marriage question

[LivingAlmostLarge]

Was your marriage religious? Or a contract? Or not married at all?

Our was a contract specifically done in front of the justice of the peace at the courthouse. We did it after 4 years of living together for the purpose of a green card. We made a contract and deal. Didn't change anything afterwards.

People including my mom always says it does. But how can I tell her I know it doesn't? Never told our parents or friends. We went through the big ceremony a year later and it was fun. But we didn't get married for religion and our commitment has nothing to do with the paper.

I'm seriously for civil unions for everyone in every state and leaving those who are religious to get married in church. I think we should make marriage a civil contract and you have to file the contract for everyone who wants to enter into it.

[GoodSteward]

Was your marriage religious? Or a contract? Or not married at all?

This thread could get interesting. Mine was a religious contract. My view is that marriage was started by God to join two people together until Death. The whole point of a marriage is to make a vow that is meant to signify faithfulness and commitment, and to establish the concept of a family in it's rightful form. Of course, people change it or ignore it all the time, but that doesn't change what it was meant for. You can say a car makes a great stereo holder, but that wasn't what it was meant for. Now a days people are saying the vow doesn't mean anything, but the vow is what makes a marriage relationship different from any other relationship. Obviously, the state sees it the same way, which is why a divorce has to be an official action as well(I don't believe in divorce, but won't get into that).

Didn't change anything afterwards.

People including my mom always says it does. But how can I tell her I know it doesn't? Never told our parents or friends.

In all fairness, you assume it doesn't. I happen to know it does change things, but this is perspective. You won't be able to "show" me how it doesn't because of why I feel it does(bible), and outside of bible verses, I can't show you how it does change things. Therefore, it's best to leave this be if it is a point for stirring each other up. This is why I'm trying to avoid sharing too much. I know most on here that comment will argue with me over it since they are not religious. That won't help anybody.

I'm seriously for civil unions for everyone in every state and leaving those who are religious to get married in church. I think we should make marriage a civil contract and you have to file the contract for everyone who wants to enter into it.

Technically the vow and the contract are two different things. You typically take the vow, then sign the contract. The state requires the contract for legal purposes and reccords for offical business. From a religious point of view, the vow with the proper authority is all that is required. The state adds that you need the contract.

For instance, You don't have to sign a contract to have a baby, but you do if you want a SS#. When you sign for that SS# you are creating a binding contract between you, the state, and the child. This is why the state can come take the child away. They have legal rights to them.

[AJ444]

Ours was strictly a contract, we actually pay a hefty marriage tax penalty each year but decided to do it because we value the other financial benefits/partner rights more than the marriage penalty.

We got married in Vegas in 2011 and our families/close friends had a spectacular weekend. It wasn't religious at all. We wrote our own vows which didn't include till death do us part though that is our intention. The marriage contract didn't change a thing in our relationship, the loving partnership was the same before as it is today.

I agree about making it a civil contract but also think a person needs to not be a minor and at least 18 when they enter into it.

[TexasHusker]

Most marriages today are in fact quasi-contract, even if under the auspices of religion or faith.

If one party doesn't do as they are supposed to do (primarily the man), then the woman is granted a "get out of jail free card" and with that, she generally wins cash and prizes.

Typically, the woman gets of jail free for the following nebulous reasons:

- He's addicted to porn
- He's emotionally "unavailable"
- He's "emotionally abusive"
- He has anger issues
- He's not a spiritual leader

Sadly, some of the most noted "Christian" marital counselors and speakers in the U.S. are regurgitating all of this b.s., and making it all biblical. The overriding theme is "men, you need to straighten up". Many/most churches are generally endorsing divorce these days.

The Bible speaks NOTHING of a marital contract. According to the Torah (a portion of the Old Testament), marriage is a BLOOD COVENANT, quite a different concept to a contract. This scripture is sacred to the Muslim, Jewish, and Christian faiths.

[GoodSteward]

The Bible speaks NOTHING of a marital contract. According to the Torah (a portion of the Old Testament), marriage is a BLOOD COVENANT, quite a different concept to a contract. This scripture is sacred to the Muslim, Jewish, and Christian faiths.

You are entitled to believe whatever it is you would like, but I would like to point that this is simply not true.

Marriage is NOT a blood covenant. Yes, the Jews celebrated consummation and virginity by producing a "proof of blood" from the wedding night, but that has nothing to do with the marriage covenant and being made one flesh. Marriage is finished by God, not a sexual act. Also, not everybody will show this proof for various reasons. Does that mean the marriage is void? No, it has nothing to do with how you are made into one flesh. You will not find any verses that indicate marriage is a blood covenant.

Also, not all covenants involved blood, and the last time bloodshed was required for one was at Calvery. Now it's done, and we don't need new ones such as this in marriage.

[disneysteve]

We were married in a fairly standard Jewish ceremony performed by my rabbi. We are both Jewish so that was in accordance with our beliefs and practices.

Did marriage change anything? Absolutely. Before marriage, she lived with her parents and I lived on my own. After marriage, we made a home and a life together. We committed to live as one for the rest of our lives, raise a family, and grow old together.

In July, we'll celebrate our 25th anniversary so it's going well so far.

to establish the concept of a family in it's rightful form.

This sentence jumps out at me and is potentially the source of a great deal of debate and discrimination. What does "family in its rightful form" mean? Clearly not everyone agrees on that point. But I think that's a topic for a different discussion as it goes beyond the question asked here.

[GoodSteward]

This sentence jumps out at me and is potentially the source of a great deal of debate and discrimination. What does "family in its rightful form" mean? Clearly not everyone agrees on that point. But I think that's a topic for a different discussion as it goes beyond the question asked here.

I knew that could go way off, and I don't intend to dig into it. Remember, that was my thoughts on it. Biblically speaking, there was marriage and then the understanding of family from that marriage. Before marriage, there was no family. God's design for a family is patterned in Genesis. Life isn't always cut and dry, but this keeps things in perspective.

There are a lot of people who make a family without marriage. That isn't the right form, and I don't personally agree with it(because the bible doesn't).

[AJ444]

I knew that could go way off, and I don't intend to dig into it. Remember, that was my thoughts on it. Biblically speaking, there was marriage and then the understanding of family from that marriage. Before marriage, there was no family. God's design for a family is patterned in Genesis. Life isn't always cut and dry, but this keeps things in perspective.

There are a lot of people who make a family without marriage. That isn't the right form, and I don't personally agree with it(because the bible doesn't).

Of course you intended to dig into it, granted this round isn't as inflamatory as the topic you created last Friday and deleted a few hours later that included when folks should rightfully be able to have sex. I respect others religion and their right to practice but when you start telling the rest of us our versions of family are wrong and quoting your "religion" you need to be knocked a few levels down off the highest of horses.

Also I don't think marrying a 16 year old is a correct foundation of family in this day and age and I don't need any religious text backing up why.

Mods: I really don't like getting into this kind of thing on a financial message board but the constant "preaching" is going too far. If other folks can cite their scripture we should be able to challenge it and ask them to prove their claims.

[disneysteve]

I respect others religion and their right to practice but when you start telling the rest of us our versions of family are wrong

Yes. This is when things go off the rails.

If this thread can't continue without insulting each other, then it will get locked.

[Mjenn]

I think this thread illustrates very well why I am grateful there is room in the definition of the legal definition of marriage for both of these perspectives. If the definition of marriage was only the religious one, I would never have gone through it, as I am not religious and my husband and I were raised in different faiths.

Marriage for us changed little and was more a means to an end than anything else (We have moved and lived in several different countries and being married makes this much easier).

We lived together before we got married and went home to our apartment after our ceremony. I kept my name, he kept his name.

As someone who is an atheist, I have never identified at all with the description of marriage many people have attested to here. My husband is also an atheist and we had no religious symbols or mention of God on our big day (largely because of the 2 different faiths of our families).

But for me, that day standing up and making public promises to the person I love and chose to be my family was an important one. Even if I don't think it changed the path we were on.

In my husband's culture you exchange wedding rings at engagement -- that is the big social commitment. Many couples we know had their wedding ceremonies at the same time they baptized their first kid.

As long as marriage has such a strong legal weight in society, I think it is important there is a non-religious state definition of marriage. If marriage loses its special legal status, I don't know if it would be that important for people like myself.

[disneysteve]

If the definition of marriage was only the religious one

That would be a big problem since there are numerous religions and they don't all define marriage the same way. That's why we need a legal definition and can't base these things on religion. The issue is with those who think that their religious view is the "right" way and everyone else is wrong.

[rennigade]

That would be a big problem since there are numerous religions

There are over 4,000 religions and each tell a different story. This pretty much sums up religion, lol.

In 2017 if you still believe that a family can only consist of a man and a women you're part of the problem. You have these ancient beliefs that no longer fit into society. Feel free to hold onto those thoughts with all your might...your circle is shrinking...and in a couple decades it will be all but dead.

As far as marriage...for me it wasnt religious because I do not believe in magic. We did have a family friend who is a preacher do our wedding. We did the generic cookie cutter till death do us part talk. We both loved each other...we lived with each other for a while so we knew we liked living with each other...we each shared similar ideas. We were compatible and we enjoyed each others company. With that being said we had to sign a contract before we could legally be married.

So to answer the question...I didnt view it as religious or a contract. But the reality is it is a contract. Thats all.

[TexasHusker]

You are entitled to believe whatever it is you would like, but I would like to point that this is simply not true.

Marriage is NOT a blood covenant. Yes, the Jews celebrated consummation and virginity by producing a "proof of blood" from the wedding night, but that has nothing to do with the marriage covenant and being made one flesh. Marriage is finished by God, not a sexual act. Also, not everybody will show this proof for various reasons. Does that mean the marriage is void? No, it has nothing to do with how you are made into one flesh. You will not find any verses that indicate marriage is a blood covenant.

Also, not all covenants involved blood, and the last time bloodshed was required for one was at Calvery. Now it's done, and we don't need new ones such as this in marriage.

We can disagree on whether or not it is a blood covenant. Even if it is a covenant sans blood, a covenant is still a very different animal than a contract.

[GoodSteward]

Of course you intended to dig into it, granted this round isn't as inflamatory as the topic you created last Friday and deleted a few hours later that included when folks should rightfully be able to have sex. I respect others religion and their right to practice but when you start telling the rest of us our versions of family are wrong and quoting your "religion" you need to be knocked a few levels down off the highest of horses.

Also I don't think marrying a 16 year old is a correct foundation of family in this day and age and I don't need any religious text backing up why.

Mods: I really don't like getting into this kind of thing on a financial message board but the constant "preaching" is going too far. If other folks can cite their scripture we should be able to challenge it and ask them to prove their claims.

I RARELY bring up anything biblical, and almost never do until someone else does. This was a thread asking a loaded question. Yes, I will express myself. No you don't have to agree, and that doesn't mean I think you are horrible person. What you are saying is as long as I agree with you, you can handle it. Good to know.

I deleted that thread because no matter how much I insist it is my view, and I am within my full rights to express it, I know people like yourself will get offended and whine. If you don't want to hear other people's opinion, and especially those who are grounded in what they believe and it contradicts you, then I suggest not using the internet.

[disneysteve]

no matter how much I insist it is my view, and I am within my full rights to express it, I know people like yourself will get offended

Yes you can express your beliefs as long as you don't do so in a way that invalidates or insults the beliefs of others.

There are a lot of people who make a family without marriage. That isn't the right form

It isn't right according to you, but that doesn't mean it isn't right.

I'm a happily married heterosexual man but still find it offensive when people insist that marriage must be between a man and a woman. I have far too many gay friends and family members who have beautiful, loving families, some who have been together for decades and were only recently allowed to finally get married under the law, a right that had been denied for far too long because of religious objections and baseless discrimination.