-Laelth

This:

"For myself, I can see no reason that sufficiently makes marriage, in general, a viable option worth wanting or supporting. I would much rather live in a society that had little interest in my relationship life, but protected me and everyone nevertheless. It's not a black-and-white situation of total societal interest or disinterest. Keep marriage, if you so want, but it shouldn't hamper or restrict others from benefits or equal treatment, especially when there appears so little reason for having it." bold added.

K&R

Children are better off in the legal structure provided by marriage, even if they end up in a divorce -- there's still a structure.

Don't get married if you don't want to. But if other people want to have legally recognized marital bonds, don't get in the way.

If you don't wish to get married, that's cool. If you do, that's fine, too. It's none of our business what anyone does in this regard.

But don't expect the government to start extending benefits and rights (and obligations) to unmarried individuals, because it's too difficult to adjudicate rights when the relationship isn't established in a contract of some sort. For governmental and legal purposes, marriage is a contract, and that's all. It's not about being happy; it's not about "religion"; it's a legal engagement. If you don't want that, fine. But don't proselytize about not marrying. Too many people have fought hard-won battles to acquire the right to marry. It is insulting to them to argue that they shouldn't have bothered.

They remain unmarried as a gesture of solidarity.

let's decide that no one needs to get married at all.



Do you realize that is exactly the argument that rightwingers have been making all along? That if marriage was opened up to gay people, no one would respect it anymore and that would lead to the end of marriage?

Let's not prove them right.

Mostly because it would have left me without anything if I did not. My husband and I were both divorced and decided to join our households. Now if I had just sold my house (the smaller of the two) and moved in and he died, I have nothing, no claim on his home, only the cash from my home which was only 4 years from pay off. So we got married, that way the neither of us would have to go to attorneys to ensure the others assets in the event of death. Now we did have to go to an attorney for estate planning to ensure we are covered in case of death (distributions of individual assets, percentage to surviving spouse, percentage to children).

http://www.alternet.org/gender/shaming-unmarried-moms

***SNIP


Stalled Conversations

In the spirit of hoping for better research into and higher quality debates about family relationships in the new year, let me review the top three examples of how the conversation stalled in 2013.

1. Women are primary breadwinners in four out of 10 U.S. households and some people can’t handle it.

In May, Pew released data that shows a seismic shift in American families in the past 50 years: Women are the main providers in 40 percent of homes with children, up from just 11 percent in 1960. The majority of these households — just over 60 percent — are headed by single mothers.

***SNIP

2. Whitlock outlines “Hurricane Illegitimacy.”

In November, ESPN.com columnist Jason Whitlock offered his perspective on the sideline antics of 25-year-old Dallas Cowboy Dez Bryant. Whitlock used Bryant's emotional outbursts during a game as an illustration of what he called “Hurricane Illegitimacy,” the superstorm of children from unmarried parents that has allegedly led to social dysfunction and lawlessness over the past 50 years. For Whitlock, the solution is simple:

If this country wants to really invest in young people, we must first invest in restoring the traditional family unit. As long as 68 percent of black women who have children are unwed, there are no cures for the social maladies preventing black progress.

***SNIP

3. The same-sex marriage debate creates wolves in sheep’s clothes.

***SNIP

It will be telling to see whether the pro-marriage liberals who offer up their names and dollars advocate just as aggressively for policies that support all families. Blankenhorn is branding his effort as “centrist.” But what could be more conservative than arguing that U.S. families should return to a vision of normalcy that no longer fits? And how does such a movement intend to appeal to young people? Among Americans 30 and younger, 40 percent view the growing number of single mothers as a big problem, compared with nearly three-quarters of adults ages 50 and older, according to Pew. Family formation is a hang-up of baby boomers, but not an issue most millennials lose sleep over.

establishing paternity to assure orderly transfer of property and title could not be achieved in any other way but to establish parameters for the coneption and birth of children and the control of women. It has been rendered useless in some ways by technology. However, society's laws and conventions surrounding marriage are deeply engrained and I believe will continue to function for a long time forward regardless of what relationships are sanctioned by it under the law.

to bequeath. Most people lived as peasants and serfs in medieval Europe, for example. By definition, they had little or no personal property and absolutely no real property to pass on.

So property rights, primogeniture, etc. etc. can't be the explanation for marriage, which happily exists amongst the peasantry, who have virtually no property to pass on to their children.

My spouse and I didn't fall into the capitalistic trap of blowing our savings on a ceremony. But our parents still wanted a wedding, so we had a modest one.

I also had to talk my spouse out of blowing 2-3 months' income on a stupid ring.

Reminder: it's the marriage that counts. A wedding is only for that one day.

the agonizing pain of marriage.

Sometimes you reap what you sow.

Valerie was my first wife's name. A remarkable woman on many levels.

Tax savings and healthcare of course

I have no interest in ever getting married. I'm almost 50, too. My bf and I are just fine the way we are...if it works, don't fix it!

You don't have to do the big, expensive wedding.

Three strikes and you're out!

We did not buy expensive rings. We did not have a reception.

It was our decision, and I'd do it all over again.

I only wish every person on earth could marry their love if that is their wish.

We had a lovely reception with food prepared by my mom, her best friend, and I. My rings were his grandmothers.

I have told many couples to think hard about the wedding, is it truly worth extravagant costs? Or would simpler be better? For us, simpler was perfect and as a bonus we started our marriage debt free almost 20 years ago.

leaving her with the kids, for whom she has often put her career on hold, while he continues with the successful career path that she has enabled him to follow by being the primary caregiver of the children and maintaining the household. Having to forfeit half of the assets accumulated during marriage may well make a man think twice about dumping his wife, leaving her with the kids, and taking up with some bimbo in a bachelor pad.

I love this thread.