Why would anyone want to get married??

Legs.Eleven

clairefontaine wrote: »

Split homes have detrimental affects on kids whether their parents were married or not married. Custody and maintenance battles are not exclusive to to divorced parents.

Yeah of course! That goes without saying. As I said before, marriage doesn't reduce this likelihood and the legal burden and the mess that involves just might add to it.

clairefontaine

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

Yeah of course! That goes without saying. As I said before, marriage doesn't reduce this likelihood and the legal burden and the mess that involves just might add to it.

PI think the US stats are marriages are staying together more than cohabited. Divorce is high but cohabited breaking up higher.

I don't want to do either personally, but I think cohabitation provides the illusion of a get out of jail free card that is not there.

seenitall

Tom M wrote: »

There's no gold star at the end of your life for making it harder than it needed to be.

Oh yes there is, thank you very much. I married my husband/wife before God and the parish and I will endure a lifetime of alcoholism, beatings and/or cheating before I would admit to anyone that I have made a mistake in choosing that hateful a** to spend my life and have children with. It's unthinkable, and divorce would be a SIN. But I have been good and saintly putting up with the obnoxious h*g, so the pearly gates await me, that's at least something to look forward to.

Legs.Eleven

clairefontaine wrote: »

PI think the US stats are marriages are staying together more than cohabited. Divorce is high but cohabited breaking up higher.

I don't want to do either personally, but I think cohabitation provides the illusion of a get out of jail free card that is not there.

As you said, there's consequences whether you're married or not. There's no "get out of jail free" card.


I understand you live in the US but with all due respect, stats from the US aren't really relevant when most people are from Ireland and living there and the Stats are very different.

LETHAL LADY

If I worried about all the technicalities of life I would probably never leave my house.:eek:

Legs.Eleven

Aineoil wrote: »

Please don't shoot me for posting this.

But here are my musings about this thread.

I am female and have been happily married for 24 years....just stating my position, I'm not making a point.

Down through the years I have seen friends who married, in the latter years I have seen younger relatives who chose to co-habit. Ireland of the 1980's was very conservative. For the majority of people to co-habit was a difficult option because it was very frowned upon.

I'm probably changing what the OP posted about. But for some people marriage equals - the wedding.

Generally I hate weddings and try and avoid them because the day is so long. But this summer I had to attend one. I'm very close to the girl that was getting married and I was little shocked at the whole wedding hysteria thing.

The Dress, flowers, music, band and DJ. The list is endless. I wanted to run a mile from all of it. But she's my friend so I endured all of it. I sincerely hope everything works out for them.

Back on topic
I have children. If there is no marriage contract what rights do my children have re property or anything else?

Can I make Will that will bequeath that to them?

Every one knows their own situation. Marriage is for some, for others it's not. Live and let live.

Again, I think everyone here has acknowledged the legal practicalities of marriage but what about the rest of it? I really doubt that the main motive of most people who get married in Ireland.

OnTheCouch

This thread reminds me of a conversation I had with a good female friend of mine and her mother recently.

The subject of marriage came up and they asked me if I was thinking about getting married anytime soon.

Now when I was growing up, the idea of marriage was quite appealing to me, I imagined it to be one of those things that just 'happened' as a grown-up and was to some degree inevitable as taxes and dying.

Nevertheless, after having been through a few relationships by this stage, most of which went fairly well for the most part, there was only really one girl with whom I thought that she might be a good bet longterm. And then even at certain times.

So my honest reply to the above question was that I was not ruling it out completely, but I couldn't see myself at this moment in time getting hitched.

Now out of politeness they did not challenge my reasoning too much, but I could tell they were fairly shocked.

Later on in the pub I went into a few more details to my friend why I felt this way. She maintained I just hadn't met the right person yet, but I countered with the reasoning that (unless I am very naive) the vast majority of people enter into marriage thinking they have found the 'one,' but this does not stop divorces occurring, in my opinion worryingly frequently.

Now this girl is a very kind and sweet person, she has been in a relationship with her boyfriend (who is sound as a pound) for many years. I have no doubt in my mind that they will get married at some stage and live happily ever after.

Using Wibbs' theory from earlier on, they are the type of people that would suit marriage and a long-term commitment. I am not so sure I am. For a start, I tend to get bored and restless easily. In my previous relationships, which have only ever lasted a couple of years at most, either one or both of us changed to such a degree in that time that we simply felt that we weren't as suited as we were when we originally got together. People tend to change the older they become and I think it's taking a big risk for someone like myself to imagine that I will be exactly the same person in 30-40 years time. As Legs.Eleven mentioned, it's a huge statement of intent to say 'till death do us part,' as one never knows what will happen. I also like my independence and ability to do new things. This is snuffed out considerably in a marriage. Yes, it doesn't have to be, but it is not that easy in my opinion to find a partner who is comfortable with a large degree of independence, certainly after a while.

There are also those who believe that Hollywood films have 'romanticised' the concept of marriage, that staying together should simply be a question of looking after each other, being a source of support to the other partner into old age, as opposed to having an incredible frisson every time you see each other, which is realistically very difficult to maintain over long periods of time.

There is probably some validity to this, but as many have already mentioned, people can easily do this without getting married. Of course, in addition, as we have discussed on many occasions in The Gentleman's Club, in Ireland, I still maintain it's a far greater risk to get married as a man than a woman, what with divorce settlements and access to the children.

I certainly would not like to be alone in my elderly years and would more than likely wish to have children at some point, but whether this will be accompanied by a marriage certificate is far from certain at this juncture.

Legs.Eleven

I asked before but can anyone here clarify whether or not someone still has to be separated from their spouse 5 years before they divorce in Ireland?

Edit: decided not to be a lazy arse and look it up:

3.Wait for four years.

The Divorce Act requires that the couple must have lived apart for at least four of the five years before proceedings are issued. It's not yet clear whether the couple have to be living in separate houses. During the referendum campaign, Government ministers seemed to suggest that a couple could be living apart if they were under the same roof but not sleeping together. That will have to be tested through the Courts.
- See more at: http://www.lawyer.ie/family-law/how-to-divorce#sthash.gu3952vR.dpuf

Ehhh....no thanks!

Read up on divorce in Ireland: http://www.lawyer.ie/family-law/how-to-divorce

clairefontaine

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

As you said, there's consequences whether you're married or not. There's no "get out of jail free" card.


I understand you live in the US but with all due respect, stats from the US aren't really relevant when most people are from Ireland and living there and the Stats are very different.

In fairness we don't have Irish stats, so there is nothing from Ireland to go by.

Secondly in Ireland you have people who never divorced and then moved in with new partners which makes collecting data even harder from Ireland.

So at least I going on some kind of data, whereas not sure what you're going on.

Plus this board includes people from all over the world, foreigners living in Ireland, as well as Irish abroad. It's not really ok to try to make discussions exclusive to only Irish people living on Irish soil.

dark crystal

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

Again, I think everyone here has acknowledged the legal practicalities of marriage but what about the rest of it? I really doubt that the main motive of most people who get married in Ireland.

Well I suppose the simple answer to that, is that not everyone views marriage as a life sentence, more so a traditional rite they wish go through in order to solidify their love and commitment to each other.

No one knows what the future holds, whether they'll be together ten years from now or not, but the vast majority of people who get married are expecting that lifetime commitment.

Marriage isn't for everybody, but I personally don't see what's so confusing about couples who want to do it.

Czarcasm

seenitall wrote: »

Ok, divorce. So think about it, what do those words "for better, worse" etc actually mean these days? They don't mean a thing, as we now have a divorce, marriage as an institution that would guarantee longevity of the relationship and longtime commitment is not worth the paper it's written on (or as our boardsie TC likes to say, it "is a temporary contract masquerading as a permanent one"). Nowadays its main function seems to be to tick the box on 'get a mortgage, have some kids' list, have a big knees-up, and, last but not least, greatly aggravate and hinder the proceedings if/when the end of the road approaches.

Ah come on now seenitall, there's more shifty goalposts going on in this thread than a game of schoolboy soccer. One minute you're saying they've no way out of a legally binding contract that isn't worth the paper it's written on. Then when I say they have the option of divorce, you use that to say it makes the institution of marriage even more meaningless.

For most people that get married, marriage isn't meaningless. They understand the commitment they are making. They're not forced into it, and it's not cruel to expect them to be responsible for their actions. If two people don't want to make that commitment, that's fine, but they shouldn't expect the same legal protection of the state as those who are married. If marriage was meaningless, the LGBT community won't be long telling you the difference between civil partnership and civil marriage.

I think you're being far too dismissive of people who choose to get married tbh. Nobody forces them to do the big knees up, nobody forces them to do anything. They CHOOSE to do all these things of their own volition. If they choose to get a mortgage is it cruel to expect that they should still be making the same payments in 20 years time? No, because that is a commitment they made, the same as marriage- they knew what they were signing up for.

If the marriage breaks down, they have the option of divorce, or, yknow, they could work together to make the marriage work again and avoid divorce.

I just don't think it a great idea (to put it mildly) that anyone, child or adult be made liable in law for the way they felt about committing to someone at some point in their history. They haven't committed a crime, they fell in love with a wrong person. That's why it's cruel; but I do get your point about "They're adults, they're responsible for their decisions", too. Which is why I think a lot of people make the wrong decision about getting married; I just don't think that the punishment fits the crime, as it were.

But they're not being punished? That's why children aren't legally allowed enter contracts. Again we come back to the example of the mortgage- they made a commitment to a 20 year term at one point in their lives, and now they are responsible for honouring that commitment. It's hardly cruel to expect people to take responsibility for their actions?

clairefontaine

dark crystal wrote: »

Well I suppose the simple answer to that, is that not everyone views marriage as a life sentence, more so a traditional rite they wish go through in order to solidify their love and commitment to each other.

No one knows what the future holds, whether they'll be together ten years from now or not, but the vast majority of people who get married are expecting that lifetime commitment.

Marriage isn't for everybody, but I personally don't see what's so confusing about couples who want to do it.

Especially since contracts are not written in stone. Everything is negotiable and open to change.

Grandpa Hassan

Candie wrote: »

Nothing lands in your lap and keeps sparkling and fizzing of it's own accord, you have to put petrol in the tank, fuel on the fire, etc. etc. So says my granny, and she knows quite a bit about life.

I'm guessing you're pretty young or haven't yet had a long termer. Most people who've been in long relationships will tell you they loved the other person enough to put in some effort. When you love someone, it's not a big deal anyway and it couldn't be called making your life harder.

The idea that you work harder in a marriage to keep a relationship together is a bad thing IMO. I'm in my late 30s, in a long term, committed relationship (she shares my views on marriage) and we have had our rocky patches, and have made it work

But if we have to work so hard, that it would only be the constraints of marriage that keep us working at it, i would rather not be in the relationship. You assume that those who arent married just break up as soon as things get difficult, and that just isnt true.

I would argue the opposite....that married couples in that situation risk staying together for too long at the expense of their happiness

Legs.Eleven

clairefontaine wrote: »

In fairness we don't have Irish stats, so there is nothing from Ireland to go by.

Secondly in Ireland you have people who never divorced and then moved in with new partners which makes collecting data even harder from Ireland.

So at least I going on some kind of data, whereas not sure what you're going on.

Plus this board includes people from all over the world, foreigners living in Ireland, as well as Irish abroad. It's not really ok to try to make discussions exclusive to only Irish people living on Irish soil.

Can you provide evidence of your stats?

Legs.Eleven

dark crystal wrote: »

Well I suppose the simple answer to that, is that not everyone views marriage as a life sentence, more so a traditional rite they wish go through in order to solidify their love and commitment to each other.

No one knows what the future holds, whether they'll be together ten years from now or not, but the vast majority of people who get married are expecting that lifetime commitment.

Marriage isn't for everybody, but I personally don't see what's so confusing about couples who want to do it.

Either do I. I'm simply debating why it doesn't appeal to me. It's not for everybody but there is a bit of a debate going on here so for the sake of argument...

Legs.Eleven

clairefontaine wrote: »

Especially since contracts are not written in stone. Everything is negotiable and open to change.

Did you know you have to be separated from your spouse for 5 years before you get a divorce? That's not negotiable in Ireland.

LETHAL LADY

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

I asked before but can anyone here clarify whether or not someone still has to be separated from their spouse 5 years before they divorce in Ireland?

Edit: decided not to be a lazy arse and look it up:



Ehhh....no thanks!

Read up on divorce in Ireland: http://www.lawyer.ie/family-law/how-to-divorce

Separation and divorce are minefields in this country from what I can see and if it's acrimonious it makes a fortune for the legal eagles, kerching.
I hate to see people in a situation where they have to pay some greedy bollox to free them from an abhorrent situation.

Legs.Eleven

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

Separation and divorce are minefields in this country from what I can see and if it's acrimonious it makes a fortune for the legal eagles, kerching.
I hate to see people in a situation where they have to pay some greedy bollox to free them from an abhorrent situation.

Yep. Hence why I'm avoiding all that hoo-ha like the plague.

pharmaton

Aineoil wrote: »

Friends ticking off all the boxes. Know the feeling.

I got in trouble for saying something along these lines last night, in my defense I was probably a wee bit tipsy but my intentions were honourable.
It was a friends birthday and we both have a lot of gay friends, a few of whom were in attendance. One girl started chatting away and I had referred to her OH as her gf to which she corrected me by stating she was in fact her wife. I don't know how I reacted but I must have thought it was funny as she seemed to take offence. I apologised and tried to explain that I just knew so many people who had taken vows recently as it was "all the rage" but she was under the impression I was insinuating her "marriage" was just a token gesture. I stated that I would rather wait until real marriage became a reality (if ever) as it seems to me to be such a huge commitment and one I imagine people wouldn't enter so lightly.

But I do know a bunch of girls entering into civil partnerships, they're welcome to it, it just wouldn't be my thing at all.

Tom M

Czarcasm wrote: »

Ah come on now seenitall, there's more shifty goalposts going on in this thread than a game of schoolboy soccer. One minute you're saying they've no way out of a legally binding contract that isn't worth the paper it's written on. Then when I say they have the option of divorce, you use that to say it makes the institution of marriage even more meaningless.

For most people that get married, marriage isn't meaningless. They understand the commitment they are making. They're not forced into it, and it's not cruel to expect them to be responsible for their actions. If two people don't want to make that commitment, that's fine, but they shouldn't expect the same legal protection of the state as those who are married. If marriage was meaningless, the LGBT community won't be long telling you the difference between civil partnership and civil marriage.

I think you're being far too dismissive of people who choose to get married tbh. Nobody forces them to do the big knees up, nobody forces them to do anything. They CHOOSE to do all these things of their own volition. If they choose to get a mortgage is it cruel to expect that they should still be making the same payments in 20 years time? No, because that is a commitment they made, the same as marriage- they knew what they were signing up for.

If the marriage breaks down, they have the option of divorce, or, yknow, they could work together to make the marriage work again and avoid divorce.





But they're not being punished? That's why children aren't legally allowed enter contracts. Again we come back to the example of the mortgage- they made a commitment to a 20 year term at one point in their lives, and now they are responsible for honouring that commitment. It's hardly cruel to expect people to take responsibility for their actions?

If you have the option of divorce you're not really making a commitment now are you.

somefeen

My Dad who had been happily married for 15 years at the time told me "Dont get married until you're atleast 40"

Im going to heed his advice.

Legs.Eleven

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

Btw, here in Spain and you're entitled to almost the same rights as married couples and as I said before, that's what we should be striving for.

I'd be inclined to disagree with this, I think marriage should not be diluted by offering almost similar rights to people who refuse to marry.

If you want the rights well you have to get married.

I find it strange people not wanting to marry the person they intend to spend their life with, have kids with etc. I think as others have hinted at, not wanting to get married means there is at least some small lack of commitment to the relationship, possibly even subconsciously.

Czarcasm

Tom M wrote: »

Why should you "make a relationship work" . Why not find someone where it naturally "works"? If a relationship is hard work then you are probably with the wrong person IMO.

Because relationships by their very nature where you have to consider the other person IS hard work, you can't just go off and do things on your own terms any more, you have to take the other person into consideration. There has to be giving and taking and compromise on both sides with the eventual result being that the outcome will make the relationship stronger.

Nothing just naturally works without putting an effort into making it work, whether that be supporting the other person when they need support, or encouraging them when they need encouragement. Expecting a relationship to work without making any effort to make it work will leave one or both parties feeling a bit short changed, and expecting such a relationship to work out is pie in the sky idealism at best.

There's no gold star at the end of your life for making it harder than it needed to be. Life is to be enjoyed.

I completely agree with you, and I wouldn't encourage anyone to martyr themselves because they'll get fcukall thanks for it. But nobody saunters through life either and nothing worth fighting for ever came easy, otherwise a person ends up unfulfilled because they take everything for granted. For sure life is to be enjoyed, and some people find fulfillment in sharing that enjoyment with another person, rather than just take take take all their lives and living like they never have to give anything back.

seenitall

Czarcasm wrote: »

Ah come on now seenitall, there's more shifty goalposts going on in this thread than a game of schoolboy soccer. One minute you're saying they've no way out of a legally binding contract that isn't worth the paper it's written on. Then when I say they have the option of divorce, you use that to say it makes the institution of marriage even more meaningless.

For most people that get married, marriage isn't meaningless. They understand the commitment they are making. They're not forced into it, and it's not cruel to expect them to be responsible for their actions. If two people don't want to make that commitment, that's fine, but they shouldn't expect the same legal protection of the state as those who are married. If marriage was meaningless, the LGBT community won't be long telling you the difference between civil partnership and civil marriage.

I think you're being far too dismissive of people who choose to get married tbh. Nobody forces them to do the big knees up, nobody forces them to do anything. They CHOOSE to do all these things of their own volition. If they choose to get a mortgage is it cruel to expect that they should still be making the same payments in 20 years time? No, because that is a commitment they made, the same as marriage- they knew what they were signing up for.

If the marriage breaks down, they have the option of divorce, or, yknow, they could work together to make the marriage work again and avoid divorce.





But they're not being punished? That's why children aren't legally allowed enter contracts. Again we come back to the example of the mortgage- they made a commitment to a 20 year term at one point in their lives, and now they are responsible for honouring that commitment. It's hardly cruel to expect people to take responsibility for their actions?

How is it shifting goalposts to point out that divorce makes a bit of a mockery of the original idea of marriage ("til death do us part")? I knew you wouldn't like THAT, but calling it shifting goalposts is a tiiiiny bit off. I never said it's impossible to get out of a marriage either, so I don't know where you got that from. But the more traditional a society is, the more important it is to follow the script, to not question the institutions, and the harder it, and its laws (4 years separated before contemplating divorce??), will work at maintaining the status quo. (Not talking about Zanzibar here.)

Good point about the mortgage. Once that most, or even a big enough number of people renege on their mortgage commitments all at about the same time, though, something in the system will have to change accordingly. Things will not be able to just get done because that's the way they've always been done. I think your esteemed institution is on the way of change too, and that's a good thing. That's how it will survive. The divorce is the beginning.

In other words, my point, that you keep missing somehow, is, personal responsibility or not, marriage is simply not as suited as it used to be, to the reality of modern life and the nature of a huge number of relationships nowadays. That's all. I'm not attacking you, your marriage, or anyone's decision to get married, especially. I may question it, but I find it lovely how well some marriages work and for how long they work. It's just that I find marriage a bit, uh, irrelevant these days, a bit redundant. But that's my opinion, only my opinion.

clairefontaine

Tom M wrote: »

If you have the option of divorce you're not really making a commitment now are you.

If you are forced to stay in a marriage it's not a commitment. Commitment is born of choice.

Legs.Eleven

Emilia Hallowed Lava wrote: »

I'd be inclined to disagree with this, I think marriage should not be diluted by offering almost similar rights to people who refuse to marry.

If you want the rights well you have to get married.

I find it strange people not wanting to marry the person they intend to spend their life with, have kids with etc. I think as others have hinted at, not wanting to get married means there is at least some small lack of commitment to the relationship, possibly even subconsciously.

Ah here! I give up...

Czarcasm

Tom M wrote: »

If you have the option of divorce you're not really making a commitment now are you.

You are, you're making a commitment at the time with the understanding that your marriage won't end in divorce.

clairefontaine

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

Did you know you have to be separated from your spouse for 5 years before you get a divorce? That's not negotiable in Ireland.

Ugh god I know. Its not really fair.

People start new families and get new partners anyway though. It's not fair on them either.

Kind a joke really.

Tom M

Czarcasm wrote: »

You are, you're making a commitment at the time with the understanding that your marriage won't end in divorce.

If you commit to stay together for life that means to stick to it regardless. That's what commitment is, otherwise it's not commitment. Things change why make such huge commitment.

pharmaton

I love hearing about people who are happily married, gives me the warm feels.