toldailytopic: Arranged marriage: good idea, bad idea?

[Nathon Detroit]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for March 22nd, 2012 09:47 AM

toldailytopic: Arranged marriage: good idea, bad idea?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

 

[some other dude]

Well, I have been thinking about getting me one of them mail order Chinese brides. :think:

 

[Rusha]

Bad idea ...

IMO, arranged marriages are more about the parents wishing to control who their child marries and brings into the family rather than compatibility and love.

 

[Jedidiah]

It depends upon your criteria.
For instance:
If it's lower divorce rates, then arranged marriage is a good idea.
If it's freedom of choice, then arranged marriage is a bad idea.

-Jed

 

[Stripe]

Arranged marriage: good idea, bad idea?

Beats an unarranged marriage? :noid:

Parents should know as well as the child a partnership that will be successful - if not better. And one need not expect that the parents will be dictatorial in such a role.

Well, I have been thinking about getting me one of them mail order Chinese brides. :think:

Make sure your application is in Chinese. The potential for grave misunderstanding abounds. :shut:

 

[Stripe]

If it's freedom of choice, then arranged marriage is a bad idea.

How does arranging a marriage limit one's ability to choose? :idunno:

 

[Rusha]

How does arranging a marriage limit one's ability to choose? :idunno:

If the person they are marrying is *chosen* FOR them (and they have no say in the matter), that is not exactly free choice.

 

[some other dude]

Make sure your application is in Chinese. The potential for grave misunderstanding abounds. :shut:

I thought I was getting this...

Instead, when I opened the FedEx box, out came this:

 

[Stripe]

If the person they are marrying is *chosen* FOR them (and they have no say in the matter), that is not exactly free choice.

You need not expect that the arrangement will be by dictatorial parents.

I thought I was getting this...Instead, when I opened the FedEx box, out came this:

Fed-ex are pretty prompt, eh? :think:

 

[Rusha]

You need not expect that the arrangement will be by dictatorial parents.

Who else would make the arrangements?

 

[Stripe]

Who else would make the arrangements?

Parents who care enough to ensure their child marries well. :thumb:

 

[Rusha]

Parents who care enough to ensure their child marries well. :thumb:

Unless of course that person is not compatible with their own child ...

 

[Stripe]

Unless of course that person is not compatible with their own child ...

Which do you think will generally be more successful:
The parents and the child deciding together, or
The child choosing without help?

 

[Rusha]

Which do you think will generally be more successful:
The parents and the child deciding together, or
The child choosing without help?

Define deciding together? Does the parent make the FINAL decision or does the child?

 

[Traditio]

I think that, in principle, arranged marriage is probably a better way of doing things than we presently do them. However, if arranged marriage is to work, then there have to be a number of qualifications/exceptions to it as a general rule. For example, if male A is arranged for woman B and man C is arranged for woman D, but A and D have been in love with each other since they were youths...? Clearly, in that case, the aforementioned arrangements should be dissolved in favor of a marriage between A and D.

Spoken another way: whereas arranged marriage is probably superior to what we presently practice now, nonetheless, there should be limitations to just how binding the arrangements are, and it should leave itself open to the choices/preferences of those who are being arranged to be married.

Especially revolting to me is the idea of arranged marriages for economic/social utility (especially to the degree that woman A can't marry man B because they differ too sharply in economic/social condition).

Furthermore, there should be exceptions for people who simply don't want to get married (for example, those who would prefer to enter monastic orders).

 

[some other dude]

Fed-ex are pretty prompt, eh? :think:

Not so good with volleyballs. :nono:

 

[Stripe]

Define deciding together? Does the parent make the FINAL decision or does the child?

I don't think these things need be so vigorously defined. Certainly the parents or the child may veto a choice made by the other, but there is no law or moral that might prohibit a child ignoring their parent's advice.

Not so good with volleyballs. :nono:

It got there in the end. Washed up on Bondi beach and inspired a mid-morning tournament.

 

[Jedidiah]

How does arranging a marriage limit one's ability to choose? :idunno:

Well Stripe, I guess the question was more nuanced than I considered, and my response was thus more knee-jerk than I intended. "Arranged marriage" in common parlance in USA is probably ignorant and anachronistic; it means that the marriage is arranged by the parents of the marrying couple (with little or not veto power granted to the couple), which is opposed to the far more common practice here of the marrying couple "arranging" the marriage themselves.

So...my bad !

:crackup:

-Jed

 

[elohiym]

We're going to let God arrange our children's marriages.

 

[Nick M]

If Rusha says bad, it must be good. I wonder who is beat more often? Those met from the failed American experiment called dating, or arranged?