Gay marriages....now what about siblings parents or animals?

[Llamalandia]

Why shouldn't a couple be allowed to divorce? It is not ideal for a marriage to fall apart and both parties should put all their effort into saving a marriage if at all possible, but when a marriage completely fails there is nothing worse than being forced to stay together. That's how people get murdered, you know.

Also, the price of $50 is not the point, the point is that the state didn't pay it. The couple did.

And then of course, there's this very valid question.

No but I'm willing to bet that the courts time and man power in filing this garbage and updating records and what not cost far more than the 50$ nominal fee giving how beauracratic and inefficiencet our govt is at all levels. I generally also hate govt btw.

[Person012345]

So you think people who don't love each other and just want to be away from each other being forced to stay married weakens the institution less than letting them get divorced?

From this I can only assume you think that marriage has absolutely nothing to do with love and is just a pointless contract that has to be fulfilled for the sake of being fulfilled. And that, I think, makes marriage totally meaningless and worthless.

[AiliailiA]

Even the most earnestly-worded denial fails when followed by a wink.

Wait you are kidding right its the difference between a shift key for crying out loud.

No I'm not kidding. The emoticons are provided for a reason: to convey emotional context which doesn't always come across in the written word. Using them randomly puts a wrong emotional context which actually makes your point harder to grasp. Or in this case, believe the sincerity of.

Spam/SPAM: Off-topic, irrelevant and multi-posts that clog the server. This includes posting lots of smilies which is known as Smilie Spam.

Whenever I've seen that rule invoked, it was for multiple smilies in one post. Doing it persistently and meaninglessly over a long series of posts doesn't seem any better to me.

I'm pretty sure you're doing it deliberately to annoy, just because someone complained to you about you doing it.

Well, I'm complaining to you again. Please try not to grimace, wink, grin, laugh etc in direct contradiction of your written words, because it's annoying!

[Pillea]

What exactly is it about divorce that makes it the most terrible of all possible outcomes, in your mind?

Because I have you down as honestly advocating the near total destruction of marriage, just to prevent divorce... something which, frankly, isn't that bad.

I'm not entirely sure but as a child I always figured if my parents tried to divorce I would totally flip out either run way from home or something. Also I believe now that it weakens the institution of marriage for those who do it in what I believe is the historically correct way (i.e. staying married until death).

Those who are gonna stay married til death, are gonna stay married til death. Those who aren't, get divorced.
Your argument is nonsensical as marriage doesn't get harmed by some people leaving the institution. It just loses some numbers.

[Anachronous Rex]

What exactly is it about divorce that makes it the most terrible of all possible outcomes, in your mind?

Because I have you down as honestly advocating the near total destruction of marriage, just to prevent divorce... something which, frankly, isn't that bad.

I'm not entirely sure but as a child I always figured if my parents tried to divorce I would totally flip out either run way from home or something. Also I believe now that it weakens the institution of marriage for those who do it in what I believe is the historically correct way (i.e. staying married until death).

My parents got divorced when I was six. I was fine.

The ground did not quake, the sky did not fall, flames did not rise up from the depths.

And I'll tell you this: even though I wasn't conscious of much at six, I knew it was better then them staying together.

[Llamalandia]

Done. It now reads as "a bit of a nympho extremely horny" happy now. Can we stop calling each other names friend?

I wish you had just removed it, instead of replacing it with something else that implies that the speaker is desperate for sex, but that's at least acceptable.

I just didn't want someone to think I was somehow censoring myself or trying to hide something somehow but I take your point.

[Anachronous Rex]

And then of course, there's this very valid question.

No but I'm willing to bet that the courts time and man power in filing this garbage and updating records and what not cost far more than the 50$ nominal fee giving how beauracratic and inefficiencet our govt is at all levels. I generally also hate govt btw.

What a shocker...

[Individuality-ness]

So you think people who don't love each other and just want to be away from each other being forced to stay married weakens the institution less than letting them get divorced?

From this I can only assume you think that marriage has absolutely nothing to do with love and is just a pointless contract that has to be fulfilled for the sake of being fulfilled. And that, I think, makes marriage totally meaningless.

And as I already pointed out, you can get out of most contracts with little hassle -- rental contracts, phone contracts, shipping contracts, etc. Maybe a small fee, but that's it. So why should marriage be the all holy exception to contracts?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

What exactly is it about divorce that makes it the most terrible of all possible outcomes, in your mind?

Because I have you down as honestly advocating the near total destruction of marriage, just to prevent divorce... something which, frankly, isn't that bad.

I'm not entirely sure but as a child I always figured if my parents tried to divorce I would totally flip out either run way from home or something. Also I believe now that it weakens the institution of marriage for those who do it in what I believe is the historically correct way (i.e. staying married until death).

So you would have wanted to your parents unhappy but together just so you didn't flip out?

The 'historically correct way'? Together and miserable. Ah, now I understand. You are one of those people who are intent on telling people how they should live.

Not that I agree with any of the spiel in your posts, but now I get it.

[Individuality-ness]

I wish you had just removed it, instead of replacing it with something else that implies that the speaker is desperate for sex, but that's at least acceptable.

I just didn't want someone to think I was somehow censoring myself or trying to hide something somehow but I take your point.

No one would have even noticed. They wouldn't care either.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

And then of course, there's this very valid question.

No but I'm willing to bet that the courts time and man power in filing this garbage and updating records and what not cost far more than the 50$ nominal fee giving how beauracratic and inefficiencet our govt is at all levels. I generally also hate govt btw.

And?

[Anachronous Rex]

I'm not entirely sure but as a child I always figured if my parents tried to divorce I would totally flip out either run way from home or something. Also I believe now that it weakens the institution of marriage for those who do it in what I believe is the historically correct way (i.e. staying married until death).

So you would have wanted to your parents unhappy but together just so you didn't flip out?

The 'historically correct way'? Together and miserable. Ah, now I understand. You are one of those people who are intent on telling people how they should live.

Not that I agree with any of the spiel in your posts, but now I get it.

Mind you, in the old days, people died.

Till death do us part was much easier when dysentery was a serious threat.

[Grainne Ni Malley]

What exactly is it about divorce that makes it the most terrible of all possible outcomes, in your mind?

Because I have you down as honestly advocating the near total destruction of marriage, just to prevent divorce... something which, frankly, isn't that bad.

I'm not entirely sure but as a child I always figured if my parents tried to divorce I would totally flip out either run way from home or something. Also I believe now that it weakens the institution of marriage for those who do it in what I believe is the historically correct way (i.e. staying married until death).

To refer to marriage as an institution, while an accurate use of the word, also denotes a rather cold approach to the idea of marriage. It de-personalizes it, truthfully. The fact remains that marriages involve real people with flaws and all that junk. When it comes down to it and two people just can't get along the absolute best thing for everyone involved, even if it doesn't seem like it at the time, is to part ways. Otherwise, a completely unhealthy atmosphere develops with high tensions, miserable people, and even hatred.

I am sorry to say, but I suspect you have a very limited experience in life thus far. People get married and it often happens that one person takes to abusing the other. Do you think the victim of abuse should stay in the marriage then? What about children who suffer through witnessing the fights of their parents who stick in it even though they have no ability to relate in a positive nature to one another?

[Llamalandia]

I'm not entirely sure but as a child I always figured if my parents tried to divorce I would totally flip out either run way from home or something. Also I believe now that it weakens the institution of marriage for those who do it in what I believe is the historically correct way (i.e. staying married until death).

My parents got divorced when I was six. I was fine.

The ground did not quake, the sky did not fall, flames did not rise up from the depths.

And I'll tell you this: even though I wasn't conscious of much at six, I knew it was better then them staying together.

See I imagine that had it been me I wouldn't have been fine and quite frankly as a child that scared the hell out of me and the irony is even at the time I knew there was a 0% chance of my parents ever splitting up nor is there one now, but nevertheless i felt as if there did exist this world ending catastrophe known as divorce. I feel at the very least that when children are involved they should have some say in approving any disillusion of marriage/later remarriage.

[Individuality-ness]

So you would have wanted to your parents unhappy but together just so you didn't flip out?

The 'historically correct way'? Together and miserable. Ah, now I understand. You are one of those people who are intent on telling people how they should live.

Not that I agree with any of the spiel in your posts, but now I get it.

Mind you, in the old days, people died.

Till death do us part was much easier when dysentery was a serious threat.

And death in childbirth. Nowadays, much longer life expectancy thanks to the miracles of modern medicine.

[Person012345]

So you think people who don't love each other and just want to be away from each other being forced to stay married weakens the institution less than letting them get divorced?

From this I can only assume you think that marriage has absolutely nothing to do with love and is just a pointless contract that has to be fulfilled for the sake of being fulfilled. And that, I think, makes marriage totally meaningless.

And as I already pointed out, you can get out of most contracts with little hassle -- rental contracts, phone contracts, shipping contracts, etc. Maybe a small fee, but that's it. So why should marriage be the all holy exception to contracts?

It depends on what exactly is promised. As already mentioned marriages have all sorts of vows, although I'll assume this guy thinks that all marriages are a pledge-to-the-death. Most contracts such as phone contracts have specific get-out clauses (if you wish to end this contract you will XYZ), whereas his idea of marriage vows probably don't.

Although I'm not sure on the legality of a contract that would give you no way out. Of course, the actual laws are what he's proposing would be changed here.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

So you would have wanted to your parents unhappy but together just so you didn't flip out?

The 'historically correct way'? Together and miserable. Ah, now I understand. You are one of those people who are intent on telling people how they should live.

Not that I agree with any of the spiel in your posts, but now I get it.

Mind you, in the old days, people died.

Till death do us part was much easier when dysentery was a serious threat.

Point. The pox usually took care of that. Or child birth or war.

I didn't know we had a time traveling poster.

[Grainne Ni Malley]

And then of course, there's this very valid question.

No but I'm willing to bet that the courts time and man power in filing this garbage and updating records and what not cost far more than the 50$ nominal fee giving how beauracratic and inefficiencet our govt is at all levels. I generally also hate govt btw.

What about the money states pay out for prison when a marriage goes awry and one of the people in the marriage feels trapped, unable to leave, so the only perceived solution is murder? I am only pushing this point because seriously, it happens! This is in the realm of worst case scenarios, but it happens far more often than you might think.

[Individuality-ness]

I feel at the very least that when children are involved they should have some say in approving any disillusion of marriage/later remarriage.

No. For one thing, children are often not privy to the issues involved in a divorce. For another, it would be extremely inappropriate and it could allow for parents to end up using the child as a weapon against the other.

[Anachronous Rex]

My parents got divorced when I was six. I was fine.

The ground did not quake, the sky did not fall, flames did not rise up from the depths.

And I'll tell you this: even though I wasn't conscious of much at six, I knew it was better then them staying together.

See I imagine that had it been me I wouldn't have been fine and quite frankly as a child that scared the hell out of me and the irony is even at the time I knew there was a 0% chance of my parents ever splitting up nor is there one now, but nevertheless i felt as if there did exist this world ending catastrophe known as divorce. I feel at the very least that when children are involved they should have some say in approving any disillusion of marriage/later remarriage.

You know what is much more traumatizing to children then a divorce?

Living with two people who don't like each other.

No, seriously. I've seen this at play a hundred times. Walked into homes where you could cut the tension with a knife, endured the snide backhanded comments, and passive-aggression; random explosive outbursts.

That shit will fuck you up.

[Llamalandia]

I'm not entirely sure but as a child I always figured if my parents tried to divorce I would totally flip out either run way from home or something. Also I believe now that it weakens the institution of marriage for those who do it in what I believe is the historically correct way (i.e. staying married until death).

To refer to marriage as an institution, while an accurate use of the word, also denotes a rather cold approach to the idea of marriage. It de-personalizes it, truthfully. The fact remains that marriages involve real people with flaws and all that junk. When it comes down to it and two people just can't get along the absolute best thing for everyone involved, even if it doesn't seem like it at the time, is to part ways. Otherwise, a completely unhealthy atmosphere develops with high tensions, miserable people, and even hatred.

I am sorry to say, but I suspect you have a very limited experience in life thus far. People get married and it often happens that one person takes to abusing the other. Do you think the victim of abuse should stay in the marriage then? What about children who suffer through witnessing the fights of their parents who stick in it even though they have no ability to relate in a positive nature to one another?

No I said no to abusive marriages which you may have missed if you haven't my posts from like 10 pages ago. I believe parents shouldn't fight or at the very least never fight in front of children and should work out any marital problems quickly and on their own (or with outside counseling) and not let it affect children. If you can't do this I don't believe you are emotionally mature enough to be raising children (not that lack of maturity stops many people in the USA from having kids anyway.) The childs interests should come first and I believe in non-abuse type situations the childs interests are always best served with the original two parent nuclear model.

[Pillea]

I feel at the very least that when children are involved they should have some say in approving any disillusion of marriage/later remarriage.

Since when did two people need their minor child's permission to get married? Since when would that be a logical thing even? A minor, who can't even enter a legal contract, being able to be an arbiter of a contract between two [or hopefully one day more than] people.

[Person012345]

See I imagine that had it been me I wouldn't have been fine and quite frankly as a child that scared the hell out of me and the irony is even at the time I knew there was a 0% chance of my parents ever splitting up nor is there one now, but nevertheless i felt as if there did exist this world ending catastrophe known as divorce. I feel at the very least that when children are involved they should have some say in approving any disillusion of marriage/later remarriage.

You know what is much more traumatizing to children then a divorce?

Living with two people who don't like each other.

No, seriously. I've seen this at play a hundred times. Walked into homes where you could cut the tension with a knife, endured the snide backhanded comments, and passive-aggression; random explosive outbursts.

That shit will fuck you up.

Pretty much. Did he answer my point that basically said exactly this before? I didn't see.

[Anachronous Rex]

Mind you, in the old days, people died.

Till death do us part was much easier when dysentery was a serious threat.

Point. The pox usually took care of that. Or child birth or war.

I didn't know we had a time traveling poster.

Speaking of which, you should really consider killing off the cephalopods now. That, or treating them very nicely.

[Individuality-ness]

And as I already pointed out, you can get out of most contracts with little hassle -- rental contracts, phone contracts, shipping contracts, etc. Maybe a small fee, but that's it. So why should marriage be the all holy exception to contracts?

It depends on what exactly is promised. As already mentioned marriages have all sorts of vows, although I'll assume this guy thinks that all marriages are a pledge-to-the-death. Most contracts such as phone contracts have specific get-out clauses (if you wish to end this contract you will XYZ), whereas his idea of marriage vows probably don't.

Although I'm not sure on the legality of a contract that would give you no way out. Of course, the actual laws are what he's proposing would be changed here.

A large amount of people in their wedding vows omit the "till death do us part". Many couples have a prenuptial. And it's often presumed now that if the contract doesn't work, the option of a divorce exists.