Why Does Marriage Have To Be "Forever?"

I don't plan to ever marry again. I don't know that I can have that kind of trust for and in someone.

Not annoyed at all. Just truly not understanding what you are trying to say.

Yes for very religious folks marriage is sacred and certainly is forever as it’s between them as a couple and G-d. I wouldn’t try to change what marriage means to them though. Why would I want them to view marriage differently/as a lease? That’s what I was trying to say. Different cultures and religions and life styles see marriage differently. You can choose your own way to see it. No need to change others.

Yes many religious people consider it must be forever. No they aren’t lying. It’s their belief. Among other beliefs. Some believe in after life for example. I don’t. It’s not up to me to change their beliefs and it would be weird for me to argue that they must stop believing.

Why would you want to change how they view marriage? It’s a bit of ethnocentric attitude. it’s not up to us to try to change those cultures and religions. It wouldn’t be appropriate. But it’s appropriate to make you choice how to view marriage and how to conduct it

I'm really not asking anyone to change their view of marriage & I don't really think my ethnocentric attitude on this little post will change the world. I mean I'm no Jesus Christ, but it was just an idea on the philosophy of marriage.

I just don't see it as all black or white. I know everyone sees things differently.
Thanks everyone.

.

Exavtly! The concept of marriage is not all black and white anymore .

That’s what I was trying to explain. That’s why I said that view on marriage and ways of conducting marriage really depends what culture/religion/socio-economic level of a particular society/life style/individual preference etc

It’s not as black and white as marriage meant to be forever and if it could be changed into less rigid model. It already changed and keeps changing in sometimes slow and sometimes fast progression along with other changes in the world.

I tried to dig deeper and perhaps failed in my attempts to explain that nothing is black and white anymore. The world is changing and will keep changing. And so is institution of marriage

This is where I believe the stigma of divorce remains. As a parent there is a ton of information and studies out there discussing the ill effects divorce has on children. And much is conflated to include single parent households.

I've met and interact through a local association of a different topic, another woman who is very clear about having raised her children as a divorcee as opposed to as a single mom. It's a cultural statement that draws some sort of boundary in how her parenting is viewed.

I could relate quite well with why she does after I myself had moved to this community after living and parenting in the community I had moved from where there was a feel of pity et al. Because it's viewed as removing wealth from a child's life and a step down in the social rung of the ladder. Not that being married to my ex was some magical key to having money considering his financial irresponsibilities. It's certainly a factor in viewing staying married 'forever' as a family institution. Financial a studies about emotional well being of children.

Every relationship and marriage is different.

Me and my husband stayed engaged for awhile before marriage. I don't see myself settling down and making a life with anyone else but we both are realist and know people change and goals change and we can't predict 20 years down the road.And marriage was a safe guard to the life we have already built together plus extra benefits. I needed insurance, the tax benefits are pretty alright, and if anything ever happened to one of us then we both would be able to handle the other's post mortem business with legal ease. Society and its infrastructures still give more benefits to couples who are married. And when you build a life with someone for close to a decade and you start to look at how to safeguard that life marriage becomes the most economical way to do that

I think marriage can be very beautiful on a personal level, I married my husband because I love him and I made a commitment to him, we didn't have a big wedding or anything, for us personally marriage felt like it should be done as privately as possible because it is about our commitment to each other. We eloped, had a close friend who is ordained marry us, and went to a nice dinner. And our commitment to each other wasn't the traditional till death do us part. It was more as long as we love each other we will care for each other and do our best for each other. We also aren't the most traditional couple as we aren't monogamous and have an open relationship.

I think marriage will always be important and a path most long term committed couples purse because our society makes it the best way to safeguard the life they have built together with added benefits. And for a lot of people it still has a deep emotional meaning. Even if me and my husband hadn't gotten married legally we still would have ended up exchanging vows and rings because it is our pact with each other. And we have discussed if we met someone that we both loved and they loved both of us we would make the same commitment to that person as well.

Marriage is really complex, I wish more people wouldn't look at it as the natural next step of a relationship or a goal to check off the life path list though. Any long term relationship regardless of marriage status or not takes a lot of work and it isn't always easy, there are plenty of days where I feel like throwing in the towel for my own selfish reasons or we had a disagreement, or my husband is on my nerves but then the moment passes and I am glad I didn't give into that impulse because I love him and I love sharing life with him even close to 10 years later.

Marriage is about commitment, through good times and bad. Been married 33 years and we are happy together. Yeah we’ve had some tough times but we always stick together!

Interesting thread!

I was young and perhaps niave when we married (him less so). I just felt I loved this person more than anyone ever and wanted to spend my whole life with him. Marriage itself wasn't necessary for that but on practical level for joint finances/pension rights etc it was. It made things simpler and more clear cut as parents too.

The term contract idea I have read about too and it sounds interesting. But can you imagine when the end of the lease approaches and the discussions/ negotiations? Lol.

Over all I think it is a societal concept to do with stability and care in older age particularly, some countries give tax benefits to those in marriage/civil partnership. It's encouragement to keep units together. Not very romantic but there you go.

Ideals can’t poof away like that, because deep down we all want them. Deep down we all want a partner for life, with whom we’ll share mutual love.
Religion is melting away because life circumstances increasingly “require” us to unleash our animalistic selves to “survive”.

I was thinking it would actually help people prepare to talk about serious issues & even the future so both partners are still in it together.

If I look at Jungian psychology we all have a shadow side, an "id." Some couples do not show their shadow sides during dating then they are married & these shadow sides come out. So we either learn to dance with these shadow sides & accept them or learn to ignore these shadows.
People change in marriages. Sometimes one does & the other doesn't or they grow at different rates. I was just thinking maybe this would help in communication.

It's an interesting idea definitely.

It could be reaffirming to say "I do" all over again.

I would renew my marriage contract, and I guess that's quite an uplifting thought.

If I were widowed I am fairly sure I would not remarry (although may date) however.

I think in this new proposed model (lease and contract)people could renew their marriage license or not, they could do the same now: stay married or get divorce.

Sure divorce is expensive. But renewal of license would probably come with legal fees, visits to attorneys to make sure renewal is done right, some couples would have an issue as one person would want to renew contract and the other don’t, some people would want to stop their contract before it’s due (break the lease).

People would have the same discussion about renewal of lisence as they have now about staying married or not and about potential deal breakers etc People who have trouble discussing their marriage with their partner now, would have the same issue discussing it in contract/lease model.

Some would never want to marry because they don’t want to sign contracts (same as some don’t marry now)

So we pretty much would face the same financial and legal and emotional issues with contract/lease concept as marriage/divorce model.

At the end it will be the same thing.

Some couple will stay together and some will not. There will always be unhappy marriages and happy ones. There will always be good relationships and will always bad. We will never change the way it is by creating different legal marital procedure.

Marriage was invented not just as a contract between a man and a woman. It was also a contract between those two people and any children that would result from the couple's union. Also, it was a contract between that family and society. A major concern was "property rights" and the "right of inheritance."

Back before we had DNA testing that could establish paternity, marriage was a way of demonstrating fatherhood. (Who the mother was is pretty obvious.) In getting married, a man was pledging to recognize as his, any children born by the woman he married. Society was also pledging to recognize that. Traditionally, the law recognized all children born of a particular woman to have been fathered by her husband. People have long understood that's not a guarantee, which is one reason why adultery by a woman was considered such a betrayal of her husband. In ancient biblical times, men had children by their wives, but also by their slaves. The children born of slaves did not have the same rights as the children born of a wife. If a female slave was not Jewish, her child fathered by a Jewish master was not considered Jewish. The Jewish father did not have the same obligations to children he fathered through non-jewish women (usually slaves) as he had to his Jewish children (born of a Jewish mother.)

Most societies did not give children born "out of wedlock" the same inheritance standing as children who were seen as the product of a marital union. In most countries that had a monarchy, only "legitimate children" could inherit the throne (and all that went with that.) Elizabeth the First became queen of England, even though she had an older brother, Henry FitzRoy. He couldn't become king because his father, King Henry the Eighth, hadn't been married to his mother.

When you dig down, a lot of laws and social conventions are motivated by the need to establish "who gets what."

Personally, I have no mental nor emotional attachment to the concept/practice of 'marriage'...

Why should a marriage last forever?
I believe that marriage, above all, comes in with two hearty lovers who have to create their small and cozy paradise for two. If this is a real love, then it is not even considered that the marriage is temporary.