| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 2/20/2008 1:31:48 PM | I think it depends on the person. I knew I wanted to get married when I was 10 years old. My parents were sitting at the kitchen table, my mother with her coffee and my father with his hot tea, and thought to myself how I wanted to have a family just like that when I grew up.
I got married the first time at the age of 16. I was more than ready, and loved married life. I thought then, and still do, that you can not truly be free until you are married. Sadly he didn't feel the same way, and ended our family two years latter. I thought we had it made, and would never have ended it.
The main reason people end up divorced is because they get married for the wrong reasons. The only real reason to get married is because both people truly love is other. I will never get married again until I feel all of the types of love for a person that you should and they also feel them for me. 1. True Love: The same unconditional love you feel for your children(no it doesn't mean you stay with an abusive person. It means you love them, even if you can't live with them.). 2. Friendship Love: The same kind of I will always be there love, you have for a friend. 3. Romantic Love: This is the least important of the three. This is the heart beating, can't wait to see the person. | |
|
| |
9 to 9
|
Joined: 12/12/2007
Msg: 53 | |
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 2/20/2008 3:19:20 PM | And your point Dr. Lecture, is what exactly?
The decomposition of marrage for love began in earnest when it became a necessary social factor and economic incentive, well before the 90's. Look it up. Throughout recorded history, there are tales rife with unhappy partners for any reason at any age. Particularly when any agency forces them to externally ritualize their relationships, to grant sanction of that state being valid, hence respected and acceptable to ones society and peers. Thus also legally defendable, to intervention against as well. Protecting, supposedly, a man or woman via legal enforcement of that state from harassing persuers of their romantic person. "I'm married and your sexually harassing me" type laws. All good and well, but I'm not seeing the need for distinction or special protection, above and beyond what any person is entitled too.
but I digress, perhaps. ;)
Marrage really doesn't have an age limit. It has a maturity factor, a internal set of ethic and values that either a person has at any age, or not. Raising the age bar as the header of this subject would suggest, or even lowering the age sanction of "being married" will not alter the internal conditions of a persons ethics that allows a marrage or any other binding relationship to function.
Manifestly obvious is a state of two people being together in love and acting in that fashion. Requiring no special protections, sanctions, or incentives to do so. Or unjustifiable complications if a person isn't. Economic or religious. Neither obviously, keep "married" people together. Their internal ethics as being mutually acceptable does.
There really is no age limit on what a person holds true. A persons "morality" as they define it and hold it true via actions, speak much louder than any title or age limit or limitation does. In all things marrage being of no exception.
Complications of the young:
Now the only complication I can see in why younger people shouldn't marry for love is the sheer fact that they mostly are hideously undereducated to meet the challenges of an adault life. Housing and utilities, Jobs needs/wants, earning their way of independent life, etc. Posessing only a half hazard knowlege of, or complete oblivion about, those necessary knowleges needed to function . Thus gauranteeing their independance, and productivity to their own ends of having a "happy life".
Considering the sheer lack of investment in public education to teach important skill to function in society as anything other than physically mature children, is there any wonder? And really, is it solely the schools to blame? When public education is synonymous for many people as "daycare you dont get billed monthly for", is it any wonder why that lack of concern for the young persons future is reflected by the state institution? Especially when the subject matter being taught doesn't educate, train or really focus, the young people on the practical necessitys for attaining a functional self supporting life at graduation. If it was, only the truly foolish would hate going to school.
Now you may be wondering. How is this related?
Its simple, if a person of any age knows the how to's of self supported living, they wont have to "shack up" or "marry" people for all the wrong reasons. They will be abel to fully explore what this "love" thing is and discover why marrage or a relationsip may be a good choice they CAN make, not an economic incentive they HAVE to make, just to survive. Or a deceptive pretense that can be made to enjoy life at lower costs.
The governing idea is, "when a person can support themselves economically, they don't need to seek a relationship, or a pretense thereof to survive and do it well." Thus returning romance to its proper place, seperate from the money he or she makes or can get. And how does one do this? Either learning via experience or education. An "education" I note that is seperate from ones public schooling.
9 to 9 | |
|
| |
| |
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/9/2008 10:03:10 PM | This downturn in marriage ... we are only nearing once again the bottom half of the circle of history. It's just society's ebb and flow. There are also times of great resurgence of values or whatnot.
I find I don't want to complain about statistics.
The only marriage we can truly affect is our own. Of course, it sucks right now because my area is full of troubled divorcees who married young. | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/10/2008 3:31:30 AM | I say bullshit in all this. It doesnt matter what age you are, people are different in all aspects of life. You have 34 year olds who are complete and utter moronic losers on the other hand you have 23 year olds that are mature progressing adults in life.
Lets be honest here, what really takes a tumble on marriages under 30? Sure maybe maturity and growing up issues..but I honestly think it's all down to the "evil" word...MONEY...and finances. I mean so often their are cases of both the man and the woman having more than 1 job, or a job that is very time consuming regardless of the pay...and well when bills cant be paid for whatever reason...that really does take a strain on a marriage. Good finance education is a must for any couple before considering having a life together permantley aswell as having a Plan B. | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/10/2008 3:59:25 AM | Well I dunno about this business of allowing or disallowing things. But, I wouldn't recommend that people get married until they have the character maturity of that we generally come to expect from over-35s.
I think our biggest problem is that our society is fixated on the second level of maturity which is "independence". People are rarely encouraged to progress to the third level which is [chosen] interdependency (synergy etc.). Instead, they are taught to let their egos run their lives.
Here's a little experiment for you. Next time you get into a new "relationship", say to your partner "if we broke up, that would really affect me because this relationship matters to me". Of course, you'd still be able to get on with your life and follow your path, but try saying that without qualification. This is counter-intuitive for popular culture. You'd get labeled as "needy" or unhealthy in some other way. If you can bring yourself to do it, watch what happens. | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/10/2008 4:01:29 AM | "Marriage means "for better or worse till the end"
Not in the USA or most of the free world. Were are you from? In stead of some age limit (dumb) how about every marriage requiers a pre-marital agreeement before hand, so if it end both people will have a better idea of what to expect. Ending a bad marriage is both healthy and good for all parties and if done right it can even be a good thing for children involved. | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/10/2008 4:25:55 AM | Re the Opost
Nice sci-fi of course, but since you asked:
I agree 100% with post 54:
|...I TOTALLY AGREE OP, however, people above age 30 should not be allowed marriage either. It is a silly out-dated human invention that NEEDS to be replaced...."
In fact I agree not only with the no marriage under 30 part, but the abolishion of the secular part at least of the institution of marriage as well (matters of religion should be outside the legal/secular system, thus people's religious marriage should only have a religious and no secular or legal/contractual dimensions). | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/10/2008 6:53:02 AM | I don't think law makers should be able to decided what age or for that matter who we marry. There are too many laws now on that subject.
Marriage is only part of relgion if you are religious. To me marriage is the start of a new family, even if you never have children. When you marry you are making you and the other person legally a family. You are proudly annoucing it to the world. To do away with marriage is like evolution in reverse.
I think a lot of the reason marriages fail is because people are too independent and too selfish. A husband and wife are meant to depend on each other. If you do not and the two of you are spinning in two different directions, how can you make it? | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/10/2008 7:28:23 AM | I don't think it has ANYTHING to do with maturity...
It is a combo of our ever-changing society and life’s lessons...
Let me explain... my mom had two boyfriends and married them both... I don't know many elders that had a "dating" life... Our society has trapped us into this "grass is always greener" and readily accessible... ugh.
Life lessons… I think everyone goes through about 20-30 changes (BIG ONES) between ages 20 and 30… Possibly even into their early 30s…
I def agree on this! It should be a law!
 | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 11/10/2008 7:43:22 AM | This sort of "there should be a law!" mentality is precisely the sort of inbred knee-jerk reasoning that will pretty soon lead to us living in a society where you can't so much as cough without offending somebody and receiving a ticket. 
The law was originally intended to punish criminals, and to settle irresolvable disputes that were beyond reasonable efforts between two disagreeing individuals.
Nowadays it has degenerated into the proverbial pre-school teacher settling every tattle tale argument between two spoiled children. 
FYI the law was never meant to tell people HOW to live, it was only meant to enforce base standards of common decency, as defined by the majority of the populace. It was intended for the retarded few that didn't understand these basic principles and needed a little spanking to drive the point home.
But now every bloody thing that ANYONE whines about is rapidly becoming a law, shifting the focus from genuine problems in our society to basic trivialities for a select few genetic rejects that lack common sense...
Naturally some laws will shift with the times to reflect the new generation's definition of decency, but there has to be limits and consideration for what kind of dangerous precedents we set. If we set this kind of harsh law this year, what kind of harsher law gets tabled next year? The year thereafter? Can no one else see the exponential potential for how many freedoms will be willfully stripped by the people themselves, too blind to see what all these knee-jerking rules will amass to because they can't see past their particular cause/interest?
Just one of the many reasons mankind is doomed to extinction, the idiots breed far faster than the rest...  | |
|
| People under age thirty should not be allowed marriage.
Posted: 4/4/2009 12:37:49 AM | [Just one of the many reasons mankind is doomed to extinction, the idiots breed far faster than the rest... ]
Funny sentence...
It would seem to me you wouldn't be so quick to disagree with my opinion... as with age and experience comes maturity... wouldn't you agree us "idiots" wouldn't be so impulsive to "breed" at age 30 as we would at age 18? | |
|
Home
login 
