The institution of marriage has lost its traditional meaning.
- Embryos, sperm and eggs can be frozen and thawed out in the future and still be viable. We have invitro fertilization, surrugate mothers, fertility drugs and viagra. People are living longer and, at least for some cultures, the standard of living is increasing. Cell phones, unlimited call/text plans, and Skype has enabled people to be together 24/7. The internet has made porn ubiquous.
True.
Side Score: 17
|
 |
Wait..., what? No!!!
Side Score: 14
|
|
|
|
|
0
points
I am of the opinion that technology isn't very closely related to marriage, and it certainly hasn't in any way contributed to rendering the institution of marriage obsolete. First of all, marriage isn't obsolete. It is very much alive and still holds a lot of meaning and sense. Marriage is still considered the sacred union by many, and people are still marrying. Technology has only brought people closer, and if it has any role here, it has to be in keeping marriage alive. Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
Technology has brought people closer but the same technology lead the people to find more partners and it cause to lost the traditional meaning of marriage. Marriage is a sacrifice,love and care. Now it is losing.No sacrifice,no love. Now it has become only for sex. It is the joining of two hearts not only 2 bodies. real marriage—that has its own value and structure. Technology and social medias helps to find more interesting and sexiest partners , that lead to collapse the value of marriage. Side: True.
Technology has brought people closer but the same technology lead the people to find more partners and it cause to lost the traditional meaning of marriage. Marriage is a sacrifice,love and care. Now it is losing.No sacrifice,no love. Now it has become only for sex. It is the joining of two hearts not only 2 bodies. real marriage—that has its own value and structure. Technology and social medias helps to find more interesting and sexiest partners , that lead to collapse the value of marriage. Side: True.
0
points
The essence of marriage is love and it has been love since the idea of marriage had been around. The basis of your argument that the woman being the property of man isn't what the institution of marriage is built on. Woman have just grown more independent these days, and that independence doesn't contribute to eliminating the traditional meaning of marriage, which I believe is love and not woman being declared the property of man. The traditional meaning still thrives. Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
Well, maybe not "gone" , but "going". It is a ridiculous concept dreamed up by the writers of many religious books to guarantee the power of man over woman, and thus guarantee that the female side of the marriage MUST be faithful, and that the male would at least get "consideration" over his.... transgressions. The "Institution of marriage" should be renamed "The institution for the control of women". Side: True.
1
point
1
point
0
points
|
1
point
Ages ago married men had mistresses, some do even now. So, porn being ubiquitous or having surrogate mothers doesn't devalue the traditional meaning of marriage. In fact, modern days have only strengthened marriage with legality, technology (fertilization techniques for unhappy mothers) and by bringing people closer. Love is the foundation of marriage, and love will survive till mankind does. Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
Embryos, sperm and eggs can be frozen and thawed out in the future and still be viable. We have invitro fertilization, surrugate mothers, fertility drugs and viagra. People are living longer and, at least for some cultures, the standard of living is increasing. Cell phones, unlimited call/text plans, and Skype has enabled people to be together 24/7. The internet has made porn ubiquous. Not sure what any of those things have to do with marriage. You brought up fertility, EDS, wireless communication and porn. Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
none of that has anything to do with the meaning of marriage (traditional or otherwise). the institution has not changed meaning because of any of the things you listed or any of the things you left out (SS marriage, interracial marriage...) the meaning is precisely in the same place it was before... forming a stable household for the proposes of taxes, inheritance, and child rearing. none of that has changed. Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
One parent plus children means simplified inheritance. One less person looking for a handout. One parent plus children means no negotiating with your spouse as to what the rules should be. If you spouse makes nearly as much as you do, you are better off filing single, head of household. Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
Whilst the traditional roles in a marriage may have changed it does not mean that one spouse has dominance over the other nor that it should be replaced by the more lose, partnership arrangement. Marriage is, or at least should be a declaration of love for each other by the two parties joined in this union, and generally speaking, offers a more stable environment in which to raise a family. The vows taken should act as a constant reminder of the responsibilities which both parties have to ensure that throughout the duration of the ever changing ''tone'' of their relationship they adopt the necessary compromises as well as engaging in a meaningful analysis and cementing of the commitment to each other. It has been my observation that the character weaknesses which result in divorce appear again in any new relationship. Best to stick to your guns with the ''devil you know'' and go for a renaissance of your love for each other if the marriage is going through a tough patch. Any irresponsible low life can pack up and run away when the going gets difficult. Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
Not in all countries. Mostly the Western European nations and Australia and America, where leftist ideology is trying to convince the masses that all is well. So these western nations are ending all moral based law and letting immorality thrive, this is how the politicians deceive the masses into believing they are free. When in reality they have no jobs, and their taxes are going up and paying for the social programs the governments really cannot afford. What we see happening to Greece is pretty much going to happen to all of these countries with huge social welfare systems Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
0
points
Mostly the Western European nations and Australia and America, where leftist ideology is trying to convince the masses that all is well. How so? So these western nations are ending all moral based law and letting immorality thrive, this is how the politicians deceive the masses into believing they are free. How so? Your post is essentially a massive Citation Needed. Side: True.
|
