Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Dennis Prager :: Townhall.com Columnist
Five non-religious arguments for marriage over living together
by Dennis Prager
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Many women callers to my radio show have told me that the man in their life sees no reason to marry. "It's only a piece of paper," these men (and now some women) argue.

There are two answers to this argument.

One is that if in fact "it is only a piece of paper," what exactly is he so afraid of? Why does he fear a mere piece of paper? Either he is lying to himself and to his woman or lying only to her because he knows this piece of paper is far more than "only a piece of paper."

The other response is all that is written above. Getting married means I am now your wife, not your live-in; I am now your husband, not your significant other. It means that we get to have a wedding where, before virtually every person alive who means anything to us, we commit ourselves to each other. It means that we have decided to bring all these people we love into our lives. It means we have legal obligations to one another. It means my family becomes yours and yours becomes mine.

Thank God my children, ages 30 and 23, decided to marry. Their partners are now my daughter-in-law and son-in-law. They are therefore now mine to love, not merely two people whom my children love.

When you realize all that is attainable by marrying and unattainable by living together without marrying, you have to wonder why anyone would voluntarily choose not to marry the person he or she wishes to live with forever.

Unless, of course, one of you really isn't planning on forever.

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dennis Prager's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Fascinating thread
Someone posting here said people are living longer, so marriage rules should change, and asked what we would do when people are regularly living to 150 or so.

As someone married once and who celebrated 34 years in that relationship as of last July, all I can say is I hope that we both live to 150 and enjoy the rest of our life together as much as--or more than--we have so far.

This is not to say it's been a marriage full of happiness and joy. It's been painful at times, frustrating at others, but always a learning experience, and with enough good times to make up for the bad ones.

We do happen to be a childless couple, partly because major depression runs in my family (along with a few other genetic issues), and partly because my husband had mumps as a teen. At this late date, it's impossible to say if our lack of children was because of my use of contraception for the first ten years of marriage or not. Lack of financial stability was also a factor because neither of us wanted to try raising children if we couldn't be reasonably certain of our ability to provide for them. So call us fearful and immature, if you like. We served many times as aunt and uncle to the children of friends.

Five years ago (almost), we took in a young woman who had been badly abused as a child, first by her mother, then by her stepmother, then by her first and second husbands. This has been quite a learning experience for us, me in particular--to have to deal with someone else's child and attempt to provide a safe haven for her to come to terms with the pain and anger she feels about what was done to her.

As boomers, my husband and I have managed to avoid the "If it feels good, do it" mentality. On the other hand, as I observe and listen to our "foster" daughter, I have to sigh over how much our generation did to ruin the lives of so many children.

Yes, there is a HUGE difference between making the lifetime commitment of a marriage and being content just to shack up. A lifetime commitment means exactly that--and it means you have to be willing to work out your differences, preferably by listening to each other.

As for the two posters complaining about how the divorce laws favor women, too true. A good friend of mine is in his third marriage. Two children from his first marriage have finally grown up to where he no longer needs to pay child support for them, but his son by his second wife is still a burden, expecially because his ex-wife has him in therapy for the "crime" of being a boy.

Plus, my friend also has two children by his current wife. As he is the sole support for them (they are pre-school aged), he and his current wife have had financial difficulties since they got married. I feel for them, though all I can do is, from time to time, be a shoulder to cry on and sometimes to provide suggestions for ways to deal with their financial problems.

Life is hard, and we all have to get used to it--and learn how to help each other, something not easy to do in a society becoming as fragmented as ours.

Just a thought.

marriage
This is just an attempt to write about non-religious reasons which is totally saturated with religous assumptions. There are obvious problems with all these points even if you do think marriage is mostly positive so this is obviously only meant to preach to the converted.

1. Unless of course you make a public commitment to a partner but don’t marry them. Duh!
2. Statement, yes. But positive or negative depends on what marriage means to that particular person.
3. Ever heard of contracts? Those are legal commitments too.
4. If they only turn up for the free food and entertainment at a wedding are they really that close to you? If they cared they would be there to greet your children and other important markers in you life all the really important people do.
5. If you need a piece of paper to work out that the parents of your grandchildren are related to you then what happens when divorce hits or there isn’t a wedding. (a) Will they still think of you as family when divorced or (b) will the non-married partner keep their distance because they know to you they aren’t proper family?
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.