if people don't believe in god

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
really?, what were these examples found in nature that you allude to and how were
they applied? If its too personal or you would rather not say, i dont mind. In a witness
ceremony Biblical examples are provided to demonstrate certain principles which are
practical to the marital arrangement. In my own wedding the example of Isaac and
Rebecca was highlighted to bring to the fore certain admirable qualities worthy of
cultivation.

Jeez RC you are testing my memory - l dug out the vows (Apache wedding prayer part) and it is actually much less "nature like" than l remember!

"Now you will feel no rain. For each of you will be shelter to the other. Now you will feel no cold, for each of you will be warmth to the other. No there is no more loneliness, for each of you will be a companion to the other. Now you are two bodies, but there is only one life before you. Go now to your dwelling place to enter into days pf your togetherness and may your days be good and long upon the earth"

As you may or may not remember l went to one JW wedding about 10 years ago.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
the divorce rate in the west is pretty shocking, other than producing lots of unhappy children, does it have an impact on society or is it just a reflection of society?

There are also plenty of divorces that liberate unhappy children.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
except for the mormons, who gather wives like hungry hippos gather white marbles.

You would think the other christian men would organize some sort of intervention to prevent those Mormon blokes from self-harming.

Originally posted by tim88
why do they get married? getting married is from the religion - if you don't believe in god don't get married 😉

The reason why an atheist would marry would obviously be for reasons other than anything to do with religion.

Personally I see marriage as a totally obsolete concept that is sadly still adopted by our society and the law should be changed so to totally ignore whether you are technically 'married' with a lover or not.
Why should two lovers choosing to live together be given less/different legal rights for not being married? -what did they do wrong by NOT marrying?

Originally posted by FMF
There are also plenty of divorces that liberate unhappy children.

good point.

Originally posted by humy
The reason why an atheist would marry would obviously be for reasons other than anything to do with religion.

Personally I see marriage as a totally obsolete concept that is sadly still adopted by our society and the law should be changed so to totally ignore whether you are technically 'married' with a lover or not.
Why should two lovers choosing to live ...[text shortened]... en less/different legal rights for not being married? -what did they do wrong by NOT marrying?

i think marriage is obsolete for some but it should be there for people who like the concept. i think there still needs to be something more legally binding for a couple that separates them from lovers. ive lived with my partner since we were 18 (we are 35 now and married) i dont think our relationship when we were 18-19 should have the same legal rules as we now have as a married couple. maybe the laws should be roughly based on time spent together and take into account property and children on top of that.

Originally posted by humy
The reason why an atheist would marry would obviously be for reasons other than anything to do with religion.

Personally I see marriage as a totally obsolete concept that is sadly still adopted by our society and the law should be changed so to totally ignore whether you are technically 'married' with a lover or not.
Why should two lovers choosing to live ...[text shortened]... en less/different legal rights for not being married? -what did they do wrong by NOT marrying?

I disagree. (with marriage being obsolete. It obviously has nothing to do with gods)

Marriage originated as a civil contract (as an exchange of 'property', the ownership of the
girl in question being transferred from father to husband) and got co-opted by religions.

The benefits of marriage today are that you gain certain rights and obligations to each other.

For example, if you get injured, family members get privileges to visit you in hospital, and
more importantly have a say in any treatments or medical decisions that occur if you are incapable
of making those decisions your self. (including end of life choices)

Just because you have moved in with someone doesn't mean necessarily that you want to or are ready
to give that person a say in whether you want to be taken of life support in the event that you fall
into a coma.

So the legal side of marriage is a way of saying to the state that your partner is the person you want to
entrust with your life, as well as all the stuff like automatic joint custody of any children you have when
together and various tax breaks and so on.

It is also a way of saying to all of your family and friends that the relationship is serious and that you
intend it to last.
It is a formal expression of commitment that tells both your partner and all your collective friends and family
that the relationship is serious.
You think about a relationship where the pair are married or engaged to be married as being more serious and
of more note than when they were just dating.


Now this doesn't mean that marrying is always the best choice, or that there is anything intrinsically wrong with
not marrying.

But it does mean that marriage is a far from obsolete concept.

And the 'good' reasons for it are all secular.

And also I might add apply equally to a gay or lesbian couple as it does to a heterosexual couple.

Originally posted by humy
Why should two lovers choosing to live together be given less/different legal rights for not being married? -what did they do wrong by NOT marrying?

Marriage is in part, a legal contract. If two people choose to live together without a legal contract then that is up to them. But obviously, if you do make a legal contract, you expect your contract to be enforced legally - so of course you have different legal rights than two people with no contract.
Sure, the law does often recognise partnerships even when there is no legal paperwork, but the paperwork sure does make it easier and clearer.
Its rather like the difference between two friends who do business together but never make it legal, and two friends who start a legally registered business.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I disagree. (with marriage being obsolete. It obviously has nothing to do with gods)

Marriage originated as a civil contract (as an exchange of 'property', the ownership of the
girl in question being transferred from father to husband) and got co-opted by religions.

The benefits of marriage today are that you gain certain rights and obligations t I might add apply equally to a gay or lesbian couple as it does to a heterosexual couple.

Point taken.

“...You think about a relationship where the pair are married or engaged to be married as being more serious and
of more note than when they were just dating. ...”

yes I know. But personally I would like our culture to change so that we don't particularly care how 'serious' their relationship is because it is none of our business!

Just wondering:

do you see any reason why we should not allow an alternative way to get married where two lovers are able to get married simply by signing a contract that simply declares them as being legally married but without ANY marriage ceremony? (so no need for somebody to say “I pronounce you man and wife” or anything like that or say anything religious and no need for a priest or even a theist to be present and no need to, say, go to church -can sign the legal contract anywhere)

personally, I see no reason why not and I think that is one option that we should have IF we are to continue to have marriage.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Marriage is in part, a legal contract. If two people choose to live together without a legal contract then that is up to them. But obviously, if you do make a legal contract, you expect your contract to be enforced legally - so of course you have different legal rights than two people with no contract.
Sure, the law does often recognise partnerships even ...[text shortened]... iness together but never make it legal, and two friends who start a legally registered business.

Point taken; so there is a point in marriage as a legal contract.
In that case I now change my position on this by questioning the point of marriage ceremony at opposed to simply questioning marriage.

I like to ask you the same question I just asked googlefudge :

do you see any reason why we should not allow an alternative way to get married where two lovers are able to get married simply by signing a contract that simply declares them as being legally married but without ANY marriage ceremony? (so no need for somebody to say “I pronounce you man and wife” or anything like that or anything religious and no need for a priest or even a theist to be present and no need to, say, go to church -can sign the legal contract anywhere) ?

Originally posted by humy
Just wondering:

do you see any reason why we should not allow an alternative way to get married where two lovers are able to get married simply by signing a contract that simply declares them as being legally married but without ANY marriage ceremony? (so no need for somebody to say “I pronounce you man and wife” or anything like that or say anything reli ...[text shortened]... y not and I think that is one option that we should have IF we are to continue to have marriage.

You don't need (in this country at least) to have anyone religious present now.
And there is no requirement for anything religious to be mentioned during any ceremony that
you might have.

I don't see any need for 'requiring' any ceremony to enact the legal contract of marriage.
But it's not very romantic, so I suspect most people would chose to have some sort of
celebration of the event.

But I have no issues with not having any ceremonial aspects for those that don't want it.

Originally posted by googlefudge
You don't need (in this country at least) to have anyone religious present now.
And there is no requirement for anything religious to be mentioned during any ceremony that
you might have.

I don't see any need for 'requiring' any ceremony to enact the legal contract of marriage.
But it's not very romantic, so I suspect most people would chose to ha ...[text shortened]...
But I have no issues with not having any ceremonial aspects for those that don't want it.

I'm clad of that 🙂

Originally posted by humy
do you see any reason why we should not allow an alternative way to get married where two lovers are able to get married simply by signing a contract that simply declares them as being legally married but without ANY marriage ceremony?

Where I come from, Zambia, there are two types of marriage, the European style marriage, and the traditional marriage. If you get married in the traditional way, you must follow your traditions. I don't know much about these traditions, but one key factor is that polygamy is allowed.
If you get married the European way, then you must be married by a marriage officer, at a registered location. Marriage officers include certain civil servants, and some priests. If you get married in the Anglican Church, then the priest is a legal marriage officer and the resulting marriage certificate is a legal document. But some Churches do not have marriage officers, so they hold a religious ceremony in Church, and do the legal stuff at the civic centre.
If both of you are not religious, or if you come from different religions and there is a problem with getting married in Church, then you can get married at the civic centre.

Originally posted by humy
yes I know. But personally I would like our culture to change so that we don't particularly care how 'serious' their relationship is because it is none of our business!

As goolgefudge points out, it is everybody's business. Once you make your spouse responsible for you in a serious way, then your spouses family also holds some responsibility etc. Relationships are important. It is important to know how important they are. If my sister is seeing someone, I generally don't really care much who his parents or siblings are. But if she marries him, then they become part of my family. Now I suppose she could simply keep me updated as to how serious the relationship is, and I could have a sliding scale as to how important my semi-relatives are, but it is so much simpler to have an official announcement.

Marriage is not so much about two people getting together as it is about two families getting together.

Originally posted by nook7
Jeez RC you are testing my memory - l dug out the vows (Apache wedding prayer part) and it is actually much less "nature like" than l remember!

"Now you will feel no rain. For each of you will be shelter to the other. Now you will feel no cold, for each of you will be warmth to the other. No there is no more loneliness, for each of you will be a companion t ...[text shortened]... on the earth"

As you may or may not remember l went to one JW wedding about 10 years ago.

Yes its quite interesting all of these principles are essentially to be found in the Bible
also. JW weddings in the UK vary greatly, from the genteel lawn parties that one finds
in southern England to the full blown jigs of the Ceilidh dance in the North.