View Poll Results: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Okay as it is/make only minor changes

    7 25.00%
  • Take away all government financial incentives

    1 3.57%
  • Make some specific changes only

    0 0%
  • Take government out of marriage completely

    13 46.43%
  • Other

    7 25.00%
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 82

Thread: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

  1. #41
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,158

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    Not really. Of course, theres no way to prove it one way or the other.
    Really? Arranged marriages were largely a thing of the past by 1900. Let's look at divorce rates and some specifics:

    According to the following site, the US Census Bureau says the divorce rates in 2000 were nine times what they were in 1950. The divorce rate in 1950 was more than 10 times what it was in 1900. Taken together that's more than a 90x increase.


    According to statistics gathered by the US Census Bureau, in 1900 the rate of divorce for males was 84 per 100,000 and 114 per 100,000 for women. The rate grew steadily as the 20th century went on, and during the Great Depression of the 1930s, it was sitting at 489 per 100,000 for men and 572 per 100,000 for women.

    After World War II, the divorce rate continued to increase. In 1950, the rate was sitting at 1,070 per 100,000 for men and 1,373 per 100,000 for women. Historical divorce rate statistics continued to rise steadily, and the numbers took a big jump in the 1970s. This may have been due to the fact that the Seventies were the decade when no-fault divorce was first made available.

    Before that point, anyone who wanted to end their marriage was going to have to prove allegations of adultery or cruelty. Being able to get a divorce based on the fact that the marriage had broken down or irreconcilable differences may have been a factor in the increase in divorce rates during this decade. By 1980, divorce rates for men had grown to 4,539 per 100,000 for males and 6,577 per 100,000 for females.

    According to the most recent statistics gathered by the US Census Bureau (2000), the divorce rate for men was 9,255 per 100,000 and 12,305 per 100,000 for women.
    Historical Divorce Rate Statistics | LoveToKnow

    My parents were hardly unique. The majority of their friends and siblings in the same age group had similar experiences: married for love, married for life.

    It isn't a myth.
    Last edited by Goshin; 05-31-11 at 12:26 AM.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  2. #42
    Professor xpiher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-23-12 @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,993

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Really? Arranged marriages were largely a thing of the past by 1900. Let's look at divorce rates and some specifics:

    According to the following site, the US Census Bureau says the divorce rates in 2000 were nine times what they were in 1950. The divorce rate in 1950 was more than 10 times what it was in 1900. Taken together that's a 90x increase.
    I wasn't just talking about arranged marriages. You aren't even mentioning the feminist movement, the equal rights movement, or the fact that women no longer have to rely on men for finical stability anymore. You also aren't mentioning the fact that people have gotten less mature since people largely start life later (25) now due to a myriad of factors.

  3. #43
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,147

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    I wasn't just talking about arranged marriages. You aren't even mentioning the feminist movement, the equal rights movement, or the fact that women no longer have to rely on men for finical stability anymore.
    This is a really good point. It kind of changes things when you expect to be an equal partner. Also, let's remember how discouraged women were from reporting abuse or dissatisfaction within marriage. Raping your wife wasn't even a crime.

    If you can't survive without your husband, what exactly are you going to do? Women of the 50's dosing themselves with booze and transquilizers (and men did the same) was largely due to miserable marriages they couldn't get out of.

    That's nice that your parents friends were happy. The majority of people didn't feel the same. That's how divorce became acceptable in the first place. If most people had no reason to want it, it wouldn't have ever become acceptable.

  4. #44
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,158

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    I wasn't just talking about arranged marriages. You aren't even mentioning the feminist movement, the equal rights movement, or the fact that women no longer have to rely on men for finical stability anymore. You also aren't mentioning the fact that people have gotten less mature since people largely start life later (25) now due to a myriad of factors.
    Well you aren't wrong. You are aware that there is a backlash ongoing against the brand of feminism that crashed through society in the 60's and 70's? The new feminists are far less radical and more open to traditional ways as a matter of choice.

    As for women not having to rely on men for financial stability anymore... well, the potential is there, and some women achieve it, but the honest fact of the matter is that the majority of women remain dependent on the husband's income to support themselves at the level they have become accustomed to. Typically, one parent has to take primary responsibility for the children, and that means putting career second. Most times this is the woman. This, plus childbirth and other factors, usually means an on-and-off career, frequently part-time, that typically is less than 1/3 of the household income. This isn't a result of sexual discrimination, its a result of factors pertaining mainly to being the primary caretaker of the children. I would know; I've had to pass on many career opportunties because of being a single father for 13 years.

    That people are less mature now than 50-100 years ago I can readily believe. I'm not positive what the answer to that is. Some have suggested a mandatory 2 years in the military at age 18 for everyone... seems a bit drastic, but it is a thought.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  5. #45
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,158

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    I am divorced.

    I have asked myself many times what might have happened if I'd stayed put and toughed it out. Would things have gotten better? Perhaps, perhaps not. Things were very bad or I would never have considered divorce. Still, divorce leaves scars. It is hard on children. Statistics show that most women are worse off financially after a divorce.

    Still, I'll be second-guessing myself for a long time. It was a hard thing to do. It was like sawing off my right arm with a dull knife, even though that arm was trying to destroy me.

    On the flip side, I've known so many people to get divorced for frivolous reasons in recent decades. People are spoiled. They think everything is supposed to be all joy and no pain. They walk at the drop of a hat, often uncaring what it does to the children. It is appalling.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Many times during SSM debates it comes up whether the government should be involved in marriage at all or whether certain financial benefits should be offered for being married.
    Yeah and I wish you people would stop pretending this is a new topic. This has been don soooooo many times.

    No one has anything new to say, this thread is just going to be another re-hash of the same 'oll thing.

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    The government's role is that of recorder.

    As such, it should be completely indifferent to who signs the contract, as long as the contract is between two consenting adults.

    Furthermore, laws forbidding polygamy and polyandry, and chain marriages, etc, are equally irrational, assuming the legal framework is established to define ownership of property in those more complicated forms, how community property is distributed upon dissolution of the marriage, and child custody issues, to be determined, of course, on the best interests of the child.

    Anyone that cares if someone is married to someone else is probably jealous.

  8. #48
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,147

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    I dunno, there's a scary misandrist and hyper-PC tone moving through some threads of the new feminism. I'd say the more moderate feminists are more common, but the fringey folks are loud. Not really doing us any favors.

    I don't think later age of marriage indicates lack of maturity. Modern societies have gotten more ethical, less violent, etc. If anything, I think it means people are considering things more carefully. Considering their finances, the solidity of their relationship, etc. That this is going on and it still isn't changing the stats is telling. The idea of a golden age is mostly a fantasy.

    I really don't think too many people apart from celebrities divorce frivolously. Most divorce stories I hear are more like yours than any celebrity. Why do you assume most people are so much less considerate than you? Divorce represents the failure of something important to the people involved. And yes, it often involves children.
    Last edited by SmokeAndMirrors; 05-31-11 at 12:51 AM.

  9. #49
    Professor xpiher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-23-12 @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,993

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by MistressNomad View Post
    I don't think later age of marriage indicates lack of maturity. Modern societies have gotten more ethical, less violent, etc. If anything, I think it means people are considering things more carefully. Considering their finances, the solidity of their relationship, etc. That this is going on and it still isn't changing the stats is telling. The idea of a golden age is mostly a fantasy.
    Not sure if this was directed at my statement or not; however, what I was saying was that people start life later than they did back in the 50s due to societal pressures/necessities to go to college before entering the work force.

  10. #50
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,147

    Re: What should be the government's involvement in marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    Not sure if this was directed at my statement or not; however, what I was saying was that people start life later than they did back in the 50s due to societal pressures/necessities to go to college before entering the work force.
    Nope. But that's cool.

    This is true. It's probably something where people pit the loss against the gain. It's true the earlier the marriage the longer. statistically, it will last (though it may or may not make it any happier), but that sort of puts career and other achievements on the second wrung.

    To be honest, marriage not being part of my equation, I've never really done that particular cost/benefit analysis. I do, after all, think it shouldn't exist as a legal institution.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •