'Forced' to marry

[garya505 2]

COMMITMENT: The state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action (or consignment to a prison or mental hospital) which may fit before to much longer

MARRIAGE: Wedlock, legal union between man and woman as husband and wife,

so two people could be COMMITED to each other without Marriage as such--- right/wrong?

or

two people could be MARRIED without COMMITMENT (No meeting of the minds as such either emotionally or intellectually) right/wrong?

there is another one MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE - a marriage or joint undertaking arranged for political, economic, or social benefit rather than from personal attachment.

believe we probably all know of many cases of all

Yes all of these are possible and they do happen, but they are the exception not the usual case. The truth is that most people demonstrate their commitment through marriage, and hesitancy towards marriage shows an uncertainty about commitment.

says who?

Seriously, with the divorce rates as high as they are, I wouldn't be putting the be-all end-all sign of commitment as Marriage.

I never said that, and you know it.

[garya505 2]

I think everyone needs to understand that there is NO UNIVERSAL TRUTH when it comes to what commitment is to each individual.

So, in your opinion, if there is no universal truth when it comes to what commitment is to each individual, then there are no tendencies or correlations?

[mybackpages 0]

Your personal valuation of the symbol of marriage just isn't universal, so it can't be used as a gauge of other people's depth of committment to each other unless they acknowledge that they share that same valuation.

Could not have said it better myself.

[Fandango 1,440]

COMMITMENT: The state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action (or consignment to a prison or mental hospital) which may fit before to much longer

MARRIAGE: Wedlock, legal union between man and woman as husband and wife,

so two people could be COMMITED to each other without Marriage as such--- right/wrong?

or

two people could be MARRIED without COMMITMENT (No meeting of the minds as such either emotionally or intellectually) right/wrong?

there is another one MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE - a marriage or joint undertaking arranged for political, economic, or social benefit rather than from personal attachment.

believe we probably all know of many cases of all

Yes all of these are possible and they do happen, but they are the exception not the usual case. The truth is that most people demonstrate their commitment through marriage, and hesitancy towards marriage shows an uncertainty about commitment.

says who?

Seriously, with the divorce rates as high as they are, I wouldn't be putting the be-all end-all sign of commitment as Marriage.

I never said that, and you know it.

Never said what?

Sorry I wasn't more clear in my last post....my comments were in response to what you said in red.

Seperate thought here:

Marriage means different things to different people....and the sign of commitment to the outside world means nothing. So technically, Brit Spears and her first hubby showed less of an aversion to commitment than David & I do? We've been together for 7 years and you can rest assured we couldn't be more committed to each other...and that held true even before we got engaged.

Edited January 3, 2007 by LisaD

[peezey 0]

While it may be true that the personal valuation of marriage just isn't universal, it is still valued by the majority of people. And it's not just a symbol either, it's a long-standing institution that has stood the test of time.

So yes, in general the decision to marry can be used as a gauge of a couple's depth of committment to, and intent towards, each other. It's just common sense. As always, there are exceptions, but that doesn't change what is generally true.

Say What!?!??!?!?! Stood the test of what?!?! I thought the studies cited here prove not so much??!?!

Edited January 3, 2007 by peezey

[brnidokiegurl 0]

You may see a couple you know that married and think, boy they are so commited. THis is the way you preceive it, doesnt necessarly make it so. It would, in a perfect world be nice to wish they mean one in the same but.....

[peezey 0]

COMMITMENT: The state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action (or consignment to a prison or mental hospital) which may fit before to much longer

MARRIAGE: Wedlock, legal union between man and woman as husband and wife,

so two people could be COMMITED to each other without Marriage as such--- right/wrong?

or

two people could be MARRIED without COMMITMENT (No meeting of the minds as such either emotionally or intellectually) right/wrong?

there is another one MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE - a marriage or joint undertaking arranged for political, economic, or social benefit rather than from personal attachment.

believe we probably all know of many cases of all

Yes all of these are possible and they do happen, but they are the exception not the usual case. The truth is that most people demonstrate their commitment through marriage, and hesitancy towards marriage shows an uncertainty about commitment.

That is your perception of why people marry. Clearly, there are quite a few people here who have married to follow the law, not to prove their committment to each other. Manypeople marry if they get pregnant, because they are in a habit of a relationship. There wouldn't be the divorce rate there is if marriage = committment. Only people can be committed to a relationship, and obviously a legal document does not make them more so. Seriously, I have never seen such blatant twistation of facts to support an OPINION.

Edited January 3, 2007 by peezey

[*julez* 124]

I think everyone needs to understand that there is NO UNIVERSAL TRUTH when it comes to what commitment is to each individual.

That is so true. No one here had said sz is wrong in her opinion, just that she's wrong for being so condescending in her attitude toward other's opinions. What has happened in this out of control thread is that sz has attacked anyone who stated an opinion that did not concur with hers.

[Fandango 1,440]

I think everyone needs to understand that there is NO UNIVERSAL TRUTH when it comes to what commitment is to each individual.

So, in your opinion, if there is no universal truth when it comes to what commitment is to each individual, then there are no tendencies or correlations?

I think we've gotten into a different day and age where you can do what pleases you. Gone are the days of people having to stay in loveless and unhappy marriages. 'Proper protocol' is gone. You dont' have to do what pleases everyone else. At least this is how I feel about the world today.

I also think a lot of ppl get married for other reasons than 'to show commitment'. Tax reasons, legal reasons, etc. IMO it doesn't mean that there is any bigger commitment the day after a wedding than there is a day before. And let's face it....again, with divorce rates so high...how big of a show of commitment is it anyways if there are ways to get out of it easily?

There is no universal truth such as 'WHAT IS COMMITMENT' because there will be differences of opinion on what it means and how to display it. Yes, it's true that D and I are getting married...and we are doing so because we want to, not because we have to. But that doesn't mean that he and I were any less committed to each other before this time. What you perceive as right and wrong is good for you, but not neccessarily good for your neighbor. They might have different opinions which is true for them.

See where I've gone with this?

[peezey 0]

I think everyone needs to understand that there is NO UNIVERSAL TRUTH when it comes to what commitment is to each individual.

So, in your opinion, if there is no universal truth when it comes to what commitment is to each individual, then there are no tendencies or correlations?

Tendancy for what? Correlation to what? You can correlate all you want, but it doesn't mean the correlation is accurate or has taken into account enough or meaningful secondary variables.

[sarah and hicham 3]

She asked you several times NOT to call her that which makes it very strange that you then proceeded to get the word "hon" into every sentence possible. That is immature and you know it.

It's no longer worth commenting on.

Why not? You just did about 2 posts above mine. I'll take that as you not wanting to admit it's immature.

[featherB 1]

Yes all of these are possible and they do happen, but they are the exception not the usual case. The truth is that most people demonstrate their commitment through marriage, and hesitancy towards marriage shows an uncertainty about commitment.

No. No it doesn't. It could do, but not necessarily - that assumption is making a massive and illogical leap, based upon the assumption that everyone shares the same value and belief system as you. I've not seen anyone here talking about being hesitant about marrying, merely a lot of people saying that, were it not necessary in order to be with the person of their choice, marriage would either not have been such an urgent consideration, or that it would not have been a consideration at all - because they do not place the same importance upon the institution of marriage that you, and szsz, so clearly do. Even when people have categorically stated that they do not feel the same way about marriage as you do, you seem to be telling them that they are mistaken and that they do in fact share the same (religion-based) values as you, because 'most' people still get married.

Apologies if that came out garbled - I'm at work and, well, pretending to be working rather than posting on here!

[brnidokiegurl 0]

work for me to, one of these days their going to get me ha wonder how many of us will be gone then

[Ban Hammer 13,656]

Apologies if that came out garbled - I'm at work and, well, pretending to be working rather than posting on here!

some of us are not pretending to work at work

[luvaLimey 0]

this thread is sooooo going to get locked....