Should marriage be abolished?

[Risottia]

In my opinion it shouldn't, and I don't even know why some people want to abolish it.

In the future there's no need for it.

Why would a guy marry a sex bot?

Because marriage isn't about sex and it isn't about things. It's about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

[Benuty]

In the future there's no need for it.

Why would a guy marry a sex bot?

Because marriage isn't about sex and it isn't about things. It's about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

The poster is called king of the incels to be fair.

[Risottia]

It's important to people, and they enjoy it.

I'd question both of those assertions.

Marriage doesn't give you seizures, heart disease, and lung damage.

That sounds like marriage to me, well the heart disease and lung damage at least.

That would be what divorce is for. And it costs less in both money and pain than quitting cocaine.

[Benuty]

"Duuude, marriage is like totally outdated", says a hippie, wearing a multi-colored robe and in need of a wash. "They're like, restrictive and they bring down the vibe, man. Why put people in a box? Ban marriage, and let us roam free and we can all be brothers and sisters! It's what's nature wanted!"

-----

Seriously though? Nah, nope. Shotgun wedding, forced marriage (different from shotgun wedding in terms of details involved), etc, they're the real concern, of course. Child marriage as well, that's a problem.

Normal, everyday, "two adults voluntarily love each other" type of marriage? Nah, why try to "fix" something that's not exactly broken by abolishing it?

As much as people like to mock hippies in the case of free love that whole attitude provided a social Darwinist wet dream come the time of HIV. So the mockery is completely justified. As for child marriage, I would like to be able to see more than a mere number of states (three I think) in the United States actually ban the damned thing.

[Risottia]

Because marriage isn't about sex and it isn't about things. It's about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

The poster is called king of the incels to be fair.

Well, I would have guessed that incels know that sex with other people isn't a necessary part of life.

[Benuty]

I'd question both of those assertions.



That sounds like marriage to me, well the heart disease and lung damage at least.

That would be what divorce is for. And it costs less in both money and pain than quitting cocaine.

Unless you are a gambler with marriages that is.

[Britannia Maior]

Yes, I am referring to Huxley’s work.

It was practically abolished in that case, albeit in a manner that isn’t common or orthodox.

Abolished by gunpoint for the first case, but everyone who knew about it was either long dead or in a reservation naturally or exiled to serve as spectacle. No one sat down in a legislature and thought "You know what would be a good idea?". The process was entirely without the consent of the population because those who survived the apocalyptic war that took place before knew better than the remaining human population.

I’ll admit that it’s been a couple of years since I’ve read the book, so I forgot about that part. I’m personally hugely opposed to any society resembling that of the World State or our own slipping into that state of being, which I consider the abolishment of marriage a factor in. It isn’t exactly the same as in the book’s setting, but you get what I mean.

[Risottia]

I don't see the problem with it. As an atheist I'll probably never get married in the traditional sense, I.E. in a church

Openly atheist here, married in a church with Ambrosian Catholic rite to a christian, with the explicit permission of the Archbishop following the recommendation of the parishioner. No problem.
Actually, the parishioner was quite happy that a non-catholic was open about his lack of faith - quite often there are non-religious folks who feign faith just because a church wedding looks better.

[Costa Fierro]

They seem like well-grounded statements to me. What's there to question about them?

That either people enjoy being married or that it's important.

Let's start with its importance. Marriage was once an important social institution that has declined in importance over the years to the point where marriage rates are the lowest they've ever been, and an increasing number of people are choosing to forego marriage altogether. There's less pressure to get married, and the benefits of marriage have turned out to be vastly overstated, not to mention the institution is still pushed by older generations as social expectations. I'd question whether or not it is as important as people think it is, and whether or not the expectation to get married should continue to be pushed onto people.

As for joy, the divorce rates are enough to answer that question.

How does that sound like marriage?

Sound like the kinds of adverse health effects one would acquire during marriage.

[Belshekistan]

I don't see the problem with it. As an atheist I'll probably never get married in the traditional sense, I.E. in a church

Openly atheist here, married in a church with Ambrosian Catholic rite to a christian, with the explicit permission of the Archbishop following the recommendation of the parishioner. No problem.

I didn't mean that I won't be able to, I meant that I'll make the choice not to.

[Risottia]

Openly atheist here, married in a church with Ambrosian Catholic rite to a christian, with the explicit permission of the Archbishop following the recommendation of the parishioner. No problem.

I didn't mean that I won't be able to, I meant that I'll make the choice not to.

I thought so before, too. Then I met my SO who happens to be catholic.

[Arzt0zka]

No.

[Questarian New Yorkshire]

Marriage was already abolished.

It had been abolished by the late 19th century in England and in the US since 1960s.

The prosocial purpose (and the only prosocial purpose, from which others are drawn) is to allow men to produce legitimate children. The trade-off for women is that their children get to be supported and legitimately accepted by the community as having a lineage, rather than being tossed from cliffs, exiled, or have tomatoes thrown at them.

When marriage breaks down this functional purpose and adds some element of "love" rather than marriage really being what it is, a contract sworn at oath to stay together to produce a legitimate family, then it breaks down all its real social meaning and contains only personal meaning for the married people. That's fine for them and means a lot to them but it means nothing to the rest of us.

[The Archregimancy]

People derive joy from cocaine as well, doesn't justify blowing ten grand on it.

Marriage doesn't give you seizures, heart disease, and lung damage.

That's what you think; you should see me after a visit to the in-laws.

(I jest, I jest - my in-laws are lovely people)

[The Blaatschapen]

Marriage, as a government process should be abolished. Or widely expanded.

Why do people get tax breaks(or different tax classes, etc.) when they're married? It makes no sense to me.

It can be widely expanded so I can marry a friend, give them my inheritance, etc. without things like "lack of conjugal visits" or "cheating" being reasons to break the marriage.

---
Marriage as a symbol of love and caring between two people? None of my business, if I am not one of the two people, so I don't care *shrug* Do invite me to your party please, I like a good party as much as anyone else

[Questarian New Yorkshire]

In the future there's no need for it.

Why would a guy marry a sex bot?

Because marriage isn't about sex and it isn't about things. It's about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

Unbased and wrong.

Cohabitation is about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

Marriage is about making babies.

[New haven america]

Sure, why not?

[New haven america]

Because marriage isn't about sex and it isn't about things. It's about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

Unbased and wrong.

Cohabitation is about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

Marriage is about making babies.

Tell all of those couples who have kids outside of marriage that then.

[Brunswick-upon-Raritan]

I believe in the sanctity of gay marriage. Abolish heterocapitalist straight marriage.

I think a more interesting question would be where and how do people want to get married these days, or if they want to at all (and if they don’t, is it because they want to abolish marriage or some other reason?).

Like marriage in the U.S. has been very secularized. I think people still want to get married, legally, domestically, and romantically, but maybe not religiously. That is why the state has to be the administrator of marriage, it’s not just an issue for the church.

[Questarian New Yorkshire]

Unbased and wrong.

Cohabitation is about people living together, sharing their work and resources, and caring for each other.

Marriage is about making babies.

Tell all of those couples who have kids outside of marriage that then.

Bro.

Seriously. Massive cerebral cortex failure.

I said that marriage is for making babies. I did not say that people outside of marriage can't physically (or even shouldn't) have children.

Take your failed gotcha and do it somewhere else (Forum 7, or Reddit maybe)

[Brunswick-upon-Raritan]

Marriage isn’t about making babies.

[Questarian New Yorkshire]

In fact in the past fewer people were married and had those kind of marriages than either today or in the 1950s. It wasn't as common, at least in recorded renaissance history. It was an objective: marriage was a byword for stable family life and legitimate children. Since those things have been eliminated since the 1880s, there is now no more reason to aim for marriage, so many people do not. Still they have children (and I didn't anywhere say this was bad or impossible.)

[Questarian New Yorkshire]

Marriage isn’t about making babies.

Yes it is.

[New haven america]

Tell all of those couples who have kids outside of marriage that then.

1. Bro.

2. Seriously. Massive cerebral cortex failure.

3. I said that marriage is for making babies. 4. I did not say that people outside of marriage can't physically (or even shouldn't) have children.

Take your failed gotcha and do it somewhere else (Forum 7, or Reddit maybe)

1. I'm not your bro.
2. Says the person who had the very idea to claim that marriage is for making babies.
3. Yes, you did, and it still sounds just as stupid as when you first made the claim.
4. But then if marriage was only for making babies then why would there be babies being born out of wedlock? Thus making the point of marriage null and void.

[Brunswick-upon-Raritan]

Marriage isn’t about making babies.

Yes it is.

Maybe for an atheist.