Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 20, 2013 20:40:07 GMT -5
I'm old-fashioned. Marriage is and should be until death do you part. By their very construction, wedleases presume a temporary relationship.
I certainly agree that couples should review, assess, and discuss what they're getting into before entering into a marriage covenant, but a wedlease is by no means required for this discussion to take place.
Let cohabitation be cohabitation and let marriage be marriage. Wedleases undermine the convenience and inexpensiveness of the former and the spirit of lifelong commitment in the latter, without providing any benefits besides lawyer's fees and the dubious privilege of calling oneself 'temporarily married'.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 20, 2013 20:48:37 GMT -5
If I were part of a religion that specified that I had the final say over all decisions in marriage, perhaps I'd feel as strongly about marriage as you do, too. Entering into a "union" where you have the ultimate control wouldn't be awful, especially if one were married to a person whose religion required them to willingly be the subordinate. I could definitely go along with the benevolent dictator arrangement. But for most women, that's not how things are, so it's not unreasonable that they might seek a more equitable arrangement.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,617
|
Post by swamp on Aug 20, 2013 20:50:46 GMT -5
If I were part of a religion that specified that I had the final say over all decisions in marriage, perhaps I'd feel as strongly about marriage as you do, too. Entering into a "union" where you have the ultimate control wouldn't be awful, especially if one were married to a person whose religion required them to willingly be the subordinate. I could definitely go along with the benevolent dictator arrangement. But for most women, that's not how things are, so it's not unreasonable that they might seek a more equitable arrangement. Heathen.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 20, 2013 20:52:19 GMT -5
If I were part of a religion that specified that I had the final say over all decisions in marriage, perhaps I'd feel as strongly about marriage as you do, too. Entering into a "union" where you have the ultimate control wouldn't be awful, especially if one were married to a person whose religion required them to willingly be the subordinate. I could definitely go along with the benevolent dictator arrangement. But for most women, that's not how things are, so it's not unreasonable that they might seek a more equitable arrangement. Heathen. Yes. I'm pretty sure if I were male and evangelical Christian, Catholic or Muslim, I'd be strongly pro-marriage. It's a good gig for them.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,617
|
Post by swamp on Aug 20, 2013 20:53:41 GMT -5
I dunno, DH is a white male Christian and he doesn't seem to be faring too well in the marriage thing. I can be kind of ornery.
Hes not evangelical, though, he's more of a live and let live be nice to people Christian.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 20, 2013 20:55:52 GMT -5
I dunno, DH is a white male Christian and he doesn't seem to be faring too well in the marriage thing. I can be kind of ornery. You're not doing it right. Virgil will tell you that your role is to defer to your husband's wishes. But don't worry, he has to "keep your best interests in mind" when making those decisions. So even if you don't like them and don't agree with them, it's fine because that's what God and your husband/boss have decided is best for you.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,617
|
Post by swamp on Aug 20, 2013 20:56:49 GMT -5
I did that. I ended up with a new pick up truck.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 20, 2013 20:59:27 GMT -5
Oh, and again, if I were male, I'd definitely want the whole "until death do you part" thing. Just look at retired couples. In many cases, the man has "retired" from his job, which means no more work, but the woman is still cooking, cleaning, doing laundry, etc. pretty much like she has done her whole life. And then it gets even better because most men don't live as long as women, so women get to take care of their husband until he dies and then live the rest of her 10+ years alone... Yep, if I were male, I'd definitely want a wife until I died. Good caretaker for me when I'm old and wrinkly.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 20, 2013 21:00:19 GMT -5
I did that. I ended up with a new pick up truck. Well surely that's OK then because we know a husband would never make a decision that wasn't in the best interest of his beloved wife.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,617
|
Post by swamp on Aug 20, 2013 21:02:12 GMT -5
I did that. I ended up with a new pick up truck. Well surely that's OK then because we know a husband would never make a decision that wasn't in the best interest of his beloved wife. Of course, I should never distrust his fiscal prudence. We needed a new truck since the other one was a whole 4 years old, had about 35,000 miles on it, and was paid for.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 20, 2013 21:24:41 GMT -5
You don't have to share my religious views on marriage to accept (all but the first two sentences of) Reply #36. But don't let me interrupt the Virgil fan club meeting.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 0:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2013 7:25:23 GMT -5
Awww....poor misunderstood Virgil. Now, now, ladies...I presume that Virgil's little lady prescribes to the same tenets as he does, so she willingly defers to her husband. Unless you found a spoon on her being on your wedding night... (sorry, couldn't resist!!! )
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,244
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Aug 21, 2013 7:48:14 GMT -5
I think the most valuable result of the whole wedlease idea would be to get people to talk about important details before they're married. So many couples never talk about the nitty gritty details that a wedlease would entail, that at least it would be a way for couples to determine if they are on the same page. It's a little like signing a Buy/Sell agreement when you form a partnership in a business. Forces the partners to think while times are good about how things will be handled when times are bad or they are no longer speaking. I think you are giving people too much credit. Look at all those shady mortgages that were signed without reading anything, because they wanted the house.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Aug 21, 2013 10:09:26 GMT -5
Personally, I'm all for anything that encourages both parties to know where they stand.
I can't speak for muslims, but the whole 'man is boss' isn't quite what the Bible teaches. That bible verse starts off with women 'be subordinate to your husbands', but ends with men 'love their wives just as Christ loves the church', which means he's going to do what the wife wants 99% of the time, only go toe to toe with his wife when it is vitally important, and the only reason the guy is in charge is to keep arguments from going on forever. When you get some Christian man who thinks he's going to be in charge, you're dealing with someone who is reading stuff out of context.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 21, 2013 10:40:39 GMT -5
If it comforts you to believe that having one sex dominate the other by default is simply a mechanism to solve arguments and that this always results in a fair system, then it's a good system for you and you should stick with it.
I might possibly begin to believe it's an equitable system if, for example, the couple took turns with being the benevolent dictator.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 21, 2013 10:46:06 GMT -5
It is, and we will. Best of luck with your own approach, whether or not that includes wedleases.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 0:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2013 10:47:39 GMT -5
I like it when everyone gets along!
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 21, 2013 10:56:13 GMT -5
It is, and we will. Best of luck with your own approach, whether or not that includes wedleases. Unfortunately, I'm fairly traditional myself and wedleases weren't around when I got married. At this point, the only option I have is to kill him off and think about a wedlease with the next vict... um, I mean volunteer.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Aug 21, 2013 11:31:13 GMT -5
If it comforts you to believe that having one sex dominate the other by default is simply a mechanism to solve arguments and that this always results in a fair system, then it's a good system for you and you should stick with it. I might possibly begin to believe it's an equitable system if, for example, the couple took turns with being the benevolent dictator. No, I'm just pointing out that the Christian understanding of marriage isn't as patriarchial as some people like to say. If you love someone enough to die for them, you could go decades or your whole marriage without ever using the "I'm the man" card.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 0:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2013 11:32:58 GMT -5
How about loving them enough that you want to kill them? Is that covered?!?
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 21, 2013 11:36:18 GMT -5
I'm fairly well aware that organized religion doesn't always follow Biblical teaching and that individuals especially are prone to cherry pick.
I'm also reasonably well versed in biblical teaching, so my issues with organized religion, individuals who practice certain forms of organized religion, etc. are not due to a lack of knowledge or understanding. I understand the tenets. I simply do not agree with them.
But if it makes you feel better to think of me as someone who only disagrees because she doesn't understand the truth, that's OK.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 21, 2013 11:36:44 GMT -5
How about loving them enough that you want to kill them? Is that covered?!? It was the best thing for him, really. His therapy wasn't going anywhere.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,617
|
Post by swamp on Aug 21, 2013 11:41:35 GMT -5
How about loving them enough that you want to kill them? Is that covered?!? It was the best thing for him, really. His therapy wasn't going anywhere. -note-I used to love him But I had to kill him............
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 0:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2013 11:42:38 GMT -5
And I can still hear him commmmplaaaaaiiiiiiiiinnnnn......
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Aug 21, 2013 11:45:19 GMT -5
I'm old-fashioned. Marriage is and should be until death do you part. By their very construction, wedleases presume a temporary relationship. I certainly agree that couples should review, assess, and discuss what they're getting into before entering into a marriage covenant, but a wedlease is by no means required for this discussion to take place. Let cohabitation be cohabitation and let marriage be marriage. Wedleases undermine the convenience and inexpensiveness of the former and the spirit of lifelong commitment in the latter, without providing any benefits besides lawyer's fees and the dubious privilege of calling oneself 'temporarily married'. Doesn't everyone already do that?
|
|