New topic!!!

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Sven_ya!

From the land of sky-blue wa-AH-ters!
Nov 7, 2001
277
0
0
Minneapolis, MN
www.planetquake.com
Marriage.

What is it? What has it become? Where should it go?

My take: I usually roll my eyes when people make any noise about how marriage isn't what it used to be and that's somehow a bad thing. Marriage has *always* been messed-up, it's just that we're more aware of it now.

Marrying out of love is a brand-new concept, in fact. Arranged marriages used to be the standard for a long, long time and there's good reason why they worked. From day 1 of your arranged marriage, you have the attitude that you do not know this person you're marrying, so decided to work like hell to make it work.

These days, we live under the delusion that we know the person we're about to marry when, in fact, you're still marrying a total stranger.

I propose we make a radical change to the institution of marriage considering the radical changes that have happened to society and relationships between men and women (or men and men and women and women if that's your thing) in the past 100 years.

My plan is simple: a 5 year waiting period for marriage licenses. Wanna get married? Are you sure? Do you *really* want to get married? OK, you'll have to wait 5 years, go through all kinds of hassle before you can march down the isle and say "I do." This would deter puppy love marriages and any marriage that wasn't thought out properly.

In addition to waiting 5 years before marriage, make it illegal to produce children without a valid marriage license. Hey, you have to get a license to drive a car, and that's nowhere near the huge responsibility as raising kids. Seems fair to me, 'cause that way the only people who are raising kids are honestly serious about the whole family thing.

Another idea: a marriage contract. Make it renewable. There's no divorce or anything messy like that, just an initial 5 year marriage contract. If at the end of those 5 years the couple decides they aren't meant to be, they simply don't renew the contract. If, however, they decide they can't live without each other, they could sign a new contract for either a 5, 10, 20, 30 or lifetime marriage. Parent licenses will only be handed out after the 2nd contract has been signed.

:)
 

BangOut

...smells like groin.
Nov 4, 2001
3,028
0
0
Right behind you...
Then how would you compute people who make babies as 18-19 year olds and then are forced to get married and find out that they're not grown up yet, aren't ready, and they might hate each other but they can't get divorced because they have baby on the way?
 

Frostblood

Strangely compelling...
Mar 18, 2001
2,126
0
0
Blighty
Do you remember that "christiantiy exposed" spammer/troll/fool who stopped by to say that marriage was obselete and having a life partner was unnatural?
 

Sven_ya!

From the land of sky-blue wa-AH-ters!
Nov 7, 2001
277
0
0
Minneapolis, MN
www.planetquake.com
Originally posted by BangOut
Then how would you compute people who make babies as 18-19 year olds and then are forced to get married and find out that they're not grown up yet, aren't ready, and they might hate each other but they can't get divorced because they have baby on the way?

Point noted. To enforce the parent license laws we'll have to make a new law that states all new babies must have an operation, sometime before puberty. Either tying the tubes or a vasectomy. Sperm and egg cells will be kept safely away in storage to be cashed-out after aquisition of said parental license.

=)
 

BangOut

...smells like groin.
Nov 4, 2001
3,028
0
0
Right behind you...
Originally posted by Sven_ya!


Point noted. To enforce the parent license laws we'll have to make a new law that states all new babies must have an operation, sometime before puberty. Either tying the tubes or a vasectomy. Sperm and egg cells will be kept safely away in storage to be cashed-out after aquisition of said parental license.

=)

Hmm, but wouldn't the cost of the operations + medical storage + physical/mental trauma be greater than the overall social benefit? :p
 

BangOut

...smells like groin.
Nov 4, 2001
3,028
0
0
Right behind you...
I think you shouldn't be able to get married until you're 30 at the very earliest.

Don't waste your youth on one person... drink, do drugs, sleep around (wear a condom)... but don't settle down with one person. People who think they've found The One True Love in the whole entire world are deluding themselves.

Better to wait until you have a steady job, income to save for the kid'(s') future, and all the barely legal fantasies of growing up will have exhausted themselves and you can settle down at that point.
 

GoldenMouse

Mad Hatter
Nov 14, 2001
2,011
0
0
Backwoods Ohio
Visit site
I think you shouldn't be able to get married until you're 30 at the very earliest. ... Better to wait until you have a steady job, income to save for the kid'(s') future, and all the barely legal fantasies of growing up will have exhausted themselves and you can settle down at that point.

Woohoo! That means another twelve years of irresponsibility. Those poor fools in RL had me thinking that that time was over!

honestly though.....

........umm......?
 

StoneViper

you can call me Mike
Nov 3, 2001
1,907
0
0
43
N43° 03' 16" :::: W77° 36' 03"
Originally posted by BangOut
I think you shouldn't be able to get married until you're 30 at the very earliest.

lets say we did do that, that no one got married until 30, and lets say that sven's idea about not having children until 5 years into the marriage.....

....then think of how less people will be in this world. no baby boomers, an extended generation period. There wouldn't be enough people to take all the needed jobs all these large corporations have. So many job openings you can eliminate homelessness of the unemployed, only there'd be too many job openings. Companies would lose money due to no one left to work for them. Business owners would go out of business only to find themselves back at the bottom of the food chain working for someone else. Mass Depression leaks in and people commit suicide due to this theory. Civil Wars break out and is this nuclear age, it wouldn't be pretty. Before you know it, the total end of planet Earth as we know it.
 

oosyxxx

teh3vilspa7ula
Jan 4, 2000
3,195
82
48
Originally posted by StoneViper


lets say we did do that, that no one got married until 30, and lets say that sven's idea about not having children until 5 years into the marriage.....

....then think of how less people will be in this world. no baby boomers, an extended generation period. There wouldn't be enough people to take all the needed jobs all these large corporations have. So many job openings you can eliminate homelessness of the unemployed, only there'd be too many job openings. Companies would lose money due to no one left to work for them. Business owners would go out of business only to find themselves back at the bottom of the food chain working for someone else. Mass Depression leaks in and people commit suicide due to this theory. Civil Wars break out and is this nuclear age, it wouldn't be pretty. Before you know it, the total end of planet Earth as we know it.

Think of the pot, though.
 

Rabid Wolf

Piano Man Ghost
Oct 26, 2001
713
0
0
Vienna, Austria
marriage doesn't make any sense.
so two people really really love one another, so what?
I mean they wouldn't do so any more or in different ways just because they put a stupid piece of metal around their fingers would they now?
far as I'm concerned there are just two reasons I could accept when it comes to other people getting married:
1) both are "faithfull" and consider a marriage some kind of obtaining "god's blessing" for their being-together.
2) financial advantages (in my country for instance two people who just live together pay almost twice the taxes as a married couple does, even if they live in just one household. and should they be short on dough, or just starting out or whatever, than many young-ish couples marry simply to gain these financial benefits.
as of me, though: atheist for one, and while far from rich still able to pay the "single man's tax" without any problems. so to hell with marriage!
 

BangOut

...smells like groin.
Nov 4, 2001
3,028
0
0
Right behind you...
Originally posted by StoneViper
....then think of how less people will be in this world. no baby boomers, an extended generation period. There wouldn't be enough people to take all the needed jobs all these large corporations have. So many job openings you can eliminate homelessness of the unemployed, only there'd be too many job openings. Companies would lose money due to no one left to work for them. Business owners would go out of business only to find themselves back at the bottom of the food chain working for someone else. Mass Depression leaks in and people commit suicide due to this theory. Civil Wars break out and is this nuclear age, it wouldn't be pretty. Before you know it, the total end of planet Earth as we know it.

No no no... there would still be plenty of people to work, but less poverty, less environmental damage, and we could get servants from robotics labs to stroke us gently.
 

GoAt

Never wrong
Nov 3, 2001
1,444
10
38
42
USA
Visit site
eh, i dunno. ive spent most of my life single, and the times ive had a girl freind, it was crap anyway.
i dunno, maybe ill realize somthing in the navy, or maybe ill growup and stay single for ever and just fool around the rest of my life. (like one of my uncles, the man has more money than god and dont have to spend it on anyone. (cept for B-days and x-mas))
 

Frostblood

Strangely compelling...
Mar 18, 2001
2,126
0
0
Blighty
....then think of how less people will be in this world. no baby boomers, an extended generation period. There wouldn't be enough people to take all the needed jobs all these large corporations have. So many job openings you can eliminate homelessness of the unemployed, only there'd be too many job openings. Companies would lose money due to no one left to work for them. Business owners would go out of business only to find themselves back at the bottom of the food chain working for someone else. Mass Depression leaks in and people commit suicide due to this theory. Civil Wars break out and is this nuclear age, it wouldn't be pretty. Before you know it, the total end of planet Earth as we know it.

What??? Thats ridiculous. Less people means less need for jobs as well as less people to fill them. If we only had half the people in the world, we'd only need half the farmers, policemen, managers and whatever. What it could do is cut polloution and overpopulation. It might save the world, not destroy it.
 

Sven_ya!

From the land of sky-blue wa-AH-ters!
Nov 7, 2001
277
0
0
Minneapolis, MN
www.planetquake.com
Originally posted by StoneViper


lets say we did do that, that no one got married until 30, and lets say that sven's idea about not having children until 5 years into the marriage.....

....then think of how less people will be in this world. no baby boomers, an extended generation period. There wouldn't be enough people to take all the needed jobs all these large corporations have. So many job openings you can eliminate homelessness of the unemployed, only there'd be too many job openings. Companies would lose money due to no one left to work for them. Business owners would go out of business only to find themselves back at the bottom of the food chain working for someone else. Mass Depression leaks in and people commit suicide due to this theory. Civil Wars break out and is this nuclear age, it wouldn't be pretty. Before you know it, the total end of planet Earth as we know it.

Interesting point, but maybe just a *tad* paranoid ... just a tad...
 

StoneViper

you can call me Mike
Nov 3, 2001
1,907
0
0
43
N43° 03' 16" :::: W77° 36' 03"
Originally posted by StoneViper


lets say we did do that, that no one got married until 30, and lets say that sven's idea about not having children until 5 years into the marriage.....

....then think of how less people will be in this world. no baby boomers, an extended generation period. There wouldn't be enough people to take all the needed jobs all these large corporations have. So many job openings you can eliminate homelessness of the unemployed, only there'd be too many job openings. Companies would lose money due to no one left to work for them. Business owners would go out of business only to find themselves back at the bottom of the food chain working for someone else. Mass Depression leaks in and people commit suicide due to this theory. Civil Wars break out and is this nuclear age, it wouldn't be pretty. Before you know it, the total end of planet Earth as we know it.

no no, this was meant to seem rediculous!
 

StoneViper

you can call me Mike
Nov 3, 2001
1,907
0
0
43
N43° 03' 16" :::: W77° 36' 03"
but what would happen if the one man that invented "Fusion Power Plants" was never born because of this marriage law. We will be setting ourselves back as we won't be inventing new things as fast as we are.

but acutally, i kinda agree with sven