to marry or not to marry?

Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 5:19 pm

I know that there are a few posts in here on the topic of marriage (religious or courtroom). And I hope that this post will encourage some more talk around the subject. I will try to keep this short, but there's a few facts to provide.

I've been with my lady friend for a few years now, and I feel it is well beyond safe to say that from day one she has been, "the one," insofar as we humble beasts can determine theoneness. In fact, our first baby arrives in September. Yay!!! Thank you, thank you, I hand you all virtual cigars.

Needless to say, I'm very happy.
The one contention that arises between us is this: marriage. I don't want it. She does. For now, she seems to have conceded to my view, but every now and again, she has a mopey day, and we have a big, unwanted discussion about it. It was following one of these conversations that I decided that I would like to hear some other atheist points of view on the question.

Some facts:
We're 34 and 35 years old.
We've lived together since about a year and a half ago.
She's an academic professional. I'm an entrepreneur.
I've been an atheist ever since I first found out what religion was. She's a presbyterian.
I'm from a reasonably secular part of Canada. She's from the biggest bible-beating area in Canada (aside from Alberta, which is just plain nuts).
I feel that because marriage is a ritual of the same church that has in the past vilified and encouraged the murder of gay men, it is an evil ritual. Indeed, the church has made itself clear about their position on gay marriage. This extends to multiple other examples: pope - condoms, catholic priests diddling children, Ted Haggard's pitiable situation, Pat Robertson's marriage advice… and by extension to its sister religions, Afghanistan - rape law. Etc. etc, etc, etc. Basically, in my opinion, the church has no place in the bedroom, and marriage is the church's door into the bedroom.
I don't have a "fear of commitment." I feel that to marry tacitly implies my consent and agreement with the church's "institution" of marriage.
Ask me, if you need more info. I'm willing to share.

I thought that I would put the question to the IG forums. I think that it would be great, for me, to glean your advice, but I also think that it would be good, wholesome, and elucidating entertainment for the IG forums. Fun for the whole family!

Or it at least provides the beginning of a conversation around this topic.

So, what do you think? I'd love to hear from the men and women, religious people and atheists who read these forums.

Thanks for the opportunity to share. Wishing you all well.

Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 9:21 pm

Hey D_A

Why do you suppose she wants the marriage? Is it a moral need because of her belief? Does she perhaps desire the ritual of the ceremony and the social acceptance that usually brings to the families involved? Perhaps she needs or wants the legal protections marriage commonly affords?

Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 11:24 pm

I knew someone would ask that question! Thanks MG.

It is more the social acceptance. (A bizarre consideration in my mind, because - like many folks, protestant or otherwise - some years ago she was married and divorced.) Her family are fairly open-minded, for the most part.

Ceremony doesn't seem important, as she is willing to forego the church.

People in common-law marriages are well protected where we live.

Something that I forgot to ask, was about the experiences of other atheists. If you have stories to share, I would find them helpful.

Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 2:04 pm

In my view, the church does not own marriage. Avoiding marriage because of the church gives the church too much. Marry her, just without the religious aspect. I'm not sure what the rules are in Canada but here in the US one does not need a religious person.

My wife and I had the usual wedding and we liked it. There is something to be said for ceremony. Also putting your name on a legally binding commitment shows you really mean to stay.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 11:27 am

Yeah, I guess that my biggest concern is looking like a hypocrite after openly mocking the absurdity of marriage for about 25 years.

I guess that I wouldn't be the first of this type of hypocrite though. haha.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 7:11 pm

Oops.... revisiting this, it looks like its pointed at people on this site... but it wasn't – I'm making fun of the stereotype of the "I'll never marry" bachelor. I forgot to be really specific while typing. Apologies.

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 2:47 am

To me it didn't seem pointed to us. I read it as you pointing out your own hypocrisy and just realizing you would not be the first person to change their mind so dramatically. I can see how the words can be ambiguous, but I read it giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Grand Poster Joined: Mar 12, 2006 Posts: 2813

Dude, being married this long (6 years), that I would say honestly I have mixed feelings on the issue.

The religious difference issue means that one has to give (as the man it will be you) on the children issue. There are other differences that could spell your doom...you like coffee she likes tea, you want to watch sports she wants to watch sleepless in seattle, you want to fuck that hot bod 19 year old, she doesnt want you to fuck that hot bod 19 year old.

I dont see it as such a big issue the religion thing...I mean I am an Atheist Catholic married to a Jehovahs Witness (long ass story).....getting together with the inlaws is well explosive, like diarrehea (or however the fuck you spell it shit hits the fazn). I think its about respecting beliefs and belittling your partner because she talks to the ceiling every now and then, we all do weird shit....but thats what marriage is about isnt it, respect?

No solid answer here, just trust your gut and pre nup.

Edit***

Andy Capp Rocks

Edit***Edit***

But bouncy boobs rock more....or should that be wobble?

Newbie Joined: Aug 06, 2003 Posts: 22

I cannot stand the concept of marriage, I do not believe in it and frankly it's more of a religious and or social tradition, that is all. It is simply a piece of paper, nothing more and the ring, simply materialistic slavery. Here are a couple of things, I find wrong with marriage, first of all, the ring to me signifies that you now "own" someone. It shouts to the world "hey, she/he is my bitch." You do not need a ring, to "show off your love," or to say, "she/he is owned/taken." All this stuff is merely for show, it's a social show, bragging rights to others and it's idiotic. The love that you share between you two, should be demonstrated through action among you two and that is all, therefore what purpose does a ring show, what purpose does paper show?

Always be weary of material things taking the place of action through the concept of love. Another aspect I do not like, is the whole name change thing, I find it insulting that the males name takes preference over the females, now he really owns you, not with just a ring, but a name too. This also demonstrates, that whole "head of the household" kind of idea, it's also sexist, I'm quite suprised a lot of women put up with this, as it boggles my mind.

I really don't get why people get married, other than the legal/tax/health benefits, other than that it's rather ridiculous and the fact that you have to be married just to get those legal/tax/health benefits, is also sad because what the government is trying to tell you subliminally is, "marriage is right" "single is wrong." I understand that there are certain common law factors too, when choosing to not get married, but you don't get nearly as much 'rights.' Marriage is an outdated, traditional practice, that serves no true value, other than to serve illogical agendas and reasoning.

Have you ever asked people why they got married, their reasoning NEVER makes any sense, especially when you apply logic to it, it's almost like debating religious folks. Everyone should have basic rights, marriage or no marriage. The government is trying to save the sanctity of marriage by offering benefits that should be a given. It's also saving the "heterosexual' marriage agenda as well. This is very interesting, especially given our current times, in some states "homosexual' marriage is legal, this also brings up the fact, that let's say some years down the road, where each state accepts this, the bottom line is, "marriage is good and it has benefits," kind of like that whole "friends with benefits." I have yet to find a logical, reasonable explanation for marriage, a 'true' reason that doesn't assume the legal factors because the legal aspects are heavily flawed.

For those who think a paper validates or proves your love, sorry you are gravely mistaken, it is action, not a piece of paper and hey guess what, when you sign your deed on your house, to pay the mortgage in a number of years, when you sign contracts, when you sign papers for auto repair, you are stating, that you agree to the terms, the vows, however you can easily bail out of this, the only thing keeping you from bailing is the 'reprecussions' legal or otherwise. Papers don't make it any more offical, it just holds more water as a legal threat, harder for the other person to bail, it does not serve the purpose it is intended for, ie: love, it's a threat used against love that wanes, love that no longer lives here, it serves as a materialistic chess piece. Then you get people who stay in abusive marriages because of that paper and the benefits it carries...oh don't even get me started on that lol, I am done.

Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 6:20 pm

Okay. Back to this one! Here's a little thread that is driving me bonkers. Just when I am thinking that the weight of marriage-positive responses is going to allow me to change my mind and buy the ring, Antiant comes along, with with his/her reason and logic, and reminds me of all that I hate about the concept of marriage.

How many cows and/or chickens should I give to my future father in law, in return for his daughter? Jeesh!

I was listening to the David Eller podcast from a few weeks ago, and he echoed DogmaBites' comments, above. Religion does not own marriage. I will agree with that.

Still, religion THINKS that it owns marriage. That is a problem.

Some challenges for the forum:

Challenge 1:
Supposing that I put aside Antiant's thoughts, what would a purely secular marriage look like? How could a marriage say, "Hey religious people! We're married, but NOT IN YOUR CHURCH! Suckaaaaz!" What would that look like?

Challenge 2:
As a next step, how could I marry in a way that allows the concerns that Antiant and I share to be voiced? (These challenges get harder.)

Challenge 3:
How does a person stop thinking about Savage's icon!?! Holy carp, loogah thoz bazooogas!

Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:46 pm

Marriage was hijacked by the religious. Marriage in its basic form is a promise between two or more people. If they wish to use rings to show their love fine, if they wish to build a house together fine, if they wish to do nothing, fine. The people that get all emotional over others getting married is even more ridiculous. I don't care if people get married, why should they care if I do? It's kind of silly.

The church shouldn't be involved and the state shouldn't either in my opinion. It's one's personal promise.

When I was married it was a cool discussion starter too. I loved to educate them about how marriage isn't something that's was born from religion.

Lastly, marriage is more a state issue than religious. A marriage isn't official unless the state grants it. One can get married without a church's involvement at all. I did. An atheist officiated my first marriage.

Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 8:29 pm

DigitalAtheist wrote:

Supposing that I put aside Antiant's thoughts, what would a purely secular marriage look like? How could a marriage say, "Hey religious people! We're married, but NOT IN YOUR CHURCH! Suckaaaaz!" What would that look like?

It would look like something that didn't contain any of the religious ritual. I've been to a few weddings and also participated. Honestly, I couldn't tell you what parts of the ritual are religious and which aren't. If this was something I was concerned about and getting married (which I don't foresee happening) some research would be in order.

Quote:

As a next step, how could I marry in a way that allows the concerns that Antiant and I share to be voiced?

This would depend a great deal upon your partner.

Quote:

How does a person stop thinking about Savage's icon!?! Holy carp, loogah thoz bazooogas!

The problem is, I don't want to "stop" thinking about it Wink

Newbie Joined: Aug 06, 2003 Posts: 22

DigitalAtheist wrote:

Challenge 1:
Supposing that I put aside Antiant's thoughts, what would a purely secular marriage look like? How could a marriage say, "Hey religious people! We're married, but NOT IN YOUR CHURCH! Suckaaaaz!" What would that look like?

See, in my eyes, personally, I don't understand why you would care what this looks like to other people and only validates what I said earlier about 'social show' all that matters is the love that is shared between you two, if your partner knows that, then that is all the validation and all the 'show' you need.

A purely secular marriage would look like a secular marriage, both share the ring (I would assume here) and if you didn't know the couple, most people would also assume you got married in a church, so from an assumption standpoint it wouldn't look all that different, until someone actually knew you and your situation on a more personal level. For example, if someone saw you and your partner out and about and you both had rings on, naturally one is going to think you are married and married via church via traditionally because that is the 'social norm.'

DigitalAtheist wrote:

Challenge 2:
As a next step, how could I marry in a way that allows the concerns that Antiant and I share to be voiced? (These challenges get harder.)

I don't know the answer to this question and I also don't see any way out of it, right now the line is divided with no options, it is strictly black and white, you are either married or you are not. Our concerns cannot be addressed because they are not divided in black and white, herein lies the dilemma and challenge because it goes against the very grain, there are too many gray areas in our concerns, therefore the concept of marriage would have to be changed as well, in order for our concerns to be voiced.

Unfortunately, I don't see the concept of marriage being changed anytime soon. Instead of waiting on this change, I prefer not to be apart of something I disagree with heavily, rather than succumb to it. I don't know, some people compromise their concerns, in some areas, some people don't, it all depends how strongly you feel about a given idea, for me there is no compromise when it comes to marriage. Basically it all boils down to whatever works for you, what ever method alternatively or not, compromise or not, you feel will best fit your relationship and ideological style.

DigitalAtheist wrote:

Challenge 3:
How does a person stop thinking about Savage's icon!?! Holy carp, loogah thoz bazooogas!

It's impossible, but a very nice distraction lol

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:18 pm

Rhiannon Annetta
October 8th, 2009
3.9 kg

Digital cigars, all 'round.

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:16 pm

DigitalAtheist wrote:

Rhiannon Annetta
October 8th, 2009
3.9 kg

Digital cigars, all 'round.

Did you two get married or was your daughter born in sin?... Laughing

Congratulations, I'll pass on the stinky stick though.


Login/Register New account	Home · FAQ · News · Shows · Videos · Forums · Arcade · Listen & Chat · Book Store · Contact Us · Go Mobile