves to 18+ years of raising
them should even begin to think about it. If it's supposed to truly be
about the best interests of the children why should society encourage things
like single mothers and raising kids on welfare? These situations have been
proven beyond a doubt to be harmful to kids. If society really gave a damn
about the kids, other than as a source of cheap labor for the future, it
would support marriage. And as for people who have thought about
it,(marriage/kids), and decided that it is either for or not for them I give
them praise for taking the time to think over what are some of the most
important issues there are in life.

~AZ~



AZ Astrea wrote:

"Tracy" wrote in message
news:jF%Lb.17584$5V2.29458@attbi_s53...
I arrived home around 12:30 pm today after spending the last 26 hours
prior
to that time doing the following:

more than 11 hours driving
about 4 hours at a wedding
about 4 hours just "relaxing" at a hotel
about an hour eating breakfast this morning
and about 6 hours sleeping

During the drive home my mother and I had a chance to talk about
marriage
overall. We seen a bumper sticker which read "I think therefore I'm
not
married". I found this bumper sticker sad. As I sat in the church
witnessing my nephew get married to a wonderful young lady, I observed
her
family. All were non-supportive in her choices of a husband. It
brought
memories back to my mother of my sister & brother-in-law getting
married,
and how his family was not supportive of their marriage. They just
"knew"
their marriage wouldn't last, but my sister and brother-in-law
recently
celebrated their 25th wedding anniversary. So back to the bumper
sticker
and why I found it sad. The bumper sticker shows how some are truly
non-supportive of marriages. It is sad, and wrong, that there are
those
who
are unable to practice what they preach (support choices). So why
can't
we,
as a society, support marriages? Don't these people realize we can
considerably decrease the divorce rate if we support other people's
choices
of being married? If I could I would have held up a sign to the woman
driving the car with that bumper sticker that read "people like you is
the
reason we have such a high divorce rate". In my opinion, she wouldn't
have
gotten the point - because she isn't thinking. How can she, or anyone
else
like her, expect others to support her choices when she isn't
supporting
theirs? Marriage is the foundation to a strong family. Family is the
foundation to any society. It teaches us how to relate to others, how
to
interact with each other, and how to get along with others. People
who
are
non-supportive of a marriage is shaking the foundation of that
marriage.
It
will cause a weaker family, and hence increase the chances of
divorce -
heartache - and trouble with our kids. If only people understood what
they
are causing by not being supportive. If only people could look beyond
themselves and see how they - themselves - could impact others.
-------------------
"I think therefore I'm not
married".
Perhaps she has never been married and never intends to get married.
Maybe
it's a statement that because there is such a high divorce rate that she
has
thought it over and will not get married.
For myself, not only have I never been married but I have never had any
desire to have children. I understood myself early enough so as to not
bring that kind of pain into my life when I wasn't ready to commit. I
am 44
and have spent the past 6 1/2 years with the person who I will likely
one
day marry. I am happy to be childfree and while it would have been nice
if
J was childfree also, well, I'm in no hurry to get legal so we will
probably
wait a few more years until there is less, (hopefully less), cs to pay.
I think you were projecting a lot onto what that woman may have been
expressing in her bumper sticker. Perhaps if more people would really
stop
to think about what they are doing before getting married and having
kids
there would be less divorce. Too many people just "follow the script"
of
finish school, get married, start a career, have babies, and then sadly,
have an affair, get divorced. Too many divorces, too many unwanted
children, if people would just stop and think..........

~AZ~

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
AZ Astrea:

Your comments below seem to fit many of the situations everyone
encounters in the present-day U.S. However, consider the following
questions. Did these situations happen anything like as frequently
30-40 years ago? I don't think they did. So what changed during that
period? Was it people, or was it the institution of marriage?

The implication of what you say is that people changed, but the
institution of marriage remained the same. You seem to be saying that
what is needed is that people need to think more before getting married.

However, the plain fact is that predominantly what changed was the
institution of marriage. The main factor in the changes in marriage was
the influence of feminist special interest groups. No-fault divorce got
started in California under the influence of these groups. The
continuing changes in domestic relations law -- virtually all of which
are disadvantageous to men -- are promoted by these groups. And that
process in turn has produced reactions among men.

Of course, you are right to say that people should think before getting
married. However, suppose someone DOES think, and then decides to get
married. Thereafter, that person is in the situation of Ford customers
in the very early days of the automobile: "You can have any color you
want, so long as it's black."

There is only kind of legal framework for marriage available -- the one
where the rules are made by the government, and where the rules are
forever subject to ex post facto change, under the influence of (mostly
anti-family) special interest groups. You never know what you're
getting into until it's time for the divorce.

Some say the answer is to rebuild marriage by doing things like
abolishing no-fault divorce. That would be a step in the right
direction. However, as indicated by the experience of the few states
that have considered covenant marriage, the special interest groups
don't go away when you do this. They remain to start again on the
undermining of marriage.

The better solution is to privatize marriage, and make the legal
framework serve no purpose other than to enforce individual
comprehensive prenuptial contracts. That way, government and the
special interest groups no longer would be able to intrude into the
private affairs of individual families. People would be FORCED to think
before getting married, if for no other reason than that they would have
to agree on the terms of the prenuptial contract.

-------------------------
I agree, the institution of marriage has changed dramatically with the
no-fault divorce and such. I think marriage is way too easy to get into and
out of. People need to really think before they get married because
marriage should be something that last forever. And as for having kids,
people need to realize that just beause they want to marry that doesn't mean
that they HAVE to have kids. It doesn't have to be the default setting.
Only people who have truly thought things out, including the expense of kids
and whether they are willing to commit themselves to 18+ years of raising
them should even begin to think about it. If it's supposed to truly be
about the best interests of the children why should society encourage things
like single mothers and raising kids on welfare? These situations have been
proven beyond a doubt to be harmful to kids. If society really gave a damn
about the kids, other than as a source of cheap labor for the future, it
would support marriage. And as for people who have thought about
it,(marriage/kids), and decided that it is either for or not for them I give
them praise for taking the time to think over what are some of the most
important issues there are in life.

~AZ~



AZ Astrea wrote:

"Tracy" wrote in message
news:jF%Lb.17584$5V2.29458@attbi_s53...
I arrived home around 12:30 pm today after spending the last 26 hours
prior
to that time doing the following:

more than 11 hours driving
about 4 hours at a wedding
about 4 hours just "relaxing" at a hotel
about an hour eating breakfast this morning
and about 6 hours sleeping

During the drive home my mother and I had a chance to talk about
marriage
overall. We seen a bumper sticker which read "I think therefore I'm
not
married". I found this bumper sticker sad. As I sat in the church
witnessing my nephew get married to a wonderful young lady, I observed
her
family. All were non-supportive in her choices of a husband. It
brought
memories back to my mother of my sister & brother-in-law getting
married,
and how his family was not supportive of their marriage. They just
"knew"
their marriage wouldn't last, but my sister and brother-in-law
recently
celebrated their 25th wedding anniversary. So back to the bumper
sticker
and why I found it sad. The bumper sticker shows how some are truly
non-supportive of marriages. It is sad, and wrong, that there are
those
who
are unable to practice what they preach (support choices). So why
can't
we,
as a society, support marriages? Don't these people realize we can
considerably decrease the divorce rate if we support other people's
choices
of being married? If I could I would have held up a sign to the woman
driving the car with that bumper sticker that read "people like you is
the
reason we have such a high divorce rate". In my opinion, she wouldn't
have
gotten the point - because she isn't thinking. How can she, or anyone
else
like her, expect others to support her choices when she isn't
supporting
theirs? Marriage is the foundation to a strong family. Family is the
foundation to any society. It teaches us how to relate to others, how
to
interact with each other, and how to get along with others. People
who
are
non-supportive of a marriage is shaking the foundation of that
marriage.
It
will cause a weaker family, and hence increase the chances of
divorce -
heartache - and trouble with our kids. If only people understood what
they
are causing by not being supportive. If only people could look beyond
themselves and see how they - themselves - could impact others.
-------------------
"I think therefore I'm not
married".
Perhaps she has never been married and never intends to get married.
Maybe
it's a statement that because there is such a high divorce rate that she
has
thought it over and will not get married.
For myself, not only have I never been married but I have never had any
desire to have children. I understood myself early enough so as to not
bring that kind of pain into my life when I wasn't ready to commit. I
am 44
and have spent the past 6 1/2 years with the person who I will likely
one
day marry. I am happy to be childfree and while it would have been nice
if
J was childfree also, well, I'm in no hurry to get legal so we will
probably
wait a few more years until there is less, (hopefully less), cs to pay.
I think you were projecting a lot onto what that woman may have been
expressing in her bumper sticker. Perhaps if more people would really
stop
to think about what they are doing before getting married and having
kids
there would be less divorce. Too many people just "follow the script"
of
finish school, get married, start a career, have babies, and then sadly,
have an affair, get divorced. Too many divorces, too many unwanted
children, if people would just stop and think..........

~AZ~

People who are unable to commit to a relationship *for life* should simply
date and forego marriage and children. We don't need more, even further
screwed up generations produced from the current "me, my, I" generation.
Not to say that conditions that may pop up should prevent divorce, just that
'touchy-feely' excuses for divorce are not reasons, just excuses.
Simple.
Phil #3


"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
So you think everyone who gets married should stay married no matter what?
I
don't agree with vows that are apparently unattainable. Apparent by the
high
divorce rate. Why not make a commitment to stay committed as long as both
parties want to?

My approach is that of a generation who has watched their parents be
miserable, all in the sake of staying married. One that has watched
Grandparents die unhappy with the life they had lived with a spouse they
didn't love but stayed together for the sake of the vows.

I would never suggest someone stay miserable in order to keep to the vow.

T
Kenneth S. wrote in message
...
Tiffany:

You reject the idea that people should honor vows they have freely
made. You reject the notion of commitment. So you are rejecting
marriage.

Your approach isn't of course unusual. Unfortunately, it's exhibited
by most of the politicians who make the laws on marriage and divorce.
That's one reason why I argue that, to all intents and purposes,
marriage as a meaningful institution has already been abolished in the
U.S.

When people want to -- or are forced to -- handle change in themselves
and in others, they always find ways of doing so.

Tiffany wrote:

Kenneth S. wrote in message
...
Tiffany:

Have you ever heard the story about the clock that struck thirteen?
That single event cast doubt on all that had gone before.

You are now telling us that the vows made in a marriage ceremony are
"basically bull****." So I think we know how much attention to pay
to
everything else you have said.

As for your shallow "growing apart" argument, I think you will find
that spouses in successful long-term marriages say that their
marriage
went through several phases, and they adjusted to those changes.

That is because they are able to handle change. Not all folks can.


The bottom line is that you think that the institution of marriage
should be abolished. You should simply come out and say so.



Initially I stated that couple should wait until they are older and
more
settle in life to marry. Some people aren't able to adjust to change
in
their lives, others can. If you wait to get married till you are older
then
atleast you will know if you or your partner can deal with the changes
that
have taken place.

Yes the old vows are bull****. I don't think one should make promises
like
that. Every couple should make their own vows as to what is important
to
them. Those old vows might work for some, so by god, use them.

T