View Full Version : The Two-Year Marriage Worth a Try?
What a great idea!
Couples unwilling to commit "till death do they part" will be able to sign short-term marriage contracts under a proposal being considered by Mexico City lawmakers. Couples will be able to choose the term of their marriage, with a minimum length of two years, and renew the contract if they stay happy, according to a reform put forward by the liberal Democratic Revolution Party.
Go vote at:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion<wbr>/2011/10/03/two-year-marriage-<wbr>worth-try/ (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/03/two-year-marriage-worth-try/)
avatar4321
10-04-2011, 01:33 AM
Marriage is supposed to last beyond death. Not be for 2 years.
Marriage is supposed to last beyond death. Not be for 2 years.
Since it is a state level contractual agreement anyway, it should be treated as such, with options to renew. People who choose religious options should be required to follow the guideline set out by their choice.
avatar4321
10-04-2011, 01:42 AM
And why should it be a state governed contract? Simply because the state recognizes the contracts doesn't mean it should govern them.
logroller
10-04-2011, 01:44 AM
My wife's has talked about wanting to renew our vows. Doubt she ever considered I might say, "Nah, lets split" Gonna ask her if that's an option the next time she suggests it. :laugh:
darin
10-04-2011, 04:55 AM
Marriage is supposed to last beyond death.
That's kinda depressing... :(
KarlMarx
10-04-2011, 06:01 AM
Marriage is an institution that will work only if the people in it want it to. People now a days are too selfish and too immature to make an institution like marriage, which requires that its participants act like adults, work. Two year marriage, one week marriage, marriage on the lay away plan, marriage between two guys or two women... it does not matter. The fault is in ourselves not in the institution...
KarlMarx
10-04-2011, 06:02 AM
Marriage is supposed to last beyond death. Not be for 2 years.
I think it's supposed to last only until death. In death, no one is given in marriage, check the Bible... I think that's what it says.
I think it's supposed to last only until death. In death, no one is given in marriage, check the Bible... I think that's what it says.
I believe, if my memory serves, that it's the Mormons that think it goes beyond death.
As for the temp marriage, I don't really get the point, as far as I see it being engaged to someone is basically a temp marriage to see how things go...but whatever ticks people's clock, if someone wants a temp marriage it's not gonna affect my life.
darin
10-04-2011, 08:26 AM
I think it's supposed to last only until death. In death, no one is given in marriage, check the Bible... I think that's what it says.
Only some folks believe that KM; others believe in Eternal Marriage.
logroller
10-04-2011, 03:38 PM
Only some folks believe that KM; others believe in Eternal Marriage.
while others think it goes as long as it remains convenient...I think that's the point of the OP.
Little-Acorn
10-04-2011, 03:47 PM
What a great idea!
Couples unwilling to commit "till death do they part" will be able to sign short-term marriage contracts under a proposal being considered by Mexico City lawmakers. Couples will be able to choose the term of their marriage, with a minimum length of two years, and renew the contract if they stay happy, according to a reform put forward by the liberal Democratic Revolution Party.
Well, they've been trying to call a union between two men a "marriage", when it isn't.
They may as well call a two-year get-together a "marriage", when that isn't either.
Once you throw out the rules, there are no rules.
Well, they've been trying to call a union between two men a "marriage", when it isn't.
They may as well call a two-year get-together a "marriage", when that isn't either.
Once you throw out the rules, there are no rules.
And who set the "rules"? Is it not society/culture?
Well, they've been trying to call a union between two men a "marriage", when it isn't.
They may as well call a two-year get-together a "marriage", when that isn't either.
Once you throw out the rules, there are no rules.
It gets worse!
They even allow people who have been married to get divorced and marry again, when that isn't either!
Maddness I tell you.
/sarcasm.
logroller
10-04-2011, 05:08 PM
It gets worse!
They even allow people who have been married to get divorced and marry again, when that isn't either!
Maddness I tell you.
/sarcasm.
You're a Tudor fan I surmise.
avatar4321
10-04-2011, 06:05 PM
I think it's supposed to last only until death. In death, no one is given in marriage, check the Bible... I think that's what it says.
" Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." (Matt 19:6)
Adam and Eve were Married and commaned to multiply and replenish the earth before the fall. There was no death in the world then.
Marriage is instituted by God, and therefore is Eternal. Or at least can be.
avatar4321
10-04-2011, 06:06 PM
And who set the "rules"? Is it not society/culture?
Nope. That would be God.
You're a Tudor fan I surmise.
Whats Tudor?
avatar4321
10-04-2011, 06:08 PM
It gets worse!
They even allow people who have been married to get divorced and marry again, when that isn't either!
Maddness I tell you.
/sarcasm.
And couples shouldn't be getting divorced. Especially not nearly at the level they are currently doing it.
I know that in some circumstances, because of man's weakness, divorces are right. But too many people are divorcing for purely selfish reason. And in doing so they destroy their families for generations to come.
avatar4321
10-04-2011, 06:09 PM
That's kinda depressing...
And that being depressing is kind of depressing :(
DragonStryk72
10-04-2011, 07:00 PM
Since it is a state level contractual agreement anyway, it should be treated as such, with options to renew. People who choose religious options should be required to follow the guideline set out by their choice.
Wait, what kind of signing bonus/re-enlistment bonus would I have to look forward to?
logroller
10-04-2011, 09:42 PM
Whats Tudor?
The Tudor dynasty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_dynasty). Well known for Henry VIII and his many wives, including several annulments (de fact~ divorce) and executions.
revelarts
10-04-2011, 09:49 PM
I wonder how many other versions of "marriage" will make it or court or the law before the word is completely meaningless. or we have to start using adjectives before and after the word to have any idea what we're talking about.
revelarts
10-04-2011, 09:54 PM
Guy wants to marry his car
Girl wants to marry a concept
Girl wants to marry a dead guy
Woman want to see her bird and cat marry...
Teacher wants to marry her class of 3rd graders,..
Guy want to marry his job... literally... make it legal...
Child wants to marry a toy...
man want to marry restaurant...
woman marries a piece of art...
WHATS WRONG WITH IT? If they LOVE EACH OTHER, or SOMTHING... It's a right...
Your just a .uh fill-in-the-blank- a phobic if you want to ban them... Someone in my family is a necrophiaic or art lover etc....
plus they were born that way...DNA will prove it .. oneday...
avatar4321
10-05-2011, 12:25 AM
I think we just need a core group of Americans honoring marriage by getting married and staying married. I heard a sermon the other day, the best thing a man can do to raise a daughter is to love her mother. Our children need to be rooted in good values. that way if the world around us goes to hell, and it's heading there, we can correct it and our posterity will be the ones who lead it back to sanity.
Maybe im wrong. I dont know. Im not sure about alot of things lately. But I know that we aren't living the way God wants us to be living.
Nope. That would be God.
Yeah? How do you figure?
DragonStryk72
10-05-2011, 11:08 PM
I wonder how many other versions of "marriage" will make it or court or the law before the word is completely meaningless. or we have to start using adjectives before and after the word to have any idea what we're talking about.
Problem is, we've romanticized what marriage is. Originally, it wasn't even about love, really. It's been a way of solidifying treaties, it's been pluralistic, it's been abusive, etc.. People forget that romantic love as a reason for marriage as a good thing is somewhat new. The other 10,000 years, it's been something else entirely. I don't think we're gonna do any damage nowadays that's gonna take it down.
avatar4321
10-05-2011, 11:17 PM
Yeah? How do you figure?
He said so.
Abbey Marie
10-06-2011, 11:44 AM
Whether marriage lasts or not, the bigger problem is people who no longer have faith in certain institutions (marriage, church) attempting to talk others out of their faith.
He said so.
He did? Where and when?
avatar4321
10-06-2011, 03:05 PM
He did? Where and when?
During the creation when He set it in motion.
However, Im sure He would be more than happy to verify it to you if you discussed it with Him sometime.
What is marriage?
Is being married in accordance with one's church and/or state any better than a sincere commitment between two people? No. The people involved make the marriage, not a ceremony or piece of paper with a state's seal of "approval" on it.
Being married doesn't save a marriage either. It does provide a handy stick to beat someone with in the case of any form of spousal abuse - physical, mental, emotional. And it has an amazing capacity to up the guilt factor in those who let others try to tell them what is "right", when only the people involved know the circumstances.
People want to try a two year marriage? Go for it. When I get my life perfect, then I'll start trying to tell others how they should live. Until then, I've got my hands full dealing with figuring out how to live my own life.
revelarts
10-10-2011, 10:20 AM
What is marriage?
Is being married in accordance with one's church and/or state any better than a sincere commitment between two people? No. The people involved make the marriage, not a ceremony or piece of paper with a state's seal of "approval" on it.
Being married doesn't save a marriage either. It does provide a handy stick to beat someone with in the case of any form of spousal abuse - physical, mental, emotional. And it has an amazing capacity to up the guilt factor in those who let others try to tell them what is "right", when only the people involved know the circumstances.
People want to try a two year marriage? Go for it. When I get my life perfect, then I'll start trying to tell others how they should live. Until then, I've got my hands full dealing with figuring out how to live my own life.
that's sounds pretty good, and I think most people can agree with the sentiment but Marragie is a PUBLIC and private arrangement. the Man an Woman for life thing, as well as being outlined by God, carries with it a PUBLIC acknowledgment of a commitment to each other for life in general, as a family unit and for any children. Basically saying Hey we are together we are not available on certain levels anymore. Nor should we be considered as just 2 individuals. Plus in the modern age the legal connections outline benefits and protections to that social unit. Joint money... property... life insurance... inheritance... etc..
SO it's more than just 2 people trying to get along.
whats the point !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
marriage is a religious thing, why is it being converted slowly into a business deal in US ???
why does some people want to convert religion into a business, they already have the freedom of having sex, so they can live together for 2 years without marriage, or does that contract make their life better knowing that if your partner dies you will get your share of his money ???, is it about money, or is it about the illusion of marriage or what ???
if a couple want to wear rings, live in the same house, call themselfs husband and wife, have kids, live as a family, they can already do all that without destroying the divine meaning of marriage.
i dont really know why many people in USA want to destroy every aspect of christianity, i fear that oneday churchs will be closed because religion will exist no more on those lands.
i hope that i will never see a law like that in any place, i dont want to see marriage turned into just another business contract.
jimnyc
10-10-2011, 10:51 AM
i hope that i will never see a law like that in any place, i dont want to see marriage turned into just another business contract.
Many, many muslims I know of are in "arranged" marriages. I also know of many that are FORCED into these marriages. I know of many that were ostracized from their communities for seeking a divorce. But I guess it's all good in islamic communities, as apparently those "contracts" allow for the beating of the woman if she doesn't cooperate with her man.
Shadow
10-10-2011, 10:53 AM
What a great idea!
Couples unwilling to commit "till death do they part" will be able to sign short-term marriage contracts under a proposal being considered by Mexico City lawmakers. Couples will be able to choose the term of their marriage, with a minimum length of two years, and renew the contract if they stay happy, according to a reform put forward by the liberal Democratic Revolution Party.
Go vote at:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion<WBR>/2011/10/03/two-year-marriage-<WBR>worth-try/ (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/03/two-year-marriage-worth-try/)
Typical mind set of this selfish " it's all about me" generation...If I'm not made to be "happy" I quit. If you aren't going to "commit" to something 100%, then don't even bother in the first place. That's my opinion. Who wants half assed participation...with a built in escape hatch for when the other party gets "bored".
Gaffer
10-10-2011, 10:58 AM
It's a law being considered in Mexico, not the US. And most likely it's got to do with some high ranking officials wanting to get quick divorces and not being tied down to the same wife when there are so many pretty senoritas out there. You can bet it's something that benefits the politicians and doesn't effect the regular people at all.
DragonStryk72
10-10-2011, 03:25 PM
Many, many muslims I know of are in "arranged" marriages. I also know of many that are FORCED into these marriages. I know of many that were ostracized from their communities for seeking a divorce. But I guess it's all good in islamic communities, as apparently those "contracts" allow for the beating of the woman if she doesn't cooperate with her man.
Dude, up until the industrial revolution, WE did arranged marriages, and WE still allowed for the beating of wives. Aside from that, this isn't the thread for that discussion.
jimnyc
10-10-2011, 04:07 PM
Dude, up until the industrial revolution, WE did arranged marriages, and WE still allowed for the beating of wives. Aside from that, this isn't the thread for that discussion.
And cavemen used to drag their women back to the caves by their hair. Then people became more and more civilized. Someone forgot to tell the muslims about this "civilized" thing. Comparing people in different eras sounds more to me like an excuse to not recognize the CURRENT problems. "WE" don't do arranged marriages or find acceptance in the beating of women anymore.
logroller
10-10-2011, 07:59 PM
And cavemen used to drag their women back to the caves by their hair. Then people became more and more civilized. Someone forgot to tell the muslims about this "civilized" thing. Comparing people in different eras sounds more to me like an excuse to not recognize the CURRENT problems. "WE" don't do arranged marriages or find acceptance in the beating of women anymore.
http://youtu.be/3FgMLROTqJ0
jimnyc
10-10-2011, 08:09 PM
Never stated others didn't exist like the schmuck Connery, Certainly, the US, and other civilized countries have their share of abuse towards women. But would ANYONE dare think the percentages/numbers are even REMOTELY comparable?
ALL abuse towards women should be stopped. But by a FAR margin, abuse of women in Islamic countries is much higher than everywhere else. Same as terrorism. Surely you'll find various forms and locations - but by a FAR margin, terrorism is committed by muslims. People seem to get turned away when I make comments like this, and even defensive, for themselves or others - but the facts are the facts.
Kathianne
10-10-2011, 08:16 PM
Never stated others didn't exist like the schmuck Connery, Certainly, the US, and other civilized countries have their share of abuse towards women. But would ANYONE dare think the percentages/numbers are even REMOTELY comparable?
ALL abuse towards women should be stopped. But by a FAR margin, abuse of women in Islamic countries is much higher than everywhere else. Same as terrorism. Surely you'll find various forms and locations - but by a FAR margin, terrorism is committed by muslims. People seem to get turned away when I make comments like this, and even defensive, for themselves or others - but the facts are the facts.
Indeed. I'm sick of the 'equivalency' arguments, there really isn't any. Those that make them are saying the few anti-abortion nuts, (how many attempts? How many successful?), are equivalent of the Muslim extremists. They are not. Neither in numbers or 'success.' Then there is the problem of the 'greater Christians' and 'greater Muslims' regarding support for the nuts. With the nutters in Christian realm there are denials not only in press, but from pulpits. Indeed, there are condemnations written online, on editorial newspaper sites, including editorial letters, etc.
Regarding the Muslims, comes the Abso mini mees. 'While I don't condone it, I understand it. It's the fault of .....'
Many, many muslims I know of are in "arranged" marriages. I also know of many that are FORCED into these marriages. I know of many that were ostracized from their communities for seeking a divorce. But I guess it's all good in islamic communities, as apparently those "contracts" allow for the beating of the woman if she doesn't cooperate with her man.
and who said that i like forced marriages ??? did i ever say that i like to see a girl forced into a marriage ?
in Islam, for a marriage to be valid, the girl must give her consent, some fathers ignore that rule and thinks that they have the right to force their daughters into marriage, but of course that is WRONG.
Kathianne
10-11-2011, 12:50 AM
and who said that i like forced marriages ??? did i ever say that i like to see a girl forced into a marriage ?
in Islam, for a marriage to be valid, the girl must give her consent, some fathers ignore that rule and thinks that they have the right to force their daughters into marriage, but of course that is WRONG.Some or many? Get honest here.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.