Forced marriage

...in the news today

Discussions about society in general and social activity.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Forced marriage

#1  Postby Agrippina » Jun 08, 2012 6:00 am

Sky News are rattling on about "forced marriage" this morning. I don't get why this is a surprising phenomenon. People have been marrying "for love" only in recent history. Marriage was invented with the idea of combining wealth to create more wealth. As long as people are forced to live with a commitment made under unnatural conditions, sometimes without thinking further than the wedding, there will be people who use that commitment to further some or other end. (From my point of view, that feeling of an overwhelming hormonal rush that makes you want to be with a particular person despite their warts, is an unnatural condition, but that's just me).

Surely the way out of the social problems created by marriage is to make marriage itself redundant and to make all unions of people, whether it's between two people, or a group of people, a civil union bound only by a legal contract and not by religion, or the government.

I'd like to see some debate on the benefits of "marriage" controlled by government, or by a legal contract.

From my personal point of view, and living in a society where all people are equal whether they are married or not, and where the ownership of property remains in the hands of the person who owns the property whether they are married or not, there is no need for formal marriage. (The default is that the laws that were in place at the time of the marriage apply in the case of divorce. So if you were married when the default was community property in the absence of a pre-marital contract, then in a divorce you share the property equally. If you were married when community property had to be stipulated by a pre-marital contract, then what you brought into the marriage is yours.)

I simply can't see why the government has to have your personal relationship registered in their records, and why they should be involved in the dispute when and if it breaks up. Surely if you want to spend your life with someone, you should draw up an agreement before entering into the formal relationship, and in that agreement state what will happen with property, and children, in the case of the relationship breaking up. At least that way, in the throes of "love" you are more likely to be generous and kindly-disposed towards the other party which will reflect positively on the children if the relationship later breaks up?

Is there any benefit to be derived from government laws about marriage?

On the specific subject of forced, or pre-arranged marriage, or contracts made by parents on behalf of their children, surely merely the legal age of consent should apply. A child of five is no more able to commit to a lifelong relationship than they are able to commit to a hairstyle. Therefore doesn't it make sense that a contract binding a child to a life partner should be null and void if the child is under the age of consent?
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36690
Age: 110
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Forced marriage

#2  Postby wunksta » Jul 21, 2013 6:49 pm

The night is dark and full of terrors...
User avatar
wunksta
 
Posts: 1350
Age: 36
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post


Return to Sociology

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest