What happened to getting married before having children?

Oldernotwiser

Fang wrote: »

This forum isn't exclusive to the UK.

Then perhaps you should make it clear that you're referring to a situation abroad?

Fang_3

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Then perhaps you should make it clear that you're referring to a situation abroad?

Why should I? I'm not. Everyone, bar a few religious nut jobs doesn't make the distinction between marriage and civil partnerships. They're the same in all but name. Legally speaking. And they'll be totally the same within a few years.

JodyBPM

Fang wrote: »

Then how can you say that you meant your vows of 'for better (f)or worse'? Or did you attach conditions on your vows?

I'm not religious, so I didn't say those vows. I said I would be his best friend, love him, always talk to him (!) ,trust him and enjoy him.

In a poem.

It was non religious, dictated by us, and more meaningful than you could ever imagine.

JodyBPM

As a complete aside, fang, i'd be interested to know how to better support my gay friends. (genuine) PM me

Fang_3

JodyBPM wrote: »

I'm not religious, so I didn't say those vows. I said I would be his best friend, love him, always talk to him (!) ,trust him and enjoy him.

In a poem.

It was non religious, dictated by us, and more meaningful than you could ever imagine.

Ok, non-religious, I can understand that. The little dig, amusing. But you said that you made a commitment for life, so if you really meant it, why are you putting conditions on it unless you accept that what you actually meant was: 'until I want to leave'? And then why do you think that your relationship is better than someone else's with a ceremony? Would you think that someone who just had the ceremony or just the legal part of a marriage is equal to you? Or do you think that you need the whole thing?

mikey72

JodyBPM wrote: »

As a complete aside, fang, i'd be interested to know how to better support my gay friends. (genuine) PM me

Do they come with special conditions?
Maybe that's what I'm doing wrong, I just treat them the same way as eveyone else.

Oldernotwiser

Fang wrote: »

Why should I? I'm not. Everyone, bar a few religious nut jobs doesn't make the distinction between marriage and civil partnerships. They're the same in all but name. Legally speaking. And they'll be totally the same within a few years.

So,if there's no difference between marriage and civil partnerships, why do gay pressure groups campaign to allow gays to marry in the UK? Surely they can't all be "religious nutjobs"?

Fang_3

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

So,if there's no difference between marriage and civil partnerships, why do gay pressure groups campaign to allow gays to marry in the UK? Surely they can't all be "religious nutjobs"?

The groups campaigning are doing so on behalf of the gay and lesbian Christians. Or other religions. So that they can legally get married in a church. The rest of us don't care.

brians_daughter

bylromarha wrote: »

Having read your post, I can think of at least 20 couples in my wider circle of friends that meet that criteria (met. married and had children within 36 months) All now married 5 - 25+ years with between 1 and 4 kids.


.

You have misread my post - stated that children born outside of miarriage in these circs are most at risk - not within marriage.

Almo

This topic comes up so regularly it's almost like it's scheduled.

A very dear, very close friend of mine is getting married today and I am over the moon for her because that is what she wants and I am devastated that I can't be there to celebrate her relationship and her (and his) happiness. I don't know their exact motivation for getting married so can't comment on them in particular but other friends who are married have done so because of, variously, love, social pressure, security, in a bid to keep a relationship going and as a sort of middle finger to parental opinions.

I don't need to publicly declare the strength of my relationship - I know what it is, and that's enough. I've said this on here in the past; where I live now we have legal/financial protection in the event of something happening to either one of us. I am his next of kin (legally), and he is mine. In the eyes of the state we are married. If we move back to the UK we will probably get married because I want him to be my next of kin. If laws change before then and we have the same protection afforded to married couples, then it won't be necessary. As for this being a passive state, I moved thousands of miles with my OH, sponsored him to get a visa and signed documents to say that I am legally and financially responsible for him while he remains in this country regardless of whether we stay together or not. If that's not a conscious decision to be with someone, I don't know what is.

I would hazard a guess that the statistics which show that cohabitees are more likely to separate have more to do with the time of the relationship in the person's life - i.e many people cohabit before marriage and break up when it becomes clear they are not well suited. If the same people married (without cohabiting) I believe the statistics would be even - they'd still break up regardless of the marriage certificate.

I think it's really sad that either group feels the need to attack the other. If marriage is important to you then it is truly a wonderful event when it happens. Those for whom marriage is not important should not have to suffer being told their relationships are built on being passive, fear of the other half's opinion or any of the other things which are thrown around as reasons for being unmarried.