 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate. |
| User | Post | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Deleted User Posts: 149/-7750 |
Bah, I´ve voted for "Who cares?". | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Kutske Posts: 125/171 |
Just so we're clear, I'm not anti-young-marraige. I was just making statements and responses I felt were relevant to the subject at hand. I dislike marraige in general, because it's merely a title, merely a legal doccument, and I don't like such concrete things being attached to highly abstract concepts such as love. Anyway, the term "young marraige" is in itself useless, because youth is not directly related to maturity. It's immature marraige that should be worried about -- two stupid kids getting hitched because their horny and desperate and in puppy love, instead of real love, or two stupid adults getting hitched because they're both going through midlife crises and think that their transient companionship and mutual empathy can last forever, or at least as long as their previous marraiges. But even then, I don't care. People should do what they want to. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Snow Tomato Posts: 196/798 |
Originally posted by Kutske That's happened plenty of times with people who aren't necessarily 19 years old and getting married. In fact, I know more relationships that were successful because the people met young. They have more in common, they know the same people.. develop similar lifestyles. You catch my drift. It's harder to do when you're like 30 years old and just met... and have 50 pounds of emotional baggage. Basically. Love IS love. If you fall in love when you're 20 years old.. you should be able to get married. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| windwaker Posts: 3/235 |
Originally posted by Wurl I almost got banned for Debate sarcasm last year. It looked exactly like this post. I THINK I'M IN LOVE! From a legal standpoint: who cares. From a moral standpoint: depends on the person, I guess. I don't really believe in the sanctity of marriage as much as I do the maturity of the person raising kids. Originally posted by geeogree I'm right with you, fuck minorities. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jomb Posts: 49/448 |
Kutske - no, i'm not kidding. I went to school with about a dozen men/women from India/Sri Lanka/that area of the world. They all seemed rather happy and liked the people they were married to. Not that i'd want an arranged marriage, but it really seemed to have worked for them. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Ares Posts: 6/24 |
Ares Anyway, I say bad (generally speaking, of course). Most of everyone's responses were something like " yes as long as they are mature enough" or something of that ilk. Well, generally speaking the extremly young are characteristically not well respected for their maturity, ergo, *fizzle*. Probably not a good idea unless the people involved are notabley exeptional in there judgement. That's the great problem of the law -- some ten year olds are far more mature than some fourty year olds, however, we have to make rock-solid laws that are written in black-and-white terms, otherwise the laws will be bent out of shape to where they're moot. It's like statutory rape; the laws serve to add extra punishment to thirty year olds who literally rape prepubescent boys or girls, but the laws hurt the case of the nineteen year old with a seventeen year old girlfriend -- he's treated as no different than the thirty year old rapist in the eyes of the law, and is sent up the river for a decade or more, regardeless of whether the relationship was mutually decided upon. People want to interpret the law too strictly these days, while it needs to be taken on a case-by-case basis. Indeed, the notion of the gray area has always been a problem when making generalizations. However that, sadly, is always going to happen, our world is far to flawed (or...complex) to be governed by any one total concept. there will always be exceptions. Same with this. Yes, I did state that some people are wiser than others but I intended to state that as a minority. Generally speaking, most youngsters are not ready to make such decisions. As for statitory, where I come from there is a two year grace area, outside of that, then it is kind of sick, or at least unseemly. Kutske |
Posts: 119/171 Jomb: Kutske - That's true, but it does'nt change the fact that they got married younger and were generally fine I've known people frim India and in that region of the world where people have arranged marriages. They surprisingly have a higher success rate than ours do. You're kidding me, yes? That's because in most cases, divorce is either illegal or a major social taboo that'll ruin the life of the woman involved. Ares: Anyway, I say bad (generally speaking, of course). Most of everyone's responses were something like " yes as long as they are mature enough" or something of that ilk. Well, generally speaking the extremly young are characteristically not well respected for their maturity, ergo, *fizzle*. Probably not a good idea unless the people involved are notabley exeptional in there judgement. That's the great problem of the law -- some ten year olds are far more mature than some fourty year olds, however, we have to make rock-solid laws that are written in black-and-white terms, otherwise the laws will be bent out of shape to where they're moot. It's like statutory rape; the laws serve to add extra punishment to thirty year olds who literally rape prepubescent boys or girls, but the laws hurt the case of the nineteen year old with a seventeen year old girlfriend -- he's treated as no different than the thirty year old rapist in the eyes of the law, and is sent up the river for a decade or more, regardeless of whether the relationship was mutually decided upon. People want to interpret the law too strictly these days, while it needs to be taken on a case-by-case basis. Ares |
Posts: 1/24 Originally posted by Rydain I smell the aroma of a libertarian! Anyway, I say bad (generally speaking, of course). Most of everyone's responses were something like " yes as long as they are mature enough" or something of that ilk. Well, generally speaking the extremly young are characteristically not well respected for their maturity, ergo, *fizzle*. Probably not a good idea unless the people involved are notabley exeptional in there judgement. Jomb |
Posts: 46/448 Kutske - That's true, but it does'nt change the fact that they got married younger and were generally fine |  I've known people frim India and in that region of the world where people have arranged marriages. They surprisingly have a higher success rate than ours do. Most of them even come to love who they were married to. Not that i'm advocating that. Just an interesting bit of information. I do believe that if there are 2 mature people and they want to get married then no one has a right to stop them, only to try to persuade them not to. People should take it more seriously though, especially if children are involved.Thexare |
Posts: 255/1104 Originally posted by xxweirdalfanxx Watch what you say. Some idiot might try to twist your words and compare what you wrote with pedophilia and bestiality. Just, you know, advance warning. Originally posted by geeogree Aren't you married?  Ryoku |
Posts: 116/123 I say that law can not be put into love. Love is a natural feeling, and has no boundaries to it.
| And also, this reminds me of "The Great Awakening" vs "The enlightenment" The religion of many protestants came into a huge play in the natural life of the colonist. And the govt. tried to change many ways the religous protestants lived, only because the religion could not be proven. This is just one of those natural kinda things. Love is natural, and they are trying to put boundaries upon it, which should be naturaly impossible. But I can see where getting married at such a young age can cause a huge problem in society. There are, right now, a huge surplus of unwed mothers. Which only increased poverty and whatnot. firemaker |
Posts: 110/194 My parentws got married at nineteen and 21. It didn't seem to affect them. However not to say that it isn't good practice to get married after you sort out your careers and things like that. | Kutske |
Posts: 109/171 Snow Tomato: Getting married under 21 is not the equivalent of putting a loaded gun to your head and pulling it. That's just ridiculously stupid. I think you misinterpreted what I said -- you said that "if you never try, you never know." I was pointing out that that sort of logic isn't rock-solid; you don't necessarily need to try something to "know." I wasn't equating the two things. Snow Tomato: And my point was, people are over glorifying marriage. It's not a devastation to your whole life if it ends. For some it is; some people lose their children, their pets, their house, their car, half or more of their savings and are indebted to pay child support for up to eighteen years or more. Financially, a divorce can devastate you, pretty much leaving you back where you were when you first moved away from your parents. Jomb: I'm the other person who voted yes. I voted yes because when 2 people are in love enough to get married that is always a good thing. As far as getting married young ruining someone's life, i dont believe that is HAS to be the case. In many places in the world, and in our past, people got married younger. It was'nt the end of the world. Our ancestors were not walking timebombs or moping around about it. In fact, they got alot done. I've always felt that maybe i'd get alot more done in my life if i did'nt have to waste so much energy dating and looking for a wife, or worrying about not finding one. I'm not saying that everyone should go get hitched right away when young, but that people should have the fundamental right to live their life however the hell they want to, so long as no one is being harmed (and not in some pansy ass, over-analyzed, psychological way). The government should not be dictating to people who and when they can marry, especially adult people. Two things. First, people in the past got married younger because they were only expected to live until their fourties, and they generally believed that as soon as you were physically able to bear children, you should be prepared to do so. Second, historically, marraige has had nothing to do with love -- it was something your parents or the elders of your tribe (etc.) forced you into, in order to tie two families together financially or politically. But anyway, I agree that the government need to have less say in the matter, but I tend to think that's true for most things... Sin Dogan |
Posts: 171/861 Marriage works if you want it to, end of story. | geeogree |
Posts: 65/207 people overglorify marriage.... marriage doesn't work or isn't valued anymore....
| yet there is a minority that apparently wants in on it.... figure that one out Jomb |
Posts: 41/448 I'm the other person who voted yes. I voted yes because when 2 people are in love enough to get married that is always a good thing. As far as getting married young ruining someone's life, i dont believe that is HAS to be the case. In many places in the world, and in our past, people got married younger. It was'nt the end of the world. Our ancestors were not walking timebombs or moping around about it. In fact, they got alot done. I've always felt that maybe i'd get alot more done in my life if i did'nt have to waste so much energy dating and looking for a wife, or worrying about not finding one. I'm not saying that everyone should go get hitched right away when young, but that people should have the fundamental right to live their life however the hell they want to, so long as no one is being harmed (and not in some pansy ass, over-analyzed, psychological way). The government should not be dictating to people who and when they can marry, especially adult people. | Taryn |
Posts: 30/36 I see your point. It's just "You officially lose your title". But don't you think that it's rare for a couple to be like that for that long? | Snow Tomato |
Posts: 141/798 No they haven't. They have their fights, like any other healthy relationship.. but they're happy together.
| And my point was, people are over glorifying marriage. It's not a devastation to your whole life if it ends. Taryn |
Posts: 28/36 Has that couple ever "...left each other..." for a short period of time? Or maybe even long? But marriage is...oh. I see your point! |  How do you define "married" anyways?Snow Tomato |
Posts: 139/798 I totally see your point, but I know a couple who got married in highschool and grew up to have very successful lives and children. It should remain an option. And what is "marriage" but a title anyway? | This is a long thread. Click here to view it. | | |||||
