Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

2004 Issues: does anyone know couples who think marriage is a stigma?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 08:15 AM
Original message
Poll question: 2004 Issues: does anyone know couples who think marriage is a stigma?
Do you know couples, same sex or opposite sex, who think of marriage as a stigma, and therefore don't get married?

I do.

In some respects, they're crazy. Marriage confers lots of valuable social and economic benefits that shift power from their wealthy employers down to their working/middle class asses. They forego those benefits because they don't like the religious/spiritual implications of marriage.

I think that if the government got out of the business of saying that there was a spiritual element to the rights marrigage confers on them (ie, if the government ONLY issued civil unions to everyone, and got out of the marrigage business altogether), these people would get civil unions and they'd be wealthier and more powerful.

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LibInternationalist Donating Member (861 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
1. I think that's pretty silly --
I'm married and a devout atheist. I think that marriage is an important cultural and societal practice, which is why it upsets me when religion claims it for its own. For the record, I am also strongly in favor of the right of any two adults to marry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. But do you know other people who won't get married because they see it
as a stigma -- a silly religious, spiritual construct that conflicts with their Marxist views of the world, or whatever?

I do.

I think that if the governmentn were only in the business of issuing civil unions, not only would we help lots of same sex couples, but we'd help lots of these people too.

And nothing would stop anyone from getting married in a church or anywhere else if they needed to satisfy their spiritual desires.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibInternationalist Donating Member (861 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. oh sure, I do
and I agree with what you're saying, to a point -- "married" sounds a lot better than "civil unionized", for example :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. The word people like this use if they bite the bullet: "partner"
Edited on Wed Feb-11-04 09:30 AM by AP
So they've "partnered."

That can't even bear to say "married" or "husband" or "wife" even when they've done it.

See, marriage is a big stigma among some. It's funny that people are fighting to get the government deeper into it rather than fighting to get the government out of their spiritual and emotional relationships with others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
4. me
we have been married for 20 years and have 4 kids. but, for the most part, our families do not know that we ever tied the knot. not so much thinking that marriage is stupid- it is a simple legal contract that protects me, as a full time mom, and our kids and property. mostly it had to do with refusing to ask permission and "blessing" for our relationship. we knew right away that we were going to stay together. we have hardly spent a night apart since the day we met. we got a lot of s*&^ from out families in the 2 years that we just lived together. so, we just said, fu.
i also objected to any illusion that i was any less than an autonomous person. especially since i decided to stay home to take care of the kids, that is a struggle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheilaT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Just curious, do you still use your original last name,
or did you change it to his when you got married?

I've been married 23 years now, two kids, never changed my last name. Which occasionally leads people to assume my husband and I are not married. And I'm likewise a stay at home mom and what I want sometimes to say to people who think I'm a parasite or worse, is that I'm doing the single most important job in the world. Or to ask, who's raising their kids?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheilaT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
6. I don't think I've ever known anyone
who considers marriage a stigma, but I've known many who thought that it was "just a piece of paper" and felt they didn't need that piece of paper. Sometimes they learned the hard way that the piece of paper guaranteed essential rights and safeguards, not to mention inheritance.

If you're committed enough to stay together for years and perhaps have a child or several together, you ought to give serious thought to the protections of marriage.

Which is exactly why same sex couples need at the very least to be guaranteed the same civil rights as a male/female couple.

On the other hand, sometimes elderly people choose to live together and not get married because they'd lose pension or social security benefits if they tied the knot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-04 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I just had friends over last week who are having a child but not getting
Edited on Wed Feb-11-04 09:38 AM by AP
married because they think of marriage as a stigma.

They're crazy. But they're right that it's fucked up that our government imports spiritual and religious (quasi or otherwise) meaning in the determination of whether they can have certain rights (and duties).

If the government limited itself to a material conferring of rights, as they do when people form corporations or get drivers licenses, I have no doubt that this couple would register for those rights (especially if you could do it by internet).

And who benefits because they don't? Well, I suppose insurance companies do, and their employers do, because it makes their life more expensive, and shifts their money to third parties who are already rich.

And we, as liberals, should be articulating arguments about this issue that help everyone, including people like this, keep more of their money and power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 24th 2014, 06:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC