Marriage and Demolition Projects

October 5, 2007

Marriage is not a union of two souls before god as witness if you don't believe too much in souls and god. What would be left of marriage if stripped of such concepts would be the legal and social status it bequeaths to two people—nothing more, nothing less, nothing incomplete. You can do it in a church, in a garden, under the sea, in front of a scuffed table with a bored magistrate behind it, anywhere. Sign a paper and you're married.

 

It wouldn't do anyone a lot of good (or bad) if we put marriage in such prosaic terms, but that's what it is beyond the expensive ceremony and the well-meant, and sometimes ill-kept, vows. I believe in marriage because it binds two people, not just in spoken obligation such as protestations of love forever and ever, but in something more solid: a legal obligation to take care of one another and the family that might spring from the union. It's also a social status in a sense that the rest of the world is forced to recognize two people's obligations to one another, thus, they would be discouraged to interfere.

 

Adding the supernatural to it is unnecessary. One can if one wants to and it wouldn't hurt anybody, really, but I think that marriage can stand on its own without god in the machinery. There's this thing called love, I guess, but let's not talk about that now.


Posted by lizette at 11:03 pm | permalink

Previous Comments

“That stung.”

Tsk tsk tsk. =/

I like your take on marriage. I’m an atheist and it’s one of my “dreams” (okay. GOALS) to someday have a husband, and it worries me that people would get turned off by my utter lack of religion. I think that the whole marriage in the eyes of God is a pot of hogwash, but hell, I’d have a church wedding because church weddings (and all the planning they entail) are fun.

Bah. No sense.

Posted by Helga at October 6, 2007, 2:55 am

it makes perfect sense. i wouldn’t mind a church wedding myself. churches are beautiful places.

Posted by lizette at October 6, 2007, 1:01 pm

i don’t like churches. they scare me.

i believe in love, though :)

Posted by marc at October 7, 2007, 2:21 am

“but I think that marriage can stand on its own without god in the machinery. There’s this thing called love, I guess, but let’s not talk about that now.”

the thing is, God IS love.. that may not be that good of an argument, but its what i believe in.=)

Posted by paul at October 7, 2007, 2:27 am

marc, so do i.

paul—it’s a faith thing, of course. tautological.

Posted by lizette at October 7, 2007, 2:30 am

so love is your religion. :-)

Posted by siu at October 7, 2007, 7:48 pm

I think marriage is more than just a legal binding or whatever. I feel it’s supposed to be something deeper than that, but then the legal stuff, or whatever paraphernalia that is associated with marriage could pretty much be a symbol of that deeper thing.

uh…

LOVE!

Posted by Ting at October 7, 2007, 10:08 pm

marriage scares me..to death.. ^_^

Posted by psyche at October 8, 2007, 12:01 am

I like what Siu said. If rumcolas didn’t get here first, love would be my religio, too. Heh.

Posted by Helga at October 8, 2007, 1:31 am

siu, the other day, i had a shouting match with an atheist about the definition of religion. suffice it to say that i wouldn’t call love a religion—it’s more of a philosophy for me. yes, i have this tendency to try to rationalize everything and force them into my frame of understanding.

ting, am i hearing this from someone who has never fallen in love? lolumpia!

helga, i can’t think of anything to say to that.

Posted by lizette at October 8, 2007, 6:15 am

liz, you know what - i hate nomenclatures on these things - apparently as you do. Some may label me an athiest or agnostic but i couldn’t care less. there are a lot of things i don’t believe in but i take comfort in the verity that life is an interminable enigma - that it has more questions than it has answers. Instead of being continually confused by these mysteries, i have learned to be amazed by these instead, and enjoy journeying in our conitnuing search for answers.

I got married in church, by the way. :-)

One more thing, would love to include you in my view from venus list. mind an ex-link?

Posted by siu at October 8, 2007, 9:39 am

siu, you’re right. there’s really a lot of other things to think and feel about than religion and the deeper questions of life, the universe, and everything.

linked you already. ;)

Posted by lizette at October 8, 2007, 10:46 am

I agree with your marriage-definition.
That’s probably the best definition to describe it .
and with regards to GOD lets hope that the uncertainty-principle is correct Lol! :-)

Posted by f!nch at October 8, 2007, 12:37 pm

finch, coo’. what’s up with stuff?

Posted by lizette at October 8, 2007, 12:52 pm

stuff?=p LOL what’s up buddy?

Posted by finch at October 8, 2007, 3:01 pm

perfect definition of marriage. i totally agree.

this view makes me believe that gay marriage should be legalized.

Posted by J at October 9, 2007, 8:48 pm

Got married first in a civil ceremony, but had to get married again in church to make my family happy. :)

Though marriage is often said to be just a piece of paper, it helps in keeping a relationship intact. It serves as anchor when the marriage is on the rocks.

Posted by rhodora at October 9, 2007, 10:14 pm

J, i believe gay marriages should be legalized too.

rhodora, very true.

Posted by lizette at October 11, 2007, 10:04 pm

i also believe we should not force people to keep their marital links forever if they no longer wish it to continue.

my parents were married in a civil ceremony, then church ceremony afterwards, too. but there were certain things that made them realize they could not keep their marital links forever.

dad married another woman ten years ago. three years later, mom married another man. good thing there`s divorce in japan.

Posted by J at October 12, 2007, 8:42 am