The best policy the Tories could introduce is a proper married couples allowance

Idiophreak

movilogo wrote: »

Not having money for marriage is a lame excuse! Same people spend thousands in holidays, flasy cars, night outs etc etc. People just don't want commitments.

...and some people don't, but still can't afford the wedding they want.

It's not an excuse, lame or otherwise, it's a reason.

Lotus-eater

movilogo wrote: »

A major reason behind fast growth of many Asian economies, is their traditional family life, which the western society lack very much nowadays.

History taught us a strong social bonding and family is good for a prosperous country.

Current state of Britain has many things to do with broken family lives.

Not having money for marriage is a lame excuse! Same people spend thousands in holidays, flasy cars, night outs etc etc. People just don't want commitments.

Yes, a marriage certificate is not just a piece of paper - but a commitment, that's why many still fear it.

A marriage certificate is just a bit of paper. If you want to leave someone you will, even if it costs you more, or do you suggest people should stay together when they want to be apart? Many many marriages are like this, staying together for the kids.

What you all seem to be saying, is that if you are married that means you won't have a broken family and it means you will be forced to stay together.

Forgive me, I forgot the divorce rates were so low in this country.

People may not want commitment, or more like, in this world we live in the UK today, attitudes have changed and many things are easier to seem greener on the other side.
But I fail to see how marriage has stopped any of this happening, most people seem to be divorced at least once, didn't work for them then.....

JayScottGreenspan

fedupfreda wrote: »

Actually in my experience being married makes you think twice about splitting it up, keeps you going through the bad times. (Apologies in advance for the long story which follows)

In my own case me and my Husband lived together for 4 years before getting married and there was always this impression (in the back of my mind, at least, can't speak for OH) that if I felt like it, I could just walk out, there were no children, we could sell the house and divide the proceeds, there would be no pain.

However when my biological clock started ticking it felt 'right' to be married. Because we could not afford a great deal, we slipped away quietly and had a register office wedding with 2 passers by acting as witnesses. There was no flash reception, car or honeymoon. I got some flowers from a market stall on the day and had made my own dress. It was memorable for the right reasons because it was our day, not hijacked by parent's expectations, having to invite a load of people we couldn't stand because of family obligations etc. Ok there was a lot of carp to put up with from his family when we got home - but my family's view was 'it was what we did anyway, its your life'.

2 years later we started a family, and with the inevitable strains, cracks started to appear at the seams. More than once one or the other walked out. However we always came back that same night - because we had that commitment. And after a few hours away from the 'coalface', as it were, we were able to talk things out.

At any time in the past we could have decided to break it all up but the effort and expense (not to mention the pain to the children) was just not worth it. We see a lot of neighbours who co-habit, the blokes just decide to up and leave because 'the state will look after the kids, innit'. And the woman sees no reason to keep a bloke when she can rely on the state to support her. The slightest problem, and they're off.

Before anyone sees red, let me explain that I DO NOT, under any circumstances, expect anyone in an abusive/violent relationship to tolerate it just for the sake of finances. There should still be support for such circumstances. But it seems to me there are too many people who think that the state has absolved them from all personal responsibility. All too many seem to think their 'right' to personal happiness counts above all else - the feelings of the partner and children are cast aside. Marriage is worth it because it makes you think twice about the implications before you break it up.

BTW - this is just my personal opinion

Very eloquently put. This is basically why I believe marriage is a good thing for society.

boyse7en

2 years later we started a family, and with the inevitable strains, cracks started to appear at the seams. More than once one or the other walked out. However we always came back that same night - because we had that commitment. And after a few hours away from the 'coalface', as it were, we were able to talk things out.

At any time in the past we could have decided to break it all up but the effort and expense (not to mention the pain to the children) was just not worth it. We see a lot of neighbours who co-habit, the blokes just decide to up and leave because 'the state will look after the kids, innit'. And the woman sees no reason to keep a bloke when she can rely on the state to support her. The slightest problem, and they're off.

But your increased commitment to each other (and the reason you came back after arguments) is that you had a strong enough commitment to each other, and the children.
Both of which you could, and probably would, have had had whether you had married or not.

Having a certificate and an album of photos in a drawer are not the reasons that you stay together.


The neighbor's blokes who leg-it, would still do the same if married. Their issue is a lack of commitment to a relationship, not the lack of a marriage certificate. Otherwise the divorce rates for the country would be significantly lower.

Sir_Humphrey

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

Very eloquently put. This is basically why I believe marriage is a good thing for society.

Unfortunately I can give an counter-example of a friend who married quite hastily (not going to go into exact circumstances), has no children, and whose marriage has just disintegrated. Having a legal contract was no help there.

On the other hand I know plenty of cohabitees who have raised families with no more fuss than usual.

What is important is what is inside, not bits of paper, white dresses and flummery. I find it ludicrous to imagine that love is going to be influenced by a legal document.

movingforward2010

The white horse makes me laugh he just some sad bloke sitting in a office somewhere consumed with hate and anger, the universe owes him everything, he'll never be happy even if everything he wanted came true. Moaning has become a way of life deeply ingrained in to his lifestyle and though pattern. Victor Meldrew but in nazi germany style.

If he was in Government it certainlly would be a 'nanny state' controlled by him.

Get over it man. Start living, stop hating your life away

movilogo

Forgive me, I forgot the divorce rates were so low in this country.

UK divorce rate is more than 50%

JayScottGreenspan

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

What is important is what is inside, not bits of paper, white dresses and flummery.

I agree with this, but I imagine it is likely that people take breaking up a little more lightly when they aren't married.

Then again, it's only where kids are involved that I think there is really a big problem with people breaking off a relatiobship on a whim. The sort of people to do that are possibly the sort of people who wouldn't care if they were married or not....
Hmm, I may be talking myself round to your point of view.

boyse7en

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

I agree with this, but I imagine it is likely that people take breaking up a little more lightly when they aren't married.

Then again, it's only where kids are involved that I think there is really a big problem with people breaking off a relatiobship on a whim. The sort of people to do that are possibly the sort of people who wouldn't care if they were married or not....
Hmm, I may be talking myself round to your point of view.

Hang on a minute there. You can't go changing your mind in here! You have to state your opinion and then stick to it, no matter how much evidence there is.

If we just go allowing people to be persuaded by rational argument, then where will we be?

Sir_Humphrey

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

Then again, it's only where kids are involved that I think there is really a big problem with people breaking off a relatiobship on a whim. The sort of people to do that are possibly the sort of people who wouldn't care if they were married or not....
Hmm, I may be talking myself round to your point of view.

That's kind of what I am getting at. Correlation but not causation. The people who get married would stay together anyway even if they were not married.

Kids obviously complicates matters whether married or not. In fact I can't think of any other good reason to stay together with someone I had come to resent or hate.

(Amateur psychologist alert). An extravert person might be more keen to make a show of loving someone by marrying them with a big ceremony. As I said, I have no problem with people marrying if they want to do so.