There's a reason the divorce rate skyrocketed once people started marrying for something as fickle as love. People have only been marrying for love since fairly recently. It's not something to place your bets on.
60 comments
Yes, marriage for love is still a fairly recent idea. But I still think it's a hell of a lot better than marrying because daddy wants to strengthen his ties with a business partner, or so that he can gain some kind of political advantage.
And the flip side of the divorce coin is that at least people can get out of a marriage, if they want to. It's nice to know that if someone gets into an abusive marriage, or if two people just find that they are no longer happy with each other then there's a solution. Sometimes, preserving the marriage is the worst thing that can be done.
omg this reminds me of a quote from one of my friends when we were 16, and he was ultraconservative... he said "Love has very little to do with marriage" [we were debating same-sex marriage].
Oh, it's myspace. Makes perfect sense.
This is actually true...many marriages in ages past were for convenience, economic reasons, or family arrangement.
Still, this is not, by itself, the largest factor contributing to the high divorce rate in the U.S. No-fault easy divorce laws are a big part of the equation.
BurntBush
Atheist married for 26 years. You fail.
14 married, 20 years together. And daddy didn't even have to sell her to me!
I hate to break it to you, but older generations who got married because it was expected of them have been getting divorced in droves since their children have grown up and they realized they were living with someone they didn't love and perhaps didn't respect. In most cases they were misrible for a long time and only because of outdated thinking that it was best for the child to be in a two person household no matter if the parents got along or not did they waste so much of their life.
Almost 83% of divorces are caused by marriage.
Napoleon: its simple: We "immoral" atheists try to choose mates we actually trust, talk with and love, rather than whoever mommy/daddy think is appropriate, or whoever our 'abstinence' accidentally knocked up.
So while cheating, making sex lame and pleasureless for the woman, not sharing chores and other crap are expected by the church, we actually try to find someone to live our lives with.
That's not fundie at all. In fact it's pretty damn accurate.
In as much as first rush love doesn't last. It's a biological condition, purely down to hormones and rarely ever lasts past the age where a child can have been born and raised to an age where it can be left alone while the mother goes out to get her own food.
Of course, the English definition of Love covers a hella lotta ground, so to specify what I'm talking about in this comment (and assuming the original was referring to) is the romantic crossed eyes in a crowded room Twoo Wuv routine.
(Multi-edits... I should not comment after 1am....)
My first marriage was to a semi-fundie, it lasted less than four years. Second marriage was to an atheist and has lasted 20 years to date. We lived together for a little over a year before that.
My parents just celebrated their 50th anniversary last summer. While they were practicing catholics for years, they gave up on the religion quite a number of years ago.
Besides, back in the day when you married for reasons other than love, women were property, not equal partners in a relationship. The men could divorce them, but not the other way around.
You lose.
nah, that's "genocide" ... it SOUNDS a lot like "love", but its really a lot more like cubscouts: Lots of fire, wood and rope.
(not that we did bad stuff. In fact, the only religious aspect of cubscouts as a kid, up where I was in quebec, was that it was done in a church-basement. That's it. No praying, no hymns, just lots of fire, rope and bits of wood. none of the lynching.)
Damn, and I thought I was cynical about love.
My parents were both Christian, but they got married because they loved each other and wanted to be together, balanced each others' personalities well, and were best friends. They were married for 26 years before my father died.
FAIL.
So, if not for love, what on earth are we marrying?, for money?, that´s similar to long-term prostitution and it ends with the first economic crisis.
"So, if not for love, what on earth are we marrying?"
To glorify God by producing good, God-fearing, Christian children to carry on the Great Commission, of course! < /fundie mode >
Actually, I agree with Sarah. My grandmother taught me the same thing. She said that "...Someone doesn't stay angry at another forever. Anger, love, fear and all other emotions fade with time. If you base an entire relationship on something as fleeting as an emotion, then that relationship is doomed." That seems like sound advice to me.
So...tell us Sarah, what IS the purpose of being in a marriage? Oh wait, lemme guess, procreation within Godly standards, right?
For the record, what caused divorce rates to 'skyrocket' (which is itself a debatable term) was -
1. We've only recently kept records; if there were divorces 1-200 years ago, without records, we can't be sure.
2. The societal stigma attached to divorce has largely disappeared. It used to mean persona non grata, &c to even *consider* breaking up a marriage. Not so any more. (Which may be a good thing - would you, the OP, like to be stuck in a bad relationship, with no recourse, for the rest of your life?)
Though I think I do agree that what we in the US think of as 'love' (Greek eros ) is not a good emotion to base a lifelong relationship on. But get your facts straight. (Let's start with that 'people have only married for love recently' claim ... )
Could be Poe, or could be Sarah's not getting any at all.
Its not like Christians don't divorce or whatever.
Not fundie. Not retarded. Can be judged as cynical; I'd say 'clinical'.
Love as the reason for choosing a mate is no more 'natural' than any other reason.
Marriage can be for many more reasons than 1)arranged or 2)love. Has nobody here seen GATTACA?
My two christian parents have been divorced six times. They still think marriage is a good idea. I'm 43, atheist, never married, and I agree with sarah (THIS time).
Well hold up now, in some cultures it has been the norm to marry for love, not the exception (my own being an example).
IMHO, the divorce rate has "skyrocketed" for several reasons:
1) some married people throughout time have always wanted divorces, but didn't do it because divorce was either illegal or stigmatised. The only difference now is they can get one fairly easily
2) marriage is not as economically necessary as it was years ago (in other words, a person nowadays usually can survive economically if their marriage breaks up)
3) a lot of marriages aren't based on love but infatuation or attraction. Many people, even in adulthood, confuse the three.
I've been married to my true love for two decades, and that love has enabled us to stay together through events that would've broken up many couples. Over the years we've survived being poor, having stillborn twins, the death of one of our children at age 4 in a car accident, losing our home, and my husband suffering from a degenerative disease. Despite what sarah seems to think, I highly doubt we'd have made it through those times if we weren't madly in love.
I'd bet EVERYTHING on any marriage based on real, true love.
Actually, it's more that mistresses are no longer an accepted practice, and divorce *is*.. If something is more achievable, then, yeah there's going to be more of it.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.