1PeaceMaker
New member
Doubtless. But the question is for Christians in general, you know, the ones a coin toss away from divorce.
Why men won't marry you
- Thread starter serpentdove
- Start date
Doubtless. But the question is for Christians in general, you know, the ones a coin toss away from divorce.
Well ... let's see. Why are teens not allowed to legally smoke, drink, or join the military (until age 17, with parental consent), drive unrestricted, etc., get a tattoo, obtain surgery without parental consent, etc.?
Do you think that marriage is LESS important than the above?
What, exactly, is the fixation on advocating marriage for younger individuals who are much easier to manipulate?
Honestly, it really doesn't change my answer. Believer or non-believer, if a couple is going to have sex, in my perfect world, they would already be married.
That having been said, should you get married to the accidental father? A qualified yes.
That they're avoidable.
I think it's reasons and, being married myself, I'm pretty sure I have a good idea. Compatibility, love, sex and a desire for the institution itself, for what comes with it, in a nutshell.
It wasn't though. It was just lonely. I understand. I went to four senior proms, beginning with my sophomore year. I always had a girl around, some romantic entanglement and drama. Then I stopped it. Just called a halt for two years. And you know when I did that? I was twenty one. Now nothing in this world is less suited to that than a twenty one year old male with options. So I understand how it can be and I understand you can survive it. And I didn't have faith in God at that point in my life. I just recognized that need and want aren't the same and that the former was a really bad idea where relationships were concerned.
No one should be married out of need. Everyone should marry out of a want to share themselves and their life. The former is unhealthy and I think will tend to place an unrealistic burden on a spouse and the life that comes with marriage.
It doesn't follow that it was marry right then or have a lonely miserable life. And I didn't say it was easy. I said it was objectively, demonstrably better on odds and I'd hate to think your exception would make the average young person looking on think, "See, it worked for her and it will work for me." Because kids normally think the first serious emotional connection is forever and it almost never is and it almost never will be the right call.
Unless you think single parent households is a good idea young marriage as a rule is a bad one. But I'm glad you made the exception.
Except consideration, judgment is impaired and impulse control is low and the result is that seven out of ten will be unhappy in the choice. Around six unhappy enough to end the marriage, even with kids underfoot.
As a rule, no.
No, everyone isn't. But most, for all their differences, who marry before the age of twenty five will see that marriage end badly.
Arguable. Why not?
1PeaceMaker
New member
Not without imposing needless misery. It's not good for a man to be alone. (or woman) It's a human rights issue. The ones marriage works for have the right to have it.
Oh, so you weren't driven by your biological imperative? It wasn't you getting married because the time was right for you? When the time is right, God brings the right person. Unbelievers would chalk it up to coincidence or there being a large pool of potentials. Whatever floats their boat.
No, loneliness causes/is a form of stress. Stress triggers problems with the health. I was having unrelenting bowel issues that "mysteriously" vanished when we married. I was stressed to the max and had had some strange sicknesses related to stress. I was also a happy and optimistic person as much as I could be and cheerful on the outside. When I married my health became robust quickly.
I never romantically entangled myself. I was morally opposed to dating. My fiancée was my first kiss.
So it was unnatural for you to be without a female companion and it caused you stress, making you consider a more serious kind of relationship? How long did you stay solitary that way?
Some people report that their spouse or SO saved their life in one way or another.
If it's not good to be alone then it's a need, according to God. I'm not ashamed to say I need to be a wife and mother. It makes me happy. And for me, when I'm happy I'm healthy.
I also married for love. I married for reasons that some would say don't make any sense, like the feeling that I had met the other half of myself. Like as though in another place and time we were already the best of friends.
But it's a lie if you tell yourself you don't need to share yourself and your life. You don't have to be unrealistic, you just don't want to be alone or without that dear special someone.
If that were true then you'd see a lot more people skipping out on the hardships of married life altogether. Many would rather prolong a contentious, difficult situation than live alone.
My first crush wasn't my fiancée. But the mother of my first crush actually was happily married at 17. For them it worked out great to go along with that first romance, and they were both loyal and tenderhearted, two essentials.
It wasn't a foolish choice for me, and isn't for a third of those who try.
That only proves that a larger percentage are fools with hard hearts, while 1/3 choose wisely.
Individual liberty protects those to whom it applies.
You say "most" like you get anything better than a dicy gamble 5 years or a decade later. Love is not one of those things you want to overly smother with rules, else you will have rebellion and misery.
Because it's not right. Social manipulation of those numbers by causing individual tragedies is ugliness. It would have been a tragedy if I had missed the first 5-7 years of my marriage.
And many tried to break us up, including trying to give us a wedding gift while telling my husband to annul weeks after we had already consummated the marriage.
1PeaceMaker
New member
Sums up the general attitude I see nicely. Different times means mocking those who found love young and used the strength of youth to be energetic parents together.
That's because you don't understand that prepping for adulthood is the prerequisite for being prepared for marriage.
Then again, I don't see our family as being supported by anyone other than our Father. We don't take credit that isn't due to us.
Another thing; multigenerational living is a great way to be for some families. You aren't against that, are you?
Who wants to do that?
I want them to stay home and take a long time to grow up. Who doesn't want to be the mom with adult kids in the home to help with child care, gardens and home business stuff? They could learn a lot from us for a long time if they wanted to, first.
They might want to move out by 16-17 to live on a college campus university. I wish they would take their time but you know kids.... they grow up so fast. It's not really going to be up to me if they fall in love at that point and want to get married. All I can try to do is inject some common sense into the situation. And up to 18 the law gives me enough power to prevent them from marrying if I wish.
1PeaceMaker
New member
I think the same should be true for a younger set than 25.
And for the ones for whom it doesn't work? You make it sound as though failed marriages are acceptable collateral damage.
See what I mean? You come across as uncaring for those who fail. Besides, by waiting just a few more years, the odds of a happy and successful marriage improve. If its true love, wont an couple of years mean nothing? And if it turns out that it is not true love, isn't it better that you waited to find out instead of divorcing?
Objectively, you can never know this to be true.
It is but only to a point. But a 25 year old adult is in a far better position to make that choice than a 15 year old child. That is the advice that I would offer to a teen.
Again. What is your definition of a child? You don't know right? You just throw that word around as an emotional manipulator , but devoid of any precise meaning.
If one is not able to legally enter into a contract that would be a pretty good indicator of still being a child.
Some countries dont allow non citizens to enter contracts. That would have made my 34 year wife a child to you.
Wow. Citizenship does not seem to me to be the same thing as having a minimum age at which a person can enter a legally binding contract. Why do you think there is a minimum age for being allowed to sign a contract?
Is English not your first language .... or is just convenient for you to pretend you don't understand the difference between a child/teen VS adult?
shagster01
New member
child/teen? Does that make an 18 year old a child still? They can enter into a contract. They can go to war.
shagster01
New member
Yet sometimes they are charged as adults in court for their actions.
What defines a child cannot be determined by age. A person may be old enough to sign a contract and still be a child in my book. The concept of contract is useless in determining who is a child and who isn't.
I know what a child is and what an adult is......nothing to do with age. It appears you don't have a firm grasp of these terms or you would easily be able to define them.
Which is wrong.