Best definition of marriage? (Also, polygamy)

More Than Mortal · May 31, 2015, 05:46:11 PM

It seems to me that the marriage debate centres around two prime definitions:

I) A cultural institution whereby society shapes and codifies the sexual behaviour which often leads to children, for the sake of those children.

Or, II) An emotional bond between two adults, which an incidental connection to procreation.

The first thing that strikes me is that the second definition doesn't seem to even justify having marriage as a social institution, at all. While I favour the legalisation of gay marriage, if marriage is simply an emotional bond then I don't really see any practical benefits of legal codification. (Full disclosure: I have no ambitions to get married myself).

Also, just out of interest, do we have any opponents of polygamy here? I've been drifting away from simply hewing to libertarian perspectives in the face of no counter-argument, but I remember a rather well-done post by LC ages ago that threw up some issues for polygamous relationships.

Turkey · May 31, 2015, 05:59:36 PM

As a Christian I consider marriage to be a literally sacred covenant between two people. Obviously that's not at all the institution we have in the secular world, and in that regard I see marriage as a legal binding between two consenting adults for the purpose of familial stability, economic convenience, social recognition, and a personal bond of love most importantly. Religiously, I'm opposed to polygamy and I don't see a particularly convincing secular argument for why it should be instituted. It seems like, as a society, we're not ready for its implementation by any means. I also think the family unit is essential to social stability, and I'm not really sure how widespread polygamy would affect that.

More Than Mortal · May 31, 2015, 06:02:05 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on May 31, 2015, 05:59:36 PM

and a personal bond of love most importantly.

I really don't understand why we need a social institution for that. Yeah, familial stability is all well and good (assuming children are part of the equation), social recognition is something I can understand, but if it all stems from a simple emotional bond I really don't see the point.

Turkey · May 31, 2015, 06:06:25 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on May 31, 2015, 06:02:05 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on May 31, 2015, 05:59:36 PM
and a personal bond of love most importantly.
I really don't understand why we need a social institution for that. Yeah, familial stability is all well and good (assuming children are part of the equation), social recognition is something I can understand, but if it all stems from a simple emotional bond I really don't see the point.

I think it's similar to how we impart certain rights and conveniences to business partners through incorporation. It provides a framework for legal proxy rights, joint banking and meting out benefits such as insurance, and custodial rights for children. The efficiency and legality of these institutions also yields more stability of family units as opposed to a more 'free agent' situation between the two.

If I wasn't religious I probably wouldn't see much point in marriage until I became older and it would actually be convenient.

Azumarill · May 31, 2015, 08:06:11 PM

It's rather silly that marriage is such a big deal. I'm a proponent of the second definition; as such, I don't think the institution should be regulated or defined by the state. Marriage has always existed as a diaspora, so I think it should remain a private institution defined by individuals.

Personally, I think formal/institutional marriage is pointless and hollow.

maverick · May 31, 2015, 08:22:06 PM

I go with the latter as to not discriminate against any groups. It's not like it really matters. I have no real opinion on polygamy though.

ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ · June 01, 2015, 12:35:09 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

June 01, 2015, 12:37:18 AM

Any consenting union between two or more of-age adults should be eligible for marriage.

BrenMan 94 · June 01, 2015, 01:16:18 AM

Marriage functions in society as a contract between two or more individuals which determines what property is shared, what happens to a person's personal goods in the event of death, etc. I don't really consider it a religious thing anymore, although I do find divorce despicable.

eggsalad · June 01, 2015, 01:34:01 AM

I consider marriage to be an economic union between two people that often entails codependency or other sharing of property and finances. Compared to the definitions you listed, mine seems to better address why marriages are afforded many rights that couples who aren't married aren't, and also why things become more complicated with polygamy.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · June 01, 2015, 03:42:56 AM

It's a civil union with benefits, but it has the connotation of love and one-ness.