PUBLIC OPINION > Marriage Is Still Relevant

sure

I don't know about everyone else, but I know that even though I am not religious in the least, I value marriage. My bond with my husband is the most significant to me.

Marriage is still relevant but since government has taken over the role of "Daddy" to single mothers it seems like the destruction of marriage is the goal of government.

Single mothers are simply being helped, which is something that should have started happening a long time ago. Women don't need men to complete them, but sometimes bringing up a baby on their own can be hard so they do require assistance.

Don't mind "helping" even though I wasn't in on the helping in the beginning - you know when the fun really is going on, but government has become "Daddy" to too many kids for too long. Babies are not created by "single" actions so, I fail to understand why I should pay for all those babies that I did not help create. I took full responsibility for the children I did create without ANY government hand outs. for one thing, don't have babies until you can support the little lives you bring into this world.

The government shouldn't pay for everything I agree, but there's never any harm in the extra help that they can give single mothers. Surely it can't hurt for even more money to go into raising a human being?

Single mothers shouldn't be single mothers. That causes poverty and your arguments is proof. three things to avoid poverty, Finish school, get a job and get married before having kids. Do the right thing for your kid - grow up and make sure you can take care of them before you have them.

So the taxpayer completes them?

Of course not! The taxpayer simply provides additional assistance so they can continue raising a child on their own.

It is still relevant, but there are too many people that think just living together is the thing to do. They don't want to make a commitment. Sad.

Is it?

"The only other large group that sided against marriage was atheists" - I do not think atheists constitute a large group.

Marriage is a Sacrament. Sacraments are never irrelevant.

I think so. On a related note how do I make it so that people on here know im not engaged anymore...? (She texted me one day and said I think I should think about if I want to marry you after collage or not) =(

Sure it's still relevant!(and sacred too, mind you)

Now that's a model couple! LOL

It's a good thing she isn't my role model... I really don't want anyone emulating that attention..... well I think you know. ;-)

Marriage isn't getting outdated just people think why be with one if u can have them all kinda thing.

The morals of this county are going down the drain fast. If you would get married and then have children you would not have to wonder who your baby daddy is. In todays schools instead of teaching morals or abstinence, they teach you how to put a condom on a banana in the 6th grade. And you wonder why so many Americans have chosen to home school their children if possible.

I'm so glad my kids are grown!

Really i thought kids were getting knocked up cause of abstinence only sex ed... Teach kids to use condoms and it helps them not get knocked up, at least it worked for me.

You won't have to use a condom if you wait till you get married to start a family. I know this is such a hard concept for you to understand but it works. Why do you need to get the milk for free before you buy the cow? The results of the if it feels good do it mentality.

Not everyone wants to get married ever,

The thing though is, is marriage is a commitment between two people... and to be honest, I don't think that in order to be "married" you need the validation of a piece of paper. That piece of paper is just essentially a legal contract.

Great. Start a family with your boyfriend and let me know how long it takes for him to find someone else and you are raising your children by yourself. Just like puppy love you will tell yourself, that will not happen to me. Our relationship is different. Just keep telling yourself that.

I hope you aren't implying that's my situation? Because if you are you are making wild assumptions.

Marriage is (more than anything else) for raising children. Not exclusively, that is also true. But, traditionally, that is what it primarily is for, end of story. Because of that, it will always be relevant. Clearly, there are no two people anywhere, who -need- a marriage in order to choose to honor and love each other. That is not the main purpose of marriage. The main purpose of marriage is to provide a strong, committed, lasting family and home for children to be raised in.

Yep'

RELEVANT. I joke that "I was married twice to my first wife, once to my second, and none to my third(common-law) wife. So I don't know if I'm getting better or worse." Ha,Ha! But I believe in marriage and long lasting relationships. And am very happy with my LADY.

Married... so I guess I'm bias, but I absolutely believe that marriage is still relevant. Who doesn't want to find someone to spend the rest of their lives with? To share your years, have children with, experience adventures, and grow old with. I've lived so much and I've never been more happy then I am now that I have a wonderful supportive husband by my side. I know that alone I could make it, but its so much better together. We can face the whole world together.

There is an economic benefit to marriage/cohabitation as sharing living expenses saves money. And the marriage part tends to increase the willingness and trust between partners to invest their money and work toward longer range goals. Perhaps there is a correlation between declining marriage rates and increasing income inequality.

Yes it Matters and if it doesn't why are gays striving so hard to be allowed to marry.

I was saying that too.

yes

That is, I think, why we should be serious about marriage. Conservatives should grow up, and allow everyone to get married, including gays and lesbians. It's to serious to play bigoted political games over it.

I think you have the right idea. When 'everyone can do it' then it's not special anymore. We deliberately got married outside of Canada so we would not have a 'Canadian Marriage' which is something even two homosexual men can get.

Our marriage office actually has the official directive "One Man One Woman For Life" in massive letters on the wall! As if a reminder.

Something interesting - one of the young women we know was always on about how anyone should get married. When she did recently get married there was little interest. A friend had even said about her marriage something to the effect "well its not really special anymore" and I got the sense she (the bride-to-be) was very very upset. But who can she blame? She was exactly part of what made her marriage less special, less unique, less serious, less respectable.

It don't understand how a happy couple who happen to be of the same sex would invalidate the specialness of marriage. If anything, I thought the culprit of that would have been all the abuse, divorces because of the poor choice to marry when they're obviously incompatible, and the idea that people should be paired up simply because of a duty to their deity.

I'm sorry, but if marriage has been invalidated, it happened long before now.

You don't understand how something with less distinction, more common, open to more combinations is less special? Then what would the word 'special' even mean or why use the word at all?

Just because there are more variations or differences in a subject doesn't mean that it is any less special. Honestly, that's the kind of argument someone would use against multiculturalism.

Besides which, in the end, marriage is about the joining of two people so that they can spend the rest of their lives together. Has gay marriage altered the essence of marriage in any way?

Well yes more variations would make it less special. What else would define 'special' if not more unique and invariable.

No, marriage is not about joining two people so they can spend the rest of their lives together. This is why we don't acknowledge a father and son living together for the rest of their lives as 'Married'. This is why we refer to a child as 'adopted' and not 'getting married'.

The 'essence of marriage' was altered when the definition was changed, opened up and includes more variations'.

Not that I acknowledge 'gay marriages' but the issue here is about what the 'state' is acknowledging or not.