On The Distribution of Spouses

[Risottia]

Governments exist to protect rights, not enforce them.

And that's why there's no such thing as governmental law enforcement.
Uhm.

[Purpelia]

This is what happens when you take a somewhat reasonable economic ideology like communism and apply it insanely to things outside of its spectrum. Seriously, this is sexual communism.

No, it's not. There's a State dictating who gets what, so it cannot be communism. Sexual socialism, at best.

Well if we assume a fair and unbiased government doing the best job they can for altruistic reasons I think we can meet in the middle and call it Sexual-Stalinism.

Governments exist to protect rights, not enforce them.

And that's why there's no such thing as governmental law enforcement.
Uhm.

No, he is actually right. There is a significant difference. Protecting your rights only means that the state won't stop you from doing something that is labeled a "right" and will prevent others from stopping you as well. Enforcing it would be a step further than that in that it would involve actually making you use that right or at least providing you with a zero cost option to do so.

A really good example is the somewhat dubious right americans have to own firearms. Their state protects their right to have weapons but it does not provide them with weapons to acomplish their right or make weapons tax deductible or anything like that. Thus it does not "enforce" their right to own firearms.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Because the current situation is dehumanizing and disadvantageous for society.

Says who? The ones who want to enslave people into sexual relationships and marriage against their will?

If THAT'S not dehumanizing, nothing is.

It's dehumanizing because it forces people to essentially put off something they likely want to do, possibly indefinitely.

Why? because someone else doesn't want to be forced into it?

Too fucking bad. You don't owe me your personhood, and neither do I owe you mine.
Deal with it.

I think you're confusing thinking people want to get married earlier than they do because of economic problems with supporting the system in the OP.

[United Mercenary Firms]

Being biologically compatible is not a valid reason in and of itself to make a lifetime commitment to another person. Arranged marriages go against the very values that are the bedrock of a stable family unit the OP remains nostalgic for.

[Purpelia]

Being biologically compatible is not a valid reason in and of itself to make a lifetime commitment to another person. Arranged marriages go against the very values that are the bedrock of a stable family unit the OP remains nostalgic for.

To be fair that's just our modern perception of them as well as our modern legislation and culture talking.
You have to remember that historically arranged marriages would have been accompanied by a culture and legislature which permitted almost no divorce* and that the culture of societies that practice it also involve massive social pressure to keep such families stable. Like, we are talking Amish levels of shunning here.
Also no contraception or abortion so if you had a child you had no choice but to try and raise it, and abject poverty so that splitting up was a bad idea financially.

And he probably wants to get all those back as well.

* In rare cases divorce was permitted but only on demand of the man. The only exception I can think off being medieval Christianity which allowed both sides to ask for divorce but exclusively if the partner being thrown out was doing the ultimate sin of refusing sex.

[Vadkness]

"Right to life" means less "right to create new life" and more "right to live your life how you would like to" and having assigned forced marriages goes completely against that. It's more of a violation of human rights than a protection of them. It's actually gross.
You mention that assigned marriages do work but you forget to mention that most people in assigned marriages are okay with the idea of that happening to them, whilst most human beings would not be. I know I wouldn't. I'm not a feminist but I highly dislike the thought of having a random man I have no trust in calling himself my husband and assuming we are together simply to reproduce.
In short: this is a sick idea and I wonder how on earth you came up with it. Although it sounds like a cool Dystopian novel idea.

[Geneviev]

Being biologically compatible is not a valid reason in and of itself to make a lifetime commitment to another person. Arranged marriages go against the very values that are the bedrock of a stable family unit the OP remains nostalgic for.

Although lottery marriages aren't a good idea, arranged marriages are as good or better than others. Arranged marriages have generally worked for peace, making stable families, and a lot of other things too.

[Katganistan]

I think you're confusing thinking people want to get married earlier than they do because of economic problems with supporting the system in the OP.

You seem to support arranged marriage, which is what the OP is talking about.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=443766&p=34081764#p34081764

You endorse government matchmaking (though with right of refusal)
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=443766&p=34081886#p34081886

because it's too hard to find a spouse on one's own
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=443766&p=34081912#p34081912

You endorse encouraging people to marry in the twenties when current conditions counterindicate this.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=443766&p=34082122#p34082122

Your reason: because we used to.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=443766&p=34088594#p34088594

Your statement that not getting married young is dehumanizing because you have to put off something you want:
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=443766&p=34090773#p34090773

So forgive me if you seem to be generally in agreement with the OP.

Online dating services that people opt into to find mates seem to be just fine. No government involvement necessary.

[Purpelia]

Online dating services that people opt into to find mates seem to be just fine. No government involvement necessary.

To be fair some government involvement is probably a good idea simply to ensure you aren't walking into a kidnapping scam on your first date or that small children aren't using the site to hook up with pedophiles and stuff.

[Awesomeland]

I propose that each heterosexual person be placed into a lottery system - both male and female.

Welp, that settles it. Under this system, I'd absolutely just declare as homosexual.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

I propose that each heterosexual person be placed into a lottery system - both male and female.

Welp, that settles it. Under this system, I'd absolutely just declare as homosexual.

I mean, I'm safe. Bisexual, ftw

[Geneviev]

I propose that each heterosexual person be placed into a lottery system - both male and female.

Welp, that settles it. Under this system, I'd absolutely just declare as homosexual.

I'm sure this system would have a homosexual lottery as well.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

Welp, that settles it. Under this system, I'd absolutely just declare as homosexual.

I'm sure this system would have a homosexual lottery as well.

This system would further reduce crime, as women calm men's darkest tendencies, and improve the economy through reduced crime, increased happiness, and a far more stable labor force that is self-replicating (as natalist policies should naturally be enacted in any system, not just this one).

This disagrees with that assumption.

[Aision]

Caamib, is that you?

The answer, of course, is:
No. Just... no.

[Geneviev]

I'm sure this system would have a homosexual lottery as well.

This system would further reduce crime, as women calm men's darkest tendencies, and improve the economy through reduced crime, increased happiness, and a far more stable labor force that is self-replicating (as natalist policies should naturally be enacted in any system, not just this one).

This disagrees with that assumption.

In that case, that is definitely an idea that should be added to this system.

[Awesomeland]

Wouldn't it be easier to, oh, I dunno, just legalize prostitution or sex robots?

[Geneviev]

Wouldn't it be easier to, oh, I dunno, just legalize prostitution or sex robots?

Those don't produce stable families.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

This disagrees with that assumption.

In that case, that is definitely an idea that should be added to this system.

Okay then. What about asexual people? Or bisexual? Which lottery would we get put into?

[Geneviev]

In that case, that is definitely an idea that should be added to this system.

Okay then. What about asexual people? Or bisexual? Which lottery would we get put into?

Bisexual would get to choose, asexual people are free to choose which lottery or if they even are put in a lottery.

[Purpelia]

Okay then. What about asexual people? Or bisexual? Which lottery would we get put into?

Bisexual would get to choose, asexual people are free to choose which lottery or if they even are put in a lottery.

So can anyone just opt out? Because if you allow people to opt out all you have is a shitty dating service.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

Okay then. What about asexual people? Or bisexual? Which lottery would we get put into?

Bisexual would get to choose, asexual people are free to choose which lottery or if they even are put in a lottery.

So, the system now become pointless. There we go.

[Geneviev]

Bisexual would get to choose, asexual people are free to choose which lottery or if they even are put in a lottery.

So can anyone just opt out? Because if you allow people to opt out all you have is a shitty dating service.

Only people who are asexual can opt out. And then they can't marry at all.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

So can anyone just opt out? Because if you allow people to opt out all you have is a shitty dating service.

Only people who are asexual can opt out. And then they can't marry at all.

Okay. I'm asexual. Done. But how does the government know that to be true or not?

[Purpelia]

So can anyone just opt out? Because if you allow people to opt out all you have is a shitty dating service.

Only people who are asexual can opt out. And then they can't marry at all.

That sounds needlessly cruel to people who actually have a partner. Or just to people who change their mind. Or those that don't want sex.

Than again this whole idea is basically a stalinist nightmare based on state ordered sex slavery. So that's to be expected.

[Geneviev]

Only people who are asexual can opt out. And then they can't marry at all.

That sounds needlessly cruel to people who actually have a partner. Or just to people who change their mind. Or those that don't want sex.

Than again this whole idea is basically a stalinist nightmare based on state ordered sex slavery. So that's to be expected.

Yes, of course it's needlessly cruel. It's the entire plot of a dystopian novel.