# Traditional marriage, is it becoming a thing of the past ?



## Milkman (Jan 27, 2015)

This is not a  thread to be judgmental of anyone or their lifestyle. Just an information sharing if anyone wants to discuss with it staying on topic. 

50 years ago when I was a child I didn't know of any couples who lived together without being married. I am sure there were some, but I was a kid living a wonderful and sheltered life in a rural north Georgia setting. Today I think I know almost as many folks who have a long term relationship or live together without being married as those who are married. These folks are getting along as fine or better than other couples who got legally married and are getting divorced after a short while.

Is our society changing from the traditional marriage standard of the past ? Any thoughts on the matter ??


----------



## K80 (Jan 27, 2015)

The government gives motivation for some of it especially young couples with kids.   Heck we could increase our disposable income significantly by getting divorced and letting my wife draw all benefits she would qualify for a a signal mother with no income. 

A couple times a year I mention getting a divorce but she insist she's not willing to burn in he'll.   You know divorce (this not to imply everyone that gets divorced his to he'll) , fraud,  and all that.   I say if the people that never get married and get those benefits can go to heaven we could too...


----------



## SarahFair (Jan 27, 2015)

I believe so.

The SO and I have been together over 11 years and haven't wed. We've thought about it and I'm not saying we won't ever..

Were happy, our children are happy. 
The sanctity of marriage in my eyes is long lost. Look at the examples around.
If that's what marriage is, no thanks


----------



## pstrahin (Jan 27, 2015)

In todays society, everything is ok.  There is nothing sacred, special, preferential or held in high regard.  It is a free for all.  Therefore people no longer see the need for traditional marriage.  They will not be frowned upon by their friends and family for cohabitating.  I know many people that are living this way, my son and his girlfriend are.


----------



## Atlanta Dawg (Jan 27, 2015)

*Yes....*



Milkman said:


> This is not a  thread to be judgmental of anyone or their lifestyle. Just an information sharing if anyone wants to discuss with it staying on topic.
> 
> 50 years ago when I was a child I didn't know of any couples who lived together without being married. I am sure there were some, but I was a kid living a wonderful and sheltered life in a rural north Georgia setting. Today I think I know almost as many folks who have a long term relationship or live together without being married as those who are married. These folks are getting along as fine or better than other couples who got legally married and are getting divorced after a short while.
> 
> Is our society changing from the traditional marriage standard of the past ? Any thoughts on the matter ??



You observe correctly....


----------



## Gadestroyer74 (Jan 27, 2015)

Yep ! Said to say the ways of old we know or knew are only meaningful to those who where raised or grew up that way. Modern ways and people and government change to allow things are the way it's going to stay. Cherish it while you can it's becoming extinct for most


----------



## OmenHonkey (Jan 27, 2015)

I am not married "anymore" However I am Engaged and plan to wed on February 30th. LOL It took her 3 months to figure that one out. HAHA. I want to get married but as stated above the future bride stands to lose a lot of income by having to insure herself and her kids. I will pick up the tab when the day comes that we do decide to tie the knot. BUT I AIN"T IN NO HURRY!!!!! HAHA

But, in response yes it seems to be diminishing rather rapidly but there are still some of us that hold it sacred. My daughter talks of her wedding day often and she's 13..........


----------



## REDMOND1858 (Jan 27, 2015)

Me and my wife lived together before we were married....it's hard to really know someone until you live with them. And if you don't really know them, how can you be for sure you want to marry them? I also believe in doing everything in your power to make the marriage work, and staying married to the one you promised forever to, forever.
I know it's kinda off topic, but when does a marriage really begin? The first time you promise that person you'll be theirs forever, or the day someone at the courthouse notarizes a piece of paper?


----------



## T-N-T (Jan 27, 2015)

REDMOND1858 said:


> Me and my wife lived together before we were married....it's hard to really know someone until you live with them. And if you don't really know them, how can you be for sure you want to marry them?



Saved me from a terrible "almost marriage"
I was engaged for about a year when I moved in with my fiance.  6 months before the wedding.  We bought our first house together and needed to live together to afford it.  
10 days before the wedding I came home and told her it just wasnt not ever gonna happen.  (talk about an OMG moment)
Anyhow,  the next time around I didnt do it that way.  Got engaged and went the hole distance and got married.  Never ever looked back.

I guess some times you need a trial run and some times you dont.

Fact is,  I feel that if you are married,  you should cherish it.  Do what you should to make it work.  Make sure it is on your mind in every decision you make.

If your not married and "shacking up" I dont care.  I have done both and dont have a problem either way.

I would rather someone live together for years on end and do right by each other and their kids than get married because their parents pushed them to.  And then resent one another and raise kids in a bad environment.

I dont know if marriage is less sacred,  but more thought out before simply "jumping in".    Or sometimes some just plunge without concern


----------



## fish hawk (Jan 27, 2015)

Not trying to open a can of worms here but God views marriage as being sacred so why shouldn't I.I know there's a lot of people that don't have this view but I also know there's still some that do.


----------



## Big7 (Jan 27, 2015)

I did the "try it before you buy it plan" back in the 90's.

After a year with not so much as a cross word, I bought the cow.

Not long after a ring and honeymoon that cost me a fortune,
she turned into a rattlesnake.

If we had not married, I believe we would still be together today.

I'm a little older now (33) at the time.
Don't think I want to try it again.
Almost did though in 2010.

I'll pass on the nup's.

A good girl (WITHOUT KIDS AT HOME) would be nice.

Seems like the kids and grandparents get into everyone's business..

So, they can raise them, feed them and NOT come to me when
some kind of catastrophe happens..

Don't think I'll go that route again.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 27, 2015)

Maybe there's legal secular marriage and there's spiritual religious marriage. Couples can be one or the other or both.
I guess as each generation develops different morals and folkways, we see changes that were once taboo.
It's tattoos for me and talking back to adults. For others it's premarital sex and living together.
It used to be frowned upon to get married at any place other than a Church.


----------



## T-N-T (Jan 27, 2015)

Yall are on to something.  
If 2 people view themselves as together but never had a ceremony...
well, I dont argue religion or politics.
Different generations is all.  Things of 300 years ago would make folks all over who think their train of thought is the perfect train gasp for air.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 27, 2015)

fish hawk said:


> Not trying to open a can of worms here but God views marriage as being sacred so why shouldn't I.I know there's a lot of people that don't have this view but I also know there's still some that do.




Good point !!  And I think everyone responding and reading here agrees with your opinion being sacred is right for you.

 But I have a question that I contemplated putting in the OP earlier.......Do you think God is more keen on commitment in a relationship, or a license from down at the Courthouse being filled out by someone after a ceremony?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 27, 2015)

TopherAndTick said:


> Yall are on to something.
> If 2 people view themselves as together but never had a ceremony...
> well, I dont argue religion or politics.
> Different generations is all.  Things of 300 years ago would make folks all over who think their train of thought is the perfect train gasp for air.



Amen!


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 27, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Good point !!  And I think everyone responding and reading here agrees with your opinion being sacred is right for you.
> 
> But I have a question that I contemplated putting in the OP earlier.......Do you think God is more keen on commitment in a relationship, or a license from down at the Courthouse being filled out by someone after a ceremony?


----------



## shakey gizzard (Jan 27, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Good point !!  And I think everyone responding and reading here agrees with your opinion being sacred is right for you.
> 
> But I have a question that I contemplated putting in the OP earlier.......Do you think God is more keen on *commitment in a relationship*, or a license from down at the Courthouse being filled out by someone after a ceremony?



Would be my vote!


----------



## egomaniac247 (Jan 27, 2015)

SarahFair said:


> I believe so.
> 
> The SO and I have been together over 11 years and haven't wed. We've thought about it and I'm not saying we won't ever..
> 
> ...




First let me say I respect your choice.

I just was curious around the background behind it.  Is it a lack of trust that one day the relationship might go sour?  Is it just not important to you?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just curious, that's all.  


Anyways - as a general statement I think there's plenty of very strong loving traditional marriages going on out there....they're everywhere.  You just don't hear about them b/c they're "normal" and there's nothing newsworthy about that.


----------



## Flash (Jan 27, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Good point !!  And I think everyone responding and reading here agrees with your opinion being sacred is right for you.
> 
> But I have a question that I contemplated putting in the OP earlier.......Do you think God is more keen on commitment in a relationship, or a license from down at the Courthouse being filled out by someone after a ceremony?



 You asking living together but committed vs legally wed but not committed???


----------



## Milkman (Jan 27, 2015)

Flash said:


> You asking living together but committed vs legally wed but not committed???



Not really,wondering what do our posters think about God's view of the marriage license requirement of our governments?


----------



## Milkman (Jan 27, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


>




So are you saying God wants to see commitment instead of a license ?


----------



## KDarsey (Jan 27, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Good point !!  And I think everyone responding and reading here agrees with your opinion being sacred is right for you.
> 
> But I have a question that I contemplated putting in the OP earlier.......Do you think God is more keen on commitment in a relationship, or a license from down at the Courthouse being filled out by someone after a ceremony?


  I will 1st say that I was raised in the Baptist Church...blahblahblah...
 I got married & was for almost 25 years. I have been divorced for going on 15 years now. I've had a couple of relationships & the last one was a 6 year mostly a mistake...maybe all mistake. I admit I was weak & maybe I felt I 'needed' a woman. We didn't live together but I did stay at her house a lot.  She wanted to get married but honestly there were too many issues & I finally grew a set & walked.  I could go on but my main thing is some women & SOME men at an older age as some of us are IMO want to marry for the wrong reasons. Financial Security is not a good reason. I didn't want or need her money (& I think she had a nice nest egg) I have my own.  But when there are things one won't let go of a happy life won't be had.
Thank goodness I never married her. Life is easier & much better today.
  I think because of money,insurance & other perks you have there  are marriages that are tolerated by 2 unhappy people.
 She wasn't willing to commit to being a one man woman & she loved to visit the 'bottle shop' too often for my tastes. 
  One more & I'll quit. Mostly women it seems at the age of say 40-^ may be widows (some men are widowers) but in a lot of cases women are receiving a pretty healthy retirement,etc. that if they marry they lose. I wouldn't give that up if it were me.
  I think commitment is key. Papers or not.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jan 27, 2015)

I think that the courts have doomed marriage as we have known it. It will soon be nothing but a civil union with few restrictions. Just a legal union of two people. 
When that happens the benefits of such a union will be less because of the economics of scale. The cost will be to great for it to be as it is now.
But. Each individual will still have the right to enter into their concept of a sanctified union according to their own religious beliefs. It will just be outside of the legal concept.
Maybe it should have been this way all along?


----------



## SarahFair (Jan 28, 2015)

egomaniac247 said:


> First let me say I respect your choice.
> 
> I just was curious around the background behind it.  Is it a lack of trust that one day the relationship might go sour?  Is it just not important to you?
> 
> I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just curious, that's all.


I trust the SO with every once of my being. I don't think he would ever pull one over on me.

Its just the thought of a government contact that makes me feel trapped.
I don't understand why they have to be involved. 

I don't understand the whole name changing,  why all of a sudden Im property of my husband, Mr's Jones. 

I don't agree with that. I am my own person. 


I'm not of Christian faith but I have a good relationship with God. I think he understands where I stand and I think that's all that matters.  

I won't deny I would like to wear a wedding dress and celebrate our relationship with our friends and family. We have a lot to be proud of. 
If we did do something like that i don't think I'd bring the courts into it. 


At the end of the day we are happily guiding and assisting  ourselves, each other, our children and our community in the best way we can. Isn't that what life is all about?


----------



## Throwback (Jan 28, 2015)

If two people are not legally married but are "common law" married will the "spouse" get any death benefits if the other dies?



T


----------



## SarahFair (Jan 28, 2015)

Throwback said:


> If two people are not legally married but are "common law" married will the "spouse" get any death benefits if the other dies?
> 
> 
> 
> T



I think Georgia did away with common law, didnt they?


----------



## Milkman (Jan 28, 2015)

Throwback said:


> If two people are not legally married but are "common law" married will the "spouse" get any death benefits if the other dies?
> 
> 
> 
> T



Death benefits from who ?


----------



## rjcruiser (Jan 28, 2015)

pstrahin said:


> In todays society, everything is ok.  There is nothing sacred, special, preferential or held in high regard.  It is a free for all.  Therefore people no longer see the need for traditional marriage.  They will not be frowned upon by their friends and family for cohabitating.



This



fish hawk said:


> Not trying to open a can of worms here but God views marriage as being sacred so why shouldn't I.I know there's a lot of people that don't have this view but I also know there's still some that do.



This



Milkman said:


> Good point !!  And I think everyone responding and reading here agrees with your opinion being sacred is right for you.
> 
> But I have a question that I contemplated putting in the OP earlier.......Do you think God is more keen on commitment in a relationship, or a license from down at the Courthouse being filled out by someone after a ceremony?




IMHO....I believe God requires both.  He answered the Pharisees saying we should pay to Ceaser what is Ceasers....so, we should obey the laws that are in place.  Also, God has a specific plan for marriage...sex...and how two should live together.

But...in today's generation, sex is nothing special.  It is a tool used to manipulate others.  The thought of multiple partners or trial runs is now the norm.

So...why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?


----------



## Yota Love (Jan 28, 2015)

I like the thoughts of a traditional marriage.I believe it should be forever.....As stated in Vow's until Death Do Us Part.

However,after the 2 of been through,I will not marry again.Been dating one person for 2 years and we get along well.She wants marriage and I do not.

I don't desire to be with anyone but her.I'm committed to her.I've prayed about it and still feel the same way at the end of that prayer.

I believe it is a thing of the past in traditional since.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 28, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> IMHO....I believe God requires both



Interesting point..... Does anyone know how recent the concept of a "marriage license" is ? 

I have to think that the folks who came to North America and started the colonies may not have had a probate court office to sell them a marriage license.  They also probably didn't have anyone to issue a ministers license to their preacher either


----------



## Fuzzy D Fellers (Jan 28, 2015)

Two types of marriage one sanctioned by the state.  One is a pledge before God. A state marriage is just a legal contract.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 28, 2015)

Marriage ceremonies dated back to the beginning of spoken history.  There has always been someway of the society to recognize the union of two people.  We really screwed up when we went from it being a holy union to a civil union.

IMHO, the gooberment should not be dabbling the marriage issue at all.  They have no business there.  The couple should be able to decide how the ceremony should be performed, and who should be able to do it.  The only concern of the gooberment should be to document the family unit for a census, as required by the constitution.


----------



## Throwback (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Death benefits from who ?



Dead persons estate


T


----------



## 660griz (Jan 28, 2015)

As long as there is some financial benefit, it will remain. Traditional meaning legal. 
From my experience, I pay less taxes, pay less insurance, easier to get loans, jobs, etc. 
If and when the benefits lessen, more than already have, marriage will surely go the route of the Do Do bird.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 28, 2015)

Throwback said:


> Dead persons estate
> 
> 
> T



A persons will and beneficiary designations determines that, not marital status.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Interesting point..... Does anyone know how recent the concept of a "marriage license" is ?



Nope...and really, does it matter?

From a moral/Biblical standpoint (I know some might equate those differently), it doesn't matter.  The government has put the "marriage license" in place...and we should live under the submission of the government God has put in place...as long as that government isn't telling us to go against what is taught in the Bible.  I don't see how the marriage license is anti-Biblical...so...imho, we should have it if we are going to be married.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Interesting point..... Does anyone know how recent the concept of a "marriage license" is ?
> 
> I have to think that the folks who came to North America and started the colonies may not have had a probate court office to sell them a marriage license.  They also probably didn't have anyone to issue a ministers license to their preacher either





rjcruiser said:


> Nope...and really, does it matter?
> 
> From a moral/Biblical standpoint (I know some might equate those differently), it doesn't matter.  The government has put the "marriage license" in place...and we should live under the submission of the government God has put in place...as long as that government isn't telling us to go against what is taught in the Bible.  I don't see how the marriage license is anti-Biblical...so...imho, we should have it if we are going to be married.



You have a good point.

But my thought with my quoted post above, is that those who settled here before the government began licensing ministers and marriage licenses were betrothed to each other by commitment or by a simple ceremony by a person who took on the role of minister, Correct? 
I think they were married, just not under a license from the local government like today's traditional marriage.


----------



## The Longhunter (Jan 28, 2015)

Throwback said:


> If two people are not legally married but are "common law" married will the "spouse" get any death benefits if the other dies?
> T



Maybe.

It's a common misconception, but "common law marriage" has the same legal status as a ceremonial wedding.  A more correct statement is that you are married through the common law.  But once you are "married" it doesn't make any legal difference how you got there.

Just for the record, Georgia, a long time common law state, disallowed the formation of common law marriages a few years ago.  Marriages formed before that date are still recognized as valid.

The reason I say "maybe" is because EACH common law marriage is fact specific, and the burden will be on the surviving spouse to prove to the provider of benefits that there was a marriage by common law.  Social Security is pretty easy, the providers of private benefits, not so much.

A real common misconception is that if you have a "common law marriage" you can have a "common law divorce", i.e. just move out.  Doesn't work that way because as stated you're just as married as if the preacher had read vows to you.  You get all the "benefits" of marriage --alimony, property division, child support and so on.

Common law issues are always interesting because they are so fact specific, and usually they only become issues because one party is saying "yea" and one party is saying "nay".


----------



## rjcruiser (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> You have a good point.
> 
> But my thought with my quoted post above, is that those who settled here before the government began licensing ministers and marriage licenses were betrothed to each other by commitment or by a simple ceremony by a person who took on the role of minister, Correct?
> I think they were married, just not under a license from the local government like today's traditional marriage.



Gotcha...and yes, I'd say that you are correct.

They probably abstained from kissing and smooching before marriage as well...but, maybe I'm just old fashioned in my thinking.


----------



## pstrahin (Jan 28, 2015)

fish hawk said:


> Not trying to open a can of worms here but God views marriage as being sacred so why shouldn't I.I know there's a lot of people that don't have this view but I also know there's still some that do.



And so do I. It is good to know there are still some of us around.


----------



## The Longhunter (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> were betrothed to each other by commitment or by a simple ceremony by a person who took on the role of minister, Correct?
> 
> I think they were married, just not under a license from the local government like today's traditional marriage.




Missed this post, but you are correct.

In a true common law marriage, the parties can become married by a mutual exchange of vows (either expressed or implied) with no officiant.


----------



## grouper throat (Jan 28, 2015)

To sum it up, I think it is a breakdown of morals in society. I have done the living in sin and divorce, and the divorce really left me with a bad outlook of marriage and family court although I married again and could not be happier. I view marriage as a holy covenant but can see why others in our society do not especially if they are not religious.


----------



## Throwback (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> A persons will and beneficiary designations determines that, not marital status.



and if they have no will and have not named a beneficiary?


T


----------



## GAGE (Jan 28, 2015)

SarahFair said:


> I trust the SO with every once of my being. I don't think he would ever pull one over on me.
> 
> Its just the thought of a government contact that makes me feel trapped.
> I don't understand why they have to be involved.
> ...



I have seen way to many failed marriages, and although I have been happily married for over 16 years, as well as "living in sin" for 2.5 years before that, I like the way you think.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 28, 2015)

Throwback said:


> and if they have no will and have not named a beneficiary?
> 
> 
> T



An insurance policy or retirement account will not allow someone to not have a beneficiary named. 

 Not having a will basically means you don't care what happens to your estate IMO.


----------



## The Longhunter (Jan 28, 2015)

Throwback said:


> and if they have no will and have not named a beneficiary?
> 
> 
> T





Milkman said:


> An insurance policy or retirement account will not allow someone to not have a beneficiary named.
> 
> Not having a will basically means you don't care what happens to your estate IMO.




What Milkman said.  An insurance policy is a contract between you and the insurance company to pay the proceeds to the person or entity you designate. As a practical matter, there are no limits on who you can designate as a beneficiary, and the insurance company doesn't care how many times you get divorced, remarried, cohabit, or procreate --it's going to pay the money to whoever name is on the line.  The benefits are not part of the estate (many people assume the benefits will be paid to the estate), and what a lot of people forget too late is that the insurance company is going to pay the money out exactly like the policy said.

If they die without a will, then the "spouse" is out of luck, unless there is a valid common law marriage, in which case the spouse takes the same as any other spouse -- portion of the estate, year's support, right to be administrator, and so on.  These are really interesting cases, as you usually have a someone claiming to be a surviving spouse, and a bunch of cousins or first set of kids saying it ain't so.

What you see more often these days is almost the obverse of the question posed.  Leroy makes a will or buys some insurance, usually through his company, forgets about it, divorces wife No. 1, remarries, has a bunch of kids with wife No. 2, and then Leroy dies.

Guess who gets the insurance proceeds, and the estate, if there is one.  Happens often with retirement plans, especially 401k where Leroy just never thinks to drop by the HR office and change that beneficiary.

Back to T's question, anyone cohabiting after common law marriages were barred in Georgia is just another person as far as estate matters are concerned.  Of course any children from the liaison will inherit.  Also you have the issue of jointly owned property and "equitable" interests.  Georgia has been slower to develop equitable interests than some other states.

One instance the deceased died with the only will being the government form the government made the deceased fill out in WW II before he shipped off to Europe.  Well, 60 years and two wives, one girlfriend and two sets of kids later, all except first wife were surprised to learn that there is not a statute of limitation on wills, and absent some clear evidence of revocation, that one page form will is good as gold.


----------



## Oldstick (Jan 28, 2015)

Atlanta Dawg said:


> You observe correctly....



And I also concur with this observation.  Way, way more accepted today, and I think a lot of times the older more traditional friends and family members have no choice but to accept it vs. going insane over the situation.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 28, 2015)

Lots of good discussion going here without much judging going on. I hope what I am going to add to the discussion isn't going to stir the pot or take anyone over the edge.

Several folks have mentioned  religion, the bible, and God regarding the topic. So here is a question related to that aspect ?

If a couple is living together without a marriage license are they welcome at your church?   In your opinion is God OK with them being together without that license?


----------



## Big7 (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Good point !!  And I think everyone responding and reading here agrees with your opinion being sacred is right for you.
> 
> Yep.
> 
> But I have a question that I contemplated putting in the OP earlier.......Do you think God is more keen on commitment in a relationship, or a license from down at the Courthouse being filled out by someone after a ceremony?



AKA TAX!



Artfuldodger said:


> Amen!



AKA TAX!



shakey gizzard said:


> Would be my vote!



Yep.



Migmack said:


> Two types of marriage one sanctioned by the state.  One is a pledge before God. A state marriage is just a legal contract.



AKA TAX!

Back in the day you had to have a blood test. = TAX

If you are in a commitment, serious or not, the gooberment has NO business in it..

EXCEPT FOR: TAX TAX TAX TAX TAX TAX

Pretty soon they will want a TAX for you to go
out on a date.

If I WANT to have a "religious" ceremony,
that's between me, MY God and MY
SO (learned a new one today..) thanks Sarah..

If I do lose my mind and do it again, it will be a "Church" wedding. Just my preference.

The rest is nobody's business. AND just ANOTHER...










TAX!


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 28, 2015)

Christian or Jewish marriage is a covenant between a couple before God. The difference between a contract and a covenant. A covenant is based on trust between parties. A contract is based on distrust.
I'm not sure if a Christian or Jewish marriage has to have a wedding feast/ceremony or if it has to be consummated.

I'm not following RJ that the government is set forth by God and that the marriage license is therefore God's requirement. It is true that we must follow the government's law unless it goes against the Bible. If the government goes beyond the biblical covenant of marriage then why is it still biblical? They've add to the biblical covenant just by making is secular. They might even let non-Christians marry or couples that God doesn't allow. In fact they already do this so it violates the biblical requirement to not follow the law if it goes against the Bible.
Government marriage isn't Christian or even religious. I'm not even sure it's a covenant. It's more of a contract.


----------



## The Longhunter (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> If a couple is living together without a marriage license are they welcome at your church?
> 
> yes
> 
> ...



Are the people who have a one  lifetime commitment with each other with no license less in favor with God than someone who practices serial but gets a license each time?  

Does your church allow remarried divorcees to join the church?  Have leadership positions? How many divorces and remarriages before they fall out of favor with God?


----------



## rjcruiser (Jan 28, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Lots of good discussion going here without much judging going on. I hope what I am going to add to the discussion isn't going to stir the pot or take anyone over the edge.
> 
> Several folks have mentioned  religion, the bible, and God regarding the topic. So here is a question related to that aspect ?
> 
> If a couple is living together without a marriage license are they welcome at your church?



Welcome...well..depends on what you mean by welcome.  Attend--yes.  Become members--I don't think so.  Current members that do this--I would hope they would be confronted and change.  Matthew 18 discusses what Christians are to other Christians that are living in sin.  No...I'm not being judgmental...God is.  And He has rules in place for a reason.



Milkman said:


> In your opinion is God OK with them being together without that license?



I don't think so.  Again, I think God put our government in place and if you want to be married, you have to have that marriage license.  Outside of our country, in foreign lands that don't hold to that, no...a covenant with God will work.  After all, that is how it happened in the Bible.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 28, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> Welcome...well..depends on what you mean by welcome.  Attend--yes.  Become members--I don't think so.  Current members that do this--I would hope they would be confronted and change.  Matthew 18 discusses what Christians are to other Christians that are living in sin.  No...I'm not being judgmental...God is.  And He has rules in place for a reason.
> 
> 
> I don't think so.  Again, I think God put our government in place and if you want to be married, you have to have that marriage license.  Outside of our country, in foreign lands that don't hold to that, no...a covenant with God will work.  After all, that is how it happened in the Bible.



But if the government goes against the Bible? Are we still required to follow it according to God?
Doesn't the government do this by allowing non-Christians and other couples that the Bible doesn't allow to marry to get a marriage license? Hasn't the government turned the Christian/Jewish marriage covenant into a secular non-religious contract? If so why must Christians follow this governmental law?


----------



## Buzz (Jan 28, 2015)

Interesting question:   Here is an article that provides quite a few numbers to support your assertion http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/record-share-of-americans-have-never-married/ 

IMO - traditional marriage died the day the government decided to make it a legally binding contract entered into in the form of a tax and enforceable by the courts.    As an interesting note, the State simply doesn't care about a Ceremony in church.   You're married when the piece of paper is signed.   Likewise, two people in flip flops can say I do at the local county courthouse and now they are in a legally bound "contract" that is exactly the same to them as two people getting married at the church and the paperwork filed for the marriage.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 28, 2015)

Buzz said:


> Interesting question:   Here is an article that provides quite a few numbers to support your assertion http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/record-share-of-americans-have-never-married/
> 
> IMO - traditional marriage died the day the government decided to make it a legally binding contract entered into in the form of a tax and enforceable by the courts.    As an interesting note, the State simply doesn't care about a Ceremony in church.   You're married when the piece of paper is signed.   Likewise, two people in flip flops can say I do at the local county courthouse and now they are in a legally bound "contract" that is exactly the same to them as two people getting married at the church and the paperwork filed for the marriage.



Yes the government has defiled the religious covenant of marriage. Should we be "yoked together" with these unbelievers?


----------



## The Longhunter (Jan 28, 2015)

Buzz said:


> Likewise, two people in flip flops can say I do at the local county courthouse and now they are in a legally bound "contract" that is exactly the same to them as two people getting married at the church and the paperwork filed for the marriage.



That's the way most European countries have been doing it for years.  There's a civil ceremony for all weddings and a church wedding for those who chose to do one.  In some of the country, the official marriage is as simple as signing a register at the local equivalent of the courthouse. 

As far as the Europeans are concerned, there's the contractual aspect of marriage, with which the state is concerned, and the covenant part of marriage, with which a higher power is concerned.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 29, 2015)

grouper throat said:


> To sum it up, I think it is a breakdown of morals in society. I have done the living in sin and divorce, and the divorce really left me with a bad outlook of marriage and family court although I married again and could not be happier. I view marriage as a holy covenant but can see why others in our society do not especially if they are not religious.



Is it  your opinion that a couple living together without a marriage license does not have morals?

If marriage is a "holy covenant" does that require a license or simply a commitment to each other.


----------



## Bigtimber (Jan 29, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Is it  your opinion that a couple living together without a marriage license does not have morals?
> 
> If marriage is a "holy covenant" does that require a license or simply a commitment to each other.



This....I wonder what was done before the goverment got involved with licenses. 100 or so years ago in this country there were no wedding licenses I'd bet. What did they do then live in sin lol? The rules changed?? Who changed them...God or man? A couple simply got married...in a church or otherwise and it was known....they were "married". True to each other with morals basicly unheard of today. In my book just because someone has a licence doesn't mean there married under God. I've known countless folks that are legally married running around on there wife/husband...lots of times openly. And they are thought more of than a a couple living together TOTALLY loyal in everyway? LOL!! Just another way the goverment has brainwashed folks into doing things the "right" way. Sheep I say.
       I'm legally married myself...but just for insurance reasons. Certainly don't think I need a licence to feel right going in front of my Lord when the time comes. He knows my heart and what I've done.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jan 29, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> But if the government goes against the Bible? Are we still required to follow it according to God?
> Doesn't the government do this by allowing non-Christians and other couples that the Bible doesn't allow to marry to get a marriage license? Hasn't the government turned the Christian/Jewish marriage covenant into a secular non-religious contract? If so why must Christians follow this governmental law?



How is the current process of marriage between two Christians done in accordance with the laws in place anti-Biblical?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 29, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> How is the current process of marriage between two Christians done in accordance with the laws in place anti-Biblical?



By the association of being yoked with the unbiblical marriages condoned by the local laws. One example that comes to mind would be two people getting married that didn't love each other. They do it just for the government/insurance benefits. They are never joined as one.
That and the fact the government marriage isn't done for religious reasons. They have made it a contract instead of a covenant.


----------



## swampstalker24 (Jan 29, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> Welcome...well..depends on what you mean by welcome.  Attend--yes.  Become members--I don't think so.  Current members that do this--I would hope they would be confronted and change.  Matthew 18 discusses what Christians are to other Christians that are living in sin.  No...I'm not being judgmental...God is.  And He has rules in place for a reason.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so.  *Again, I think God put our government in place and if you want to be married, you have to have that marriage license.*  Outside of our country, in foreign lands that don't hold to that, no...a covenant with God will work.  After all, that is how it happened in the Bible.



So, using your logic, since God put our government in place, and our government says it's ok for two men or two women get married, then God is ok with this and it is what he wants?

Not saying I agree/disagree, just trying to understand this logic.  I know that it is mentioned in the bible that we should obey our government laws, but on the other hand there is a lot of talk these days about the government going against the people's religion and obama being the devil ect....

Can it be both ways?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 29, 2015)

swampstalker24 said:


> So, using your logic, since God put our government in place, and our government says it's ok for two men or two women get married, then God is ok with this and it is what he wants?
> 
> Not saying I agree/disagree, just trying to understand this logic.  I know that it is mentioned in the bible that we should obey our government laws, but on the other hand there is a lot of talk these days about the government going against the people's religion and obama being the devil ect....
> 
> Can it be both ways?



Some Christians believe the Earth is ruled by Satan and God's government will come later but you helped make my point about government marriage.  We've already discussed the two forms of marriage, biblical and governmental being two different things. While I believe it's possible to be in both types, one is not of God.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Jan 29, 2015)

Depends on how you define traditional marriage. Are we deviating from the tradition path to get to marriage? Yes. Are we deviating from what a traditional marriage was comprised of, somewhat and only in a few areas. 

I would argue that a man and woman who get a divorce today aren't much different than the bickering couple who hated each other in the 50's, but stayed together because divorce was more taboo then. Neither of them represent the traditional marriage, IMO, so it's a dead wash. 

As to the difference between religious marriages and civil marriages, I agree that there is one, but both can be just as committed to their partners as the other.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 29, 2015)

Marriage privatization is the concept that the state should have no authority to define the terms of personal relationships such as marriage. Proponents of marriage privatization, including certain minarchists, anarchists, libertarians, and opponents of government interventionism, claim that such relationships are best defined by private individuals and not the state. Arguments for the privatization of marriage have been offered by a number of scholars and writers. Proponents of marriage privatization often argue that privatizing marriage is a solution to the social controversy over same-sex marriage. Arguments for and against the privatization of marriage span both liberal and conservative political camps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_privatization

In the debate over whether to legalize gay marriage, both sides are missing the point. Why should the government be in the business of decreeing who can and cannot be married? Proponents of gay marriage see it as a civil-rights issue. Opponents see it as another example of minority “rights” being imposed on the majority culture. But why should anyone have—or need to have—state sanction for a private relationship? As governments around the world contemplate the privatization of everything from electricity to Social Security, why not privatize that most personal and intimate of institutions, marriage?
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/privatize-marriage

Late last month, First Things magazine published a brief article arguing that pastors whose beliefs do not permit them to officiate same-sex weddings should withdraw from participating in government-sanctioned marriage entirely, thereby drawing "a clear distinction between the government-enforced legal regime of marriage and the biblical covenant of marriage." The conservative publication also hosted a pledge to the same effect. Hundreds of pastors have signed, agreeing that preservation of religious liberty and biblical faith requires such abstention.

And while First Things worries about allowing the government to "redefine marriage," I'd suggest that redefinition already happened — and it started hundreds of years ago. What was supposed to be a covenant between two people, their families, and God has become a legal formality that can only occur with the state's permission.

By putting marriage in the hands of the government, we've already said that God's perspective isn't the last word. By taking marriage out of the church and into the halls of Congress, we make a sacred covenant into a secular contract. And by legislating marriage in any way, we cede this holy ground to the state.

Neither side is able to tell the other what to believe. Neither side "wins" the culture war — and neither side loses.
http://theweek.com/articles/441713/religious-right-isnt-retreating--reforming


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Jan 29, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Marriage privatization is the concept that the state should have no authority to define the terms of personal relationships such as marriage. Proponents of marriage privatization, including certain minarchists, anarchists, libertarians, and opponents of government interventionism, claim that such relationships are best defined by private individuals and not the state. Arguments for the privatization of marriage have been offered by a number of scholars and writers. Proponents of marriage privatization often argue that privatizing marriage is a solution to the social controversy over same-sex marriage. Arguments for and against the privatization of marriage span both liberal and conservative political camps.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_privatization
> 
> In the debate over whether to legalize gay marriage, both sides are missing the point. Why should the government be in the business of decreeing who can and cannot be married? Proponents of gay marriage see it as a civil-rights issue. Opponents see it as another example of minority “rights” being imposed on the majority culture. But why should anyone have—or need to have—state sanction for a private relationship? As governments around the world contemplate the privatization of everything from electricity to Social Security, why not privatize that most personal and intimate of institutions, marriage?
> ...



I agree with much of what you say, except that, until you separate out the civil privileges extended to married couples, you can't make marriage, or union, a uniquely religious affair. 

I also disagree that marriage can only happen with the state's blessing. That's just not true. The state isn't condoning the status of the relationship, they're giving equal protection and privilege under law, and nothing more. 

I do think that if preachers and other people of faith don't want to have certain ceremonies performed in their facilities then they have that right. It's already done, even with hetero couples during prenuptial counseling. It's rare, but I'll bet if you dig you could find where a preacher declined to marry people because they honestly felt they were incompatible and the couple did nothing but find another venue/officiant, etc. I side with the people of faith that they shouldn't be forced to do a ceremony against their beliefs or wishes, regardless of the reasons. But that's mainly due to the fact that there are plenty of other places to get wed, the courthouse where you get the license being the most obvious.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jan 29, 2015)

I don't really believe that the government or the church either one should have any say-so in who you choose to live with and have a relationship with, and whether or not you intend to marry them. I also think that it should be a requirement that a couple should have to live together for at least three years before getting a marriage license.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Jan 29, 2015)

NCHillbilly said:


> I don't really believe that the government or the church either one should have any say-so in who you choose to live with and have a relationship with, and whether or not you intend to marry them. I also think that it should be a requirement that a couple should have to live together for at least three years before getting a marriage license.



Without reproducing.


----------



## Gone Fishing (Jan 29, 2015)

I've had both.  Seven years living with someone and find out they promised to sell the home we lived in together to take care of someone else.  I left.  Second marriage known each other nine years married seven.  He was mentally and verbally mean.  Turns out he just wanted out.  So now on my own for over a year now and I can say without a shadow of doubt it won't ever happen again.  I can't imagine even allowing another man into my life.  People are different now.  Now you have to wonder if after a couple of days if you won't be found dead or raped or God only knows what.  It's just sad.  I'm so glad growing up that I didn't know this is how things would turn out.  You grow up  thinking that there is one special person out there.  So marriage what's the point.  My hats off to those that have happy one because you are very lucky.


----------



## SarahFair (Jan 29, 2015)

I think there is some societal pressure on couples. 
Weddings are sold as fantasies where people live happily ever after when in all actuality it takes A LOT of work to make them lasting.


----------



## Robert28 (Jan 30, 2015)

I learned a lot from my grandparents who were married 53 years. My grandparents got married in their early 20's and didn't even go on a honeymoon because my grandpa had to leave to go fight WWII two days later. My grandparents moved at least once or twice a year due to the military and my grandmother was left to raise my mom and uncle by herself most of the time. She'd get occasional letters from my grandpa but 90% of the letter would be blacked out for security reasons. My grandfather also fought in Korea and eventually retired from the Air Force. I still have the pic of the first house they ever bought, you wanna talk about small....it was small! They lived off of my grandfathers military income while saving my grandmothers income as a teacher(that would be hard to do this day and age). 

All I know is back then they didn't think they had to "have it all right away" when they first got married. I swear they were living paycheck to paycheck at least half of their marriage, if not longer. My grandpa would be away for months at a time and my grandma had a house to run and kids to raise while he was gone fighting wars. You just have to have two people that are willing to work with and for each other and sacrifice. You don't need a $300,000 house right after you get married. Shoot, my grandparents didn't really live it up until they were well into their 70's and 80's and even then they still were tightwads.haha Ironically though when they died they were both millionares but you'd never have known it.


----------



## fish hawk (Jan 30, 2015)

NCHillbilly said:


> I don't really believe that the government or the church either one should have any say-so in who you choose to live with and have a relationship with, and whether or not you intend to marry them. *I also think that it should be a requirement that a couple should have to live together for at least three years before getting a marriage license*.



That sounds ridiculous....How are two people gonna prove they have lived together for three years?Maybe have a social worker drop in once or twice a month?And the church doesn't have a say so,God word does,the foundation from which the church was formed.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 30, 2015)

Robert28 said:


> I learned a lot from my grandparents who were married 53 years. My grandparents got married in their early 20's and didn't even go on a honeymoon because my grandpa had to leave to go fight WWII two days later. My grandparents moved at least once or twice a year due to the military and my grandmother was left to raise my mom and uncle by herself most of the time. She'd get occasional letters from my grandpa but 90% of the letter would be blacked out for security reasons. My grandfather also fought in Korea and eventually retired from the Air Force. I still have the pic of the first house they ever bought, you wanna talk about small....it was small! They lived off of my grandfathers military income while saving my grandmothers income as a teacher(that would be hard to do this day and age).
> 
> All I know is back then they didn't think they had to "have it all right away" when they first got married. I swear they were living paycheck to paycheck at least half of their marriage, if not longer. My grandpa would be away for months at a time and my grandma had a house to run and kids to raise while he was gone fighting wars. You just have to have two people that are willing to work with and for each other and sacrifice. You don't need a $300,000 house right after you get married. Shoot, my grandparents didn't really live it up until they were well into their 70's and 80's and even then they still were tightwads.haha Ironically though when they died they were both millionares but you'd never have known it.


 It sounds like they were salt of the earth type people and had what it took to stick together. I bet the story would have been the same even without a marriage license.


----------



## jmharris23 (Jan 30, 2015)

I'll speak to the God and church portion of this conversation to some degree. 

This issue here about what is "right" and what is "wrong" for the Christian at least, should be governed by what the bible says on the topic. 

With that in mind, it would be my understanding that if you call yourself a follower of Christ, and you have a significant other, then you should be married both by commitment, and by law. 

If you are not a Christ-follower, then there is no need to worry with what the bible says and I would say you are then free to do as you wish. 

To answer your earlier question, in my church a couple living together is absolutely welcome to attend and participate, but they cannot be members nor hold any leadership/teaching positions. 

Finally to respond to your OP, "the times…they are a changin!"


----------



## rjcruiser (Jan 30, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> By the association of being yoked with the unbiblical marriages condoned by the local laws. One example that comes to mind would be two people getting married that didn't love each other. They do it just for the government/insurance benefits. They are never joined as one.
> That and the fact the government marriage isn't done for religious reasons. They have made it a contract instead of a covenant.



I don't see anyone getting married for the benefits.  Seems like today, from a govt standpoint, the costs outweigh the benefits.

Also, by your same reasoning, then Christians shouldn't pay taxes because by the association, they're supporting a non-Christian govt.  



swampstalker24 said:


> So, using your logic, since God put our government in place, and our government says it's ok for two men or two women get married, then God is ok with this and it is what he wants?
> 
> Not saying I agree/disagree, just trying to understand this logic.  I know that it is mentioned in the bible that we should obey our government laws, but on the other hand there is a lot of talk these days about the government going against the people's religion and obama being the devil ect....
> 
> Can it be both ways?



No...God is not okay with gay marriage.  Just like the Roman government in Biblical times, many things were wrong...but, Jesus told the Pharisees to give to Ceaser what was Ceaser's.  He wasn't condoning everything that Ceaser did by saying this.  But...that's another thread 



SarahFair said:


> it takes A LOT of work to make them lasting.



I totally agree with that.



jmharris23 said:


> This issue here about what is "right" and what is "wrong" for the Christian at least, should be governed by what the bible says on the topic.
> 
> With that in mind, it would be my understanding that if you call yourself a follower of Christ, and you have a significant other, then you should be married both by commitment, and by law.
> 
> ...



X2.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jan 30, 2015)

Gone Fishing said:


> I've had both.  Seven years living with someone and find out they promised to sell the home we lived in together to take care of someone else.  I left.  Second marriage known each other nine years married seven.  He was mentally and verbally mean.  Turns out he just wanted out.  So now on my own for over a year now and I can say without a shadow of doubt it won't ever happen again.  I can't imagine even allowing another man into my life.  People are different now.  Now you have to wonder if after a couple of days if you won't be found dead or raped or God only knows what.  It's just sad.  I'm so glad growing up that I didn't know this is how things would turn out.  You grow up  thinking that there is one special person out there.  So marriage what's the point.  My hats off to those that have happy one because you are very lucky.



Don't give up. I went through a really bad first marriage, and so did my present wife. We were both gun shy, but we have been happily married for over 20 years now and have a fine son. There are good men out there. The only thing that makes me  is that I see so many women I am related to who keep going after the same type of guy over and over, and keep getting the same results, then put all men down. Seems like they don't want anything to do with a good guy who will actually be good to them and treat them with respect, he's too "boring." They want an exciting "bad boy," but then complain when he acts like one. I'm not saying that's your situation at all, just making a general point about relationships. Men are just as bad looking for that "hot chick" that is all trouble and drama and makes their life miserable.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Jan 30, 2015)

NCHillbilly said:


> Don't give up. I went through a really bad first marriage, and so did my present wife. We were both gun shy, but we have been happily married for over 20 years now and have a fine son. There are good men out there. The only thing that makes me  is that I see so many women I am related to who keep going after the same type of guy over and over, and keep getting the same results, then put all men down. Seems like they don't want anything to do with a good guy who will actually be good to them and treat them with respect, he's too "boring." They want an exciting "bad boy," but then complain when he acts like one. I'm not saying that's your situation at all, just making a general point about relationships. Men are just as bad looking for that "hot chick" that is all trouble and drama and makes their life miserable.



An excellent point. I'm on my 3rd marriage after swearing I wouldn't do it again after the 2nd. 

I found my wife when I stopped "looking" for a woman, and just surrounded myself with great people I wanted to be friends with. Our relationship grew out of that friendship and our marriage is stronger for it. We can, and do, tell each other everything and call it our "non-editing" clause. We say what we feel, and what's on our minds, and if we're afraid of how it's going to be taken we preface it with "I'm saying this right now because of our non-editing clause, but I'm not sure how it's going to sound so give me some room to fumble it." Or something like that. 

That keeps things from festering while trying to find the right time, or right way, to say something and lets the other one know that the phrasing won't be perfect, so don't take it the way it may initially sound. Of course once that's understood by both you just know to expect those things and don't have to say it all, but it works really well for us.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 30, 2015)

jmharris23 said:


> To answer your earlier question, in my church a couple living together is absolutely welcome to attend and participate, but they cannot be members nor hold any leadership/teaching positions.
> 
> "





Thanks for the insight.   I don't know the proper terminology but is this in the "by laws" of that denomination or just the one church group?


----------



## jmharris23 (Jan 30, 2015)

Milkman said:


> Thanks for the insight.   I don't know the proper terminology but is this in the "by laws" of that denomination or just the one church group?



Well I can only speak for the Southern Baptists but each SBC church is autonomous and makes their own decisions regarding these types of things but traditionally and overwhelmingly this is the stance of most SBC churches.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 30, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> Also, by your same reasoning, then Christians shouldn't pay taxes because by the association, they're supporting a non-Christian govt.
> 
> 
> No...God is not okay with gay marriage.  Just like the Roman government in Biblical times, many things were wrong...but, Jesus told the Pharisees to give to Ceaser what was Ceaser's.  He wasn't condoning everything that Ceaser did by saying this.  But...that's another thread



What I'm trying to say is the government should get out of the marriage business.

Relating to the government, taxes, and rendering unto Caesar, I don't believe you are interpreting the scripture correctly.  Jesus is asking them who their  allegiance is to, God or Caesar. It's about serving two masters. It's not about paying taxes or government rule. 
Many Christians interpret this wrong but that is another thread.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jan 30, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> What I'm trying to say is the government should get out of the marriage business.



I don't necessarily disagree with that.  But for now, they are...and we need to comply imho.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 30, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> I don't necessarily disagree with that.  But for now, they are...and we need to comply imho.



I think we need to comply if we want to be considered married as for as the government is concerned. 
I don't see why we need to comply to this government marriage license as for as God is concerned.
God isn't requiring the license. The two aren't connected biblically. Just because the state requires one to receive state benefits, God doesn't require it to receive his benefits. 
God doesn't or isn't asking us to follow the civil law in respect to marriage. It isn't going against the Bible by not getting a state marriage license. What is against the bible is to fornicate outside of marriage.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 30, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I think we need to comply if we want to be considered married as for as the government is concerned.
> I don't see why we need to comply to this government marriage license as for as God is concerned.
> God isn't requiring the license. The two aren't connected biblically. Just because the state requires one to receive state benefits, God doesn't require it to receive his benefits.
> God doesn't or isn't asking us to follow the civil law in respect to marriage. It isn't going against the Bible by not getting a state marriage license. What is against the bible is to fornicate outside of marriage.



But you feel a couple has to stand up before someone who is accepted as a minister/priest/elder etc. and take vows to be considered married, correct ?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 30, 2015)

Milkman said:


> But you feel a couple has to stand up before someone who is accepted as a minister/priest/elder etc. and take vows to be considered married, correct ?



No, I don't believe that is necessary. A marriage is a covenant between two people before God. The ceremony doesn't make the couple married any more than a baptism makes someone saved.
Now I would think most Christians would want both of the aforementioned rituals to show to others that they are married or saved. 
God already knows what's in our hearts.


----------



## Huntinfool (Jan 30, 2015)

This thread is sad....just sad.


----------



## NOYDB (Jan 30, 2015)

Which tradition is being asked about?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 30, 2015)

Milkman said:


> So are you saying God wants to see commitment instead of a license ?



Amen. Only love can make a golden wedding ring.
(I missed this question earlier)                                   When two people enter a marriage covenant before God, they become one.
The marriage license doesn't make two people, one.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 30, 2015)

Huntinfool said:


> This thread is sad....just sad.



Sharing of opinions, questions, and thoughts is sad ?


----------



## Huntinfool (Jan 30, 2015)

Maybe I should clarify.

Many of the thoughts, ideas and opinions that are being shared are very sad.  That's what I meant.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Jan 30, 2015)

swampstalker24 said:


> Well dang, that is sad!


----------



## Milkman (Jan 30, 2015)

Huntinfool said:


> Maybe I should clarify.
> 
> Many of the thoughts, ideas and opinions that are being shared are very sad.  That's what I meant.





swampstalker24 said:


> Well dang, that is sad!





StripeRR HunteRR said:


>




I think we need to remember this isn't one of the "free for all" forums.  Please lets keep it on topic and keep it a sharing of information.  I used to moderate this forum and know they still keep an eye on it.


----------



## elfiii (Jan 30, 2015)

Milkman said:


> I think we need to remember this isn't one of the "free for all" forums.  Please lets keep it on topic and keep it a sharing of information.  I used to moderate this forum and know they still keep an eye on it.



We sure do. Keep this one on topic, no pics, etc. etc. or off it goes to the Spiritual forums where it probably belongs anyway.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 30, 2015)

elfiii said:


> We sure do. Keep this one on topic, no pics, etc. etc. or off it goes to the Spiritual forums where it probably belongs anyway.



Thanks Elfiii,  
 I purposely didn't post it there due to the tendency of some folks being judgmental and taking it way off topic.


----------



## Milkman (Jan 30, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Amen. Only love can make a golden wedding ring.
> (I missed this question earlier)                                   When *two people enter a marriage covenant before God, they become one.*
> The marriage license doesn't make two people, one.



I cant see how anyone could disagree with that


----------



## gemcgrew (Jan 30, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> The marriage license doesn't make two people, one.


When I asked Jennifer if she would be my wife, she said "Yes". We were married, before God, at that very moment. The license came after the marriage, and then was recognized by society.


----------



## Bigtimber (Jan 31, 2015)

I just don't understand the need to comply with the goverment to have a traditional marriage.....especially pick and choose comply. If you complied with what the government mandates, then gay marriage should be excepted as well. I can't see having it both ways. 
         And I would furthermore think the Bible is a guild to traditional marriage . I see no were in that great Book were it states marriage is anything more than a commitment between a man and a woman.

       Also I see no were in that book anyone actually performs or mentions a wedding ceremony, gives any instructions on how to do so, any mention of a wedding cake, having a wedding ring,  dresses in white, or anything of that nature whatever. So if its not in the Bible...its made up by man. Certainly nothing wrong with that....but bringing God into it and making it out to be a genuine religious ceremony like baptism ? I don't really know how that directly applies.


----------



## fish hawk (Jan 31, 2015)

Bigtimber said:


> I just don't understand the need to comply with the goverment to have a traditional marriage.....especially pick and choose comply. If you complied with what the government mandates, then gay marriage should be excepted as well. I can't see having it both ways.
> And I would furthermore think the Bible is a guild to traditional marriage . I see no were in that great Book were it states marriage is anything more than a commitment between a man and a woman.
> 
> Also I see no were in that book anyone actually performs or mentions a wedding ceremony, gives any instructions on how to do so, any mention of a wedding cake, having a wedding ring,  dresses in white, or anything of that nature whatever. So if its not in the Bible...its made up by man. Certainly nothing wrong with that....but bringing God into it and making it out to be a genuine religious ceremony like baptism ? I don't really know how that directly applies.



Jesus preformed his first miracle at a wedding by changing water into wine. John 2:1-11
There is no commandment concerning wedding ceremonies. However, the biblical pattern is that marriages always begin with some kind of ceremony or wedding, most notable would be that of Jesus Christ and his bride.  

 Revelation 19:7-9
7Let us rejoice and be glad
    and give him glory!
For the wedding of the Lamb has come,
    and his bride has made herself ready.
8 Fine linen, bright and clean,
    was given her to wear.”
9 Then the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!” And he added, “These are the true words of God.”


----------



## NOYDB (Jan 31, 2015)

Wedding per Hallmark, Really traditional!


----------



## fish hawk (Jan 31, 2015)

NOYDB said:


> Wedding per Hallmark, Really traditional!



You do realize this is the On-Topic forum and not the campfire don't you?Your thinkin about valentines day!!!


----------



## Bigtimber (Jan 31, 2015)

fish hawk said:


> Jesus preformed his first miracle at a wedding by changing water into wine. John 2:1-11
> There is no commandment concerning wedding ceremonies. However, the biblical pattern is that marriages always begin with some kind of ceremony or wedding, most notable would be that of Jesus Christ and his bride.
> 
> Revelation 19:7-9
> ...



Once....it mentions a celebration were the wife puts on some nice clothes and people ate?  Seriously? I'm not saying anything is wrong with a wedding/party/whatever you want to call it. People being happy about a couple making that commitment is a great thing. Supporting that is a great thing....but making it out to be the right/only thing from a  Bible teaching point of view is a big, big, big stretch. 

         Thats doesn't say anything more than hey...me and her decided to be be man and wife. Ya'll come over to the house and bring some wine, eat and party. lol. IF there was a wedding ceremony to be done at all.....wouldn't Jesus of all people be the one to perform it? Or mention he did  it ANYWHERE? I mean Jesus himself is at the "wedding" and doesn't feel the need to do or make mention anything concerning a cerimony? Who more qualified? Alot of this is fabricated by man through the years.

I'd say traditional marriage is going away not because of some government non sense people cling too or some ceremony  made up by who knows who.....its because the moral fabric in this Country has been burnt to a crisp and stomped out in the mud. My Grandfather refused to even watch tv whatsoever toward the end of his life....used to say....nothing but filth on it anymore. You know....he was right. Prime example....and its got 200% worse since then.


----------



## NOYDB (Jan 31, 2015)

fish hawk said:


> You do realize this is the On-Topic forum and not the campfire don't you?Your thinkin about valentines day!!!



On topic is for factual information to be exchanged. Not "here's my opinion, you can't present yours".

Valentines day is a good example of the commercialization of every human activity.

I am not trying to start anything here. Just a response to something already posted.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2015)

fish hawk said:


> Jesus preformed his first miracle at a wedding by changing water into wine. John 2:1-11
> There is no commandment concerning wedding ceremonies. However, the biblical pattern is that marriages always begin with some kind of ceremony or wedding, most notable would be that of Jesus Christ and his bride.
> 
> Revelation 19:7-9
> ...



How can we have a biblical pattern of a wedding feast that we must follow that hasn't happened yet per Revelation?
What is the mystery associated with Christ and his Church and our marriages?
When will this mystery be revealed?
In the example of Christ and his Church compared to man's marriages, which one is being compared to the other?
In what way is it being compared?

What are the traditional Christian wedding vows as stated in the Bible? How does the Bible tell us to perform this ceremony? Who does the Bible tell us should get married and why has this changed from the Old testament, New testament, and modern times?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2015)

Thanks for the replies, opinions, and sharing of personal experiences. It was a good and civil exchange of opinion. It never could have been so in the political or religious forums.  

 I stand fast with my observation in the OP. Things are changing from the norm of the last few generations.
And that may be a good thing IMO


----------



## Huntinfool (Feb 2, 2015)

Milkman said:


> I think we need to remember this isn't one of the "free for all" forums.  Please lets keep it on topic and keep it a sharing of information.  I used to moderate this forum and know they still keep an eye on it.



I was very much trying to be on topic and I've gone back and re-read the OP and just now the post above this one.  Here are my thoughts and some stats that support my reason for saying much of what's been expressed here is sad to me.

In 1995, the % of "first unions" (meaning first time living with a 'partner') among women 15-44 were below:

Cohabitation = 34%
Marriage = 39%
No union = remainder

Between 2006-2010, those same stats are below:

Cohabitation = 48%
Marriage = 23%
No union = remainder

Given the trend, I would suspect those numbers are a lot more stark going back in time.

(CDC stats)


The % of births to un-wed mothers has gone from roughly 5% in 1940, to about 20% in 1980 to over 40% since 2007 (CDC again).


I put these out there not to condemn anyone, but simply to make a point based on observation.

Clearly, the answer to the OP is "Yes".  In the United States, traditional marriage is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.  According to the last post, that may not be such a bad thing.  I could not disagree more with that sentiment.

People are opting for co-habitation rather than marriage and they are having children.  The majority of un-wed mothers has moved from primarily teenagers to primarily 20-somethings over the last 60-70 years.

Soon, more children will be born outside of marriage than in and co-habitation arrangements typically last less than 24 months (again CDC).

That last one is not a good stat for the children in our country.  Anyone who grew up in public school and has any experience with what public school is today is aware of how different the children in those schools are than even just 30 years ago.  

So, yes, I believe traditional marriage is going to increasingly become more rare as we move forward.  Not only in the definition of marriage, but also in the % of couples who actually participate in it.  I think both of those are sad things.


----------



## Milkman (May 26, 2018)

3 years later.   Any new observations from anyone?


----------



## GAGE (May 26, 2018)

I do not have much to add, other than my wife and I lived in "sin" for two years prior to getting married and we just recently celebrated our 20 year wedding anniversary.


----------



## Milkman (May 26, 2018)

GAGE said:


> I do not have much to add, other than my wife and I lived in "sin" for two years prior to getting married and we just recently celebrated our 20 year wedding anniversary.



Is it your belief that the first 2 years of your relationship were different due to there not being a licensed marriage?


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 26, 2018)

Milkman said:


> Is it your belief that the first 2 years of your relationship were different due to there not being a licensed marriage?



My wife and I have been married nearly a quarter-century, but we lived together for nearly three years before we got legally married, mostly because we had both just gotten out of a bad marriage and didn't want to jump back into the fire too quickly. It's sure a whole lot easier to get married than to get un-married.

I feel that there was/is no difference in the two periods, we were just as committed to each other before we had a piece of paper saying that we were married as we are now. Legal marriage is not near as much a foundation for a relationship as true love and respect for each other, IMO. The state or xx Baptist Church sanctioning a relationship does not automatically make it a better relationship, as far as I can tell. When it comes down to it, you are married in your heart, not on a piece of paper.


----------



## Nicodemus (May 26, 2018)

Milkman said:


> 3 years later.   Any new observations from anyone?





My Lady and I have been together for over 36 turkey and deer seasons. We`ve raised a son, paid off all our debts, are both retired, still hunt and fish together, take the occasional trip, answer to no one, and enjoy life. 

And you?


----------



## rayjay (May 28, 2018)

I think it's wise to live together for 2 or 3 years before getting married. Seen way too many people go full on stupid the first few years out from under mommy and daddy's house rules.

ETA, been knowing each other 42 years, together 41 years and married 40.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (May 28, 2018)

Milkman said:


> This is not a  thread to be judgmental of anyone or their lifestyle. Just an information sharing if anyone wants to discuss with it staying on topic.
> 
> 50 years ago when I was a child I didn't know of any couples who lived together without being married. I am sure there were some, but I was a kid living a wonderful and sheltered life in a rural north Georgia setting. Today I think I know almost as many folks who have a long term relationship or live together without being married as those who are married. These folks are getting along as fine or better than other couples who got legally married and are getting divorced after a short while.
> 
> Is our society changing from the traditional marriage standard of the past ? Any thoughts on the matter ??



Marriage has always been a covenant between two people before God. The fact that the government decided to take their cut makes it no more legal or binding.


----------



## Dirtroad Johnson (May 28, 2018)

Nicodemus said:


> My Lady and I have been together for over 36 turkey and deer seasons. We`ve raised a son, paid off all our debts, are both retired, still hunt and fish together, take the occasional trip, answer to no one, and enjoy life.
> 
> And you?



  to you & the Mrs., great plan for a quality way of life.


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2018)

As far as “traditional marriages”...........

 I believe people have figured out how to make the most of the tax system by getting married, or staying single......depending on their tax brackets, and other programs like peach care, to get the best benefit / less penalty possible. 

They are less concerned about the paperwork that makes the govt and churches happy but I don’t think the sanctity or commitment of their relationship means any less to them. 

As my neighbor says “Which way gives me more return”

Been with my wife 25 years, married for 23.


----------



## Nicodemus (May 29, 2018)

Dirtroad Johnson said:


> to you & the Mrs., great plan for a quality way of life.


----------



## toyota4x4h (May 29, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> As far as “traditional marriages”...........
> 
> I believe people have figured out how to make the most of the tax system by getting married, or staying single......depending on their tax brackets, and other programs like peach care, to get the best benefit / less penalty possible.
> 
> ...



This
You can about have a baby for free unwed but if you are married cost goes way up. 
Still I chose to marry my wife. We did live together about 6 months before hand bec she was in transition from living in Atlanta and moving back here and didn't want to live with her parents at age 30. I don't see a problem with it ever.


----------



## GAGE (May 29, 2018)

Milkman said:


> Is it your belief that the first 2 years of your relationship were different due to there not being a licensed marriage?



Not at all, but being from parents who took a few tries to find the right one I did not feel the need to not test the water prior to marriage.


----------



## Crakajak (May 29, 2018)

My VOWS were for better or worse. We choose to make it better.34 years and growing.


----------



## Milkman (May 31, 2018)

Nicodemus said:


> My Lady and I have been together for over 36 turkey and deer seasons. We`ve raised a son, paid off all our debts, are both retired, still hunt and fish together, take the occasional trip, answer to no one, and enjoy life.
> 
> And you?



My opinions on the subject remains unchanged since I started the thread in 2015. My personal situation remains unchanged as well.

 My sweetie and I are in the 13th year of a fully committed and loving relationship. We enjoy doing things and traveling together. We really love each other and both of our families. 
Together, we have 8 beautiful grandchildren. We still haven’t gotten around to the licensed marriage part yet. But make no mistake we are as married as it gets.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (May 31, 2018)

Milkman said:


> My opinions on the subject remains unchanged since I started the thread in 2015. My personal situation remains unchanged as well.
> 
> My sweetie and I are in the 13th year of a fully committed and loving relationship. We enjoy doing things and traveling together. We really love each other and both of our families.
> Together, we have 8 beautiful grandchildren. We still haven’t gotten around to the licensed marriage part yet. But make no mistake we are as married as it gets.



I once had a chaplain at Ft. Stewart tell me I was living in sin because I was divorced and remarried. He was of the Catholic persuasion. At the time the JCC just had a new Commander appointed to them. I had gone through some other training with that new commander and happened to have a friendly conversation with him after this incident. Don't know what came of that offending chaplain, but I never saw him again.  

Me nor my marriage will be dictated by any man, from a state government or a religious government. My marriage is dictated by God and it is only he who we'll answer to.


----------



## ryanh487 (May 31, 2018)

I think part of the problem with society is that they view the entirety of marriage as it is legally defined by the modern government.

By most folks definition of marriage, a good 90% of married people in the world aren't married.

The bible, by example, shows us that marriage as it was with Adam and Eve and for thousands of years is a simple formula.  Sex + Commitment = Marriage.  

Sex - Commitment = fornication

Sex + commitment + someone outside of that commitment = adultery

Society has this idea that "just living together" isn't really marriage so it means they have an out.  If you're that committed to eachother, you're just married without the taxes.  A $50 piece of paper is not what makes a marriage a marriage. The sanctity of marriage has been destroyed because of the tiny box that folks have put marriage in.


----------



## OmenHonkey (Jun 5, 2018)

I just got married on the 26th of May. We never lived together prior. But i have had live in girlfriends in the past. I told my wife when i met her right off the bat that us "Living together" would happen if we got married and no sooner. She understood and we have been moving forward as we should. I plan on this one lasting and will do what i have to do to keep it that way.


----------



## The mtn man (Jun 5, 2018)

I think the reason people arnt getting married as much is because of the consequences that come from it not working out. I can say from experience. Ex wife took everything I ever had and worked for, along with the kids, and because my children were older than 14 years old, I had no legal rights to be a parent at that point, I was at the mercy of the ex, and she showed no mercy, all this while legally obligated to pay almost 30% of my gross income for child support. Had to live in a camper in an rv park for a while. The rv park was where my eyes were opened. It was full of men that were in my same situation, courts had given their ex wives everything they had worked for, the rv park was all any of us could afford, and most of us had decent incomes. These stories are why young men will not marry anymore like it use to be. After the marriage is legal, the women hold all the cards. Why , unless you truly found someone that would not rake you over the coals if things went wrong, you would be a fool to get married. It's all a crap shoot anyways.


----------



## transfixer (Jun 5, 2018)

I respect the sanctity of marriage,  unfortunately a lot of " modern " females do not necessarily think the same way,   women in this day and time look at it as simple and easy to walk away from the commitment of marriage when things get difficult,  whether that be from finances, problems with teenagers,  busy lives that end up causing husbands and wives  not to spend enough time with each other,, etc,etc,    They know they can walk away fairly easily,  courts will almost always be on their side,  and most will have no problem getting back out in the dating world and finding someone else,   I guess that's part of being a "liberated" woman ? 
     I've been married and divorced twice,  both times to someone who had been married before and walked away from their marriages,   my fault that I didn't stop to think about that before getting involved with them,   each time they had someone lined up to replace me before we were divorced,,   there is always blame on both sides,  but its pretty telling when I'm still close with my stepkids from my last marriage , and never speak with their mom,   
            The sanctity of marriage is something to be respected,  I have no problem living with someone before marriage,  but after saying the marriage vows it should mean something more,   in todays society it usually doesn't.


----------

