Should traditional wedding vows be scuttled?

[hexaemeron]

As I was reading the Marriage / Divorce forums, I saw a reply from DN in a thread about a man who is going to uphold his marriage vows even though he wishes to move from his home and live alone for awhile to see if he wants to divorce.

 

DN asked him "What about upholding your other marriage vows" and then proceeded to list the traditional Christian/Western wedding vows.

 

With divorce being so prevalent, should a shift away from these ideas en masse be more realistic and prevent people from being disappointed? Should we set a more realistic standard, or continue to strive for something that eludes more people than not today?

[Cognitive_Canine]

I plan on writing my own vows.

 

Honestly, if marriage wasn't intended as forever, I wouldn't see the point to it.

[greywolf]

What are the traditional marriage vows anyway? Mine are definitely not going to say anything about 'obeying' .... >_>

[hexaemeron]

I plan on writing my own vows.

 

Honestly, if marriage wasn't intended as forever, I wouldn't see the point to it.

 

Interesting. With people living longer and longer lives every decade, I think this is something that honestly needs addressed. What happens when lifespans hit an average of 100? 150? 200? More?

 

The idea of "forever" changes almost every decade. It was easy to be married forever when all you did was tend animals and cook food, chop wood and die at 30. What forever means now is very different.

[Cognitive_Canine]

Interesting. With people living longer and longer lives every decade, I think this is something that honestly needs addressed. What happens when lifespans hit an average of 100? 150? 200? More?

 

The idea of "forever" changes almost every decade. It was easy to be married forever when all you did was tend animals and cook food, chop wood and die at 30. What forever means now is very different.

 

I think people should just get married later. If it wasn't for only capable of conceiving children thing, I would probably wait until 50 to actually settle down.

[hexaemeron]

Because I can't edit my posts right now... here's the snippit I saw from DN in the other thread:

 

I , (Name),

Take you, (Name),

To be my (wife/husband);

To have and to hold,

From this day forward,

For better, for worse,

For richer, for poorer,

In sickness and in health,

To love and to cherish,

'Till death do us part."

[pumpkinmoon]

Because I can't edit my posts right now... here's the snippit I saw from DN in the other thread:

 

I , (Name),

Take you, (Name),

To be my (wife/husband);

To have and to hold,

From this day forward,

For better, for worse,

For richer, for poorer,

In sickness and in health,

To love and to cherish,

'Till death do us part."

 

 

Why would you marry someone who you didn't intend to spend the rest of your life with?

[hexaemeron]

I think people should just get married later. If it wasn't for only capable of conceiving children thing, I would probably wait until 50 to actually settle down.

 

There's a book series I read that supposes that humans will discover functional immortality in this century. You grow, you age, and when you hit about 60, you go into a medical facility and sit in a big petri dish for 14 months as your cells are repaired and rejuvenated and you emerge from the pyrex chrysalis a new 18 year old, with all the life experiences you gained in your "first life" -- In this novel series, most people have marriages contracts that can be renewed at 5 year intervals, upon mutual agreement, and most people go on to live completely different lives than their "previous" ones. New marriages, new children, everything.

 

I think if we find ourselves with this sort of medical breakthrough (which, honestly, is entirely possible this century, without even taking Singularity into account), it seems reasonable that something like this would happen.

[hexaemeron]

Why would you marry someone who you didn't intend to spend the rest of your life with?

 

I don't know? Being realistic about marriage in our world today, I guess? I guess we should ask the millions of people who've already marriage someone and didn't spend a lifetime in the marriage.

[hexaemeron]

What are the traditional marriage vows anyway? Mine are definitely not going to say anything about 'obeying' .... >_>

 

I'm so with you here, grey.

[greywolf]

There's a book series I read that supposes that humans will discover functional immortality in this century. You grow, you age, and when you hit about 60, you go into a medical facility and sit in a big petri dish for 14 months as your cells are repaired and rejuvenated and you emerge from the pyrex chrysalis a new 18 year old, with all the life experiences you gained in your "first life" -- In this novel series, most people have marriages contracts that can be renewed at 5 year intervals, upon mutual agreement, and most people go on to live completely different lives than their "previous" ones. New marriages, new children, everything.

 

I think if we find ourselves with this sort of medical breakthrough (which, honestly, is entirely possible this century, without even taking Singularity into account), it seems reasonable that something like this would happen.

 

I read a sci-fi book like that once, but people could even change how they wanted their bodies to look... It involved people committing suicide a lot when they got bored of their bodies... Sorry for going OT... carry on...

[Cognitive_Canine]

There's a book series I read that supposes that humans will discover functional immortality in this century. You grow, you age, and when you hit about 60, you go into a medical facility and sit in a big petri dish for 14 months as your cells are repaired and rejuvenated and you emerge from the pyrex chrysalis a new 18 year old, with all the life experiences you gained in your "first life" -- In this novel series, most people have marriages contracts that can be renewed at 5 year intervals, upon mutual agreement, and most people go on to live completely different lives than their "previous" ones. New marriages, new children, everything.

 

I think if we find ourselves with this sort of medical breakthrough (which, honestly, is entirely possible this century, without even taking Singularity into account), it seems reasonable that something like this would happen.

 

Iunno, I'd still really want to be with the same person. One of the most romantic ideas is the idea that you were lovers in another life. That you'd 'met their soul before'. I know it's cheesy as all heck but I feel like my boyfriend and I probably knew each other in past lives. Probably as friends. We just click so well that it's a nice thought.

[greywolf]

Because I can't edit my posts right now... here's the snippit I saw from DN in the other thread:

 

I , (Name),

Take you, (Name),

To be my (wife/husband);

To have and to hold,

From this day forward,

For better, for worse,

For richer, for poorer,

In sickness and in health,

To love and to cherish,

'Till death do us part."

 

Yeah, I don't want mine to say that. I think I'd just want my vows to say something about how we'll keep each other's happiness as a priority.

[Cognitive_Canine]

I don't know? Being realistic about marriage in our world today, I guess? I guess we should ask the millions of people who've already marriage someone and didn't spend a lifetime in the marriage.

 

I don't think marriage has changed all that much. Look back in history...and it's just become more long term and requires more faithfulness.

 

A lot of people compare it to the 50's....however, this was a time of horrible sexism and repressed sexuality. Not exactly a great time, in my opinion.

 

I think marriage has only gotten stronger over the years. No more mistresses or concubines being acceptable. People marry for love now, not for business (well, most people anyway). People don't need to be married to have kids like they used to. They do it because they genuinely want to be married. Not as a means to the end (always exceptions but just in general).

[hexaemeron]

Iunno, I'd still really want to be with the same person. One of the most romantic ideas is the idea that you were lovers in another life. That you'd 'met their soul before'. I know it's cheesy as all heck but I feel like my boyfriend and I probably knew each other in past lives. Probably as friends. We just click so well that it's a nice thought.

 

So, if you had lived a full life with him, and you both were returned to 18 year old youth, you would not at all feel compelled to have a completely different life? Make different choices? Because, for all intents and purposes, you would have fulfilled the traditional requirement of a 'lifetime" committment. You would just be given a new life, basically after that one.

[hexaemeron]

I don't think marriage has changed all that much. Look back in history...and it's just become more long term and requires more faithfulness.

 

A lot of people compare it to the 50's....however, this was a time of horrible sexism and repressed sexuality. Not exactly a great time, in my opinion.

 

I think marriage has only gotten stronger over the years. No more mistresses or concubines being acceptable. People marry for love now, not for business (well, most people anyway). People don't need to be married to have kids like they used to. They do it because they genuinely want to be married. Not as a means to the end (always exceptions but just in general).

 

I don't know about this. I think a lot of men simply feel pressured to get married, and women well admit to manipulating situations to get the ring. Maybe it's not that marriage needs overhauled, but the reasons for getting married, might?

[misssmithviii]

Your vows are your own choice, I see no reason why it must be limited. If you want your vows to be a certain way (more 'realistic' or setting the standard lower so as to not risk disappointment) then that's fully your choice. Of course I suggest you inform whomever you're in a relationship with that this is how you feel.

 

I personally do not find those traditional vows to be difficult or something to strive for, it comes naturally for me when I'm in love and loved back. I certainly wouldn't marry someone who didn't agree with me, so as long as you have a good understanding with your partner then that's really what matters IMHO.

[ProtestTheHero]

I think it's unrealistic to feel that you could truly love a spouse forever. I think that the reason why marriages fail fairly often is that expectation. It's not unconditional love the way some blood relationships are. It's very much conditional, so what the person does can and will alter the way and even degree to which you love that person. How that person will act will most likely change over time as it's inevitable. You either change with them or learn to love this person as he/she may no longer be an accurate representation of the person you married, you realize that a big part of long-term marriages are based more on hard work and compromise than love, or you decide that hard work and compromise and those changes that inevitably occur are too much for you to handle. Now you're no longer happy, you fall out of love, and you divorce. It's not something you can always foresee.

 

I think there needs to be a couple "if I feel like it" phrases thrown in vows somewhere.

[Cognitive_Canine]

So, if you had lived a full life with him, and you both were returned to 18 year old youth, you would not at all feel compelled to have a completely different life? Make different choices? Because, for all intents and purposes, you would have fulfilled the traditional requirement of a 'lifetime" committment. You would just be given a new life, basically after that one.

 

If I'd already lived a full life and been happy with my partner, what is the point in starting anew? Many people covet the kind of connection I have with my partner. Can you just throw that stuff a way and say 'it doesn't count anymore'? I don't think I could. Just starting over seems like an injustice to all we've had and sort of taking for granted what we've been through.

[hexaemeron]

You know, I actually really like the "Let's try 5 years and see what happens" concept. You can still have a lifetime committment, if that's what you want, but there's a tacit understanding that if both parties aren't happy at the conclusion of term, they can exit amicably with pre-agreed division of assets and custody rights.

[hexaemeron]

If I'd already lived a full life and been happy with my partner, what is the point in starting anew? Many people covet the kind of connection I have with my partner. Can you just throw that stuff a way and say 'it doesn't count anymore'? I don't think I could. Just starting over seems like an injustice to all we've had and sort of taking for granted what we've been through.

 

I'm not saying that you'd have to cast him out. I'm sure he'd still be in your life. You'd still have children, grandchildren, great-grands, etc. But you'd just take this next cycle of life to live differently.

[sophie274]

It's a bit off-topic, because I'm not commenting on wedding vows per se, but the fact is, marriage in the 21st century is not the huge sham and failure that people often make it out to be. If you wait to get married until you are late 20s, early 30s, and get a college education before getting married, your odds of staying married are VERY high. Those marriages are overwhelmingly successful. It's a lot of the very young marriages that skew the divorce rates, and certain socio-economic groups (and not saying that's "their" fault, but it's the way it is). So honestly, get a college education, do your thing in your twenties, marry someone with your eyes open, be willing to work at it, and you've got a very good chance of a lifetime partnership.

 

On wedding vows - yeah, people can do whatever they want, and I don't think anyone nowadays feels forced into traditional vows. Most couples I know have written their own. And yes, there are some things in the traditional vows that are outdated - "obeying" language, and specifics about reproducing like rabbits.

 

However, I don't think I would attend a wedding where the vows said something to the effect of "We're in love now, let's enjoy the ride, this probably won't last forever, and we have permission to leave each other if things go badly in terms of money or health, but hey, here's to LOVE" - because in that case, I've been "married" to every single one of my boyfriends. Not much special about that, in my opinion. I mean, to me, the whole idea of marriage is that it's a big, tough, momentous commitment that you're undertaking because you think it's going to be wonderful in the long run, and at the wedding you ask people to come together and witness to that and support your union as best they can, and they are partly there to hold you accountable to the promise you made to your partner, yourself and your friends (and your deity, if applicable) that day. If people want to make a short-term union, great, but I don't think it should be cloaked as "marriage". The term does mean LIFETIME partnership, and I think it should remain as such, even if many elect not to do it because they can't stomach the commitment.

 

Oh, and as for the issue of body regeneration ... doesn't sound realistic to me at all, but if it happens, maybe I'll change my stance. Sounds creepy though. IMO, all good things must come to an end - I'd like to die at some point, please.

[sophie274]

You know, I actually really like the "Let's try 5 years and see what happens" concept. You can still have a lifetime committment, if that's what you want, but there's a tacit understanding that if both parties aren't happy at the conclusion of term, they can exit amicably with pre-agreed division of assets and custody rights.

 

And if that's what people want, I think they should go ahead, but why get married? Just draw up a little 5-year contract (I find this a bit amusing (just the turn of phrase, not the idea, given how bad of a track-record five-year plans tend to have - USSR anyone?)) and sign with a flourish. Why rename marriage when there are still people willing to go whole hog and abide by the lifetime rule?

[misssmithviii]

This is beginning to sound very much like a business proposal

 

Why not try for the best and come what may, react in accordance? Why is it that so many people focus so much on the possibilities of failure rather than the hope towards a success? So much so they end up saying scr*w it and never even going for it?

 

I am still, at heart, quite a skeptical person. However in that regard, I find it tiring to always think of what could happen and all the reasons behind getting involved in the first place if there's a chance of failure.

 

There's always a chance of failure. In everything in life. There's always the possibility, isn't there?

 

I do believe love is conditional. I live by a code I've written myself over the years. And my wedding vows will reflect that code. If I wanted to write vows for every possibility and condition, it would take hours, perhaps even days!

But even in the event that my partner does not uphold his vows, divorce is much less of a disappointment to me than never trying at all.

 

I kind of rambled there, hope there was some sense in that

[Cognitive_Canine]

I agree with this completely.

 

This is why I don't really pay attention to the statistics. 25%, you say? Well, that's good because most people I know are complete morons. So, even most of the incompetent have successful marriage.