FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-01-2003, 06:51 PM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 207
Default

I don't think divorce is always bad on the children. Maybe some kids somehow get it in their head that it's their fault mommy and daddy don't get along anymore but others don't. Maybe others just take it bad and don't get why their parents no longer live together. I think it depends on the kid. My nephew and niece took their parents divorce very well.

I was rather young when my parents got divorced and I couldn't have been happier. My parents were awful for each other, although I am glad they stayed together long enough to have me otherwise... well I'd have no opinion whatsoever. I'm just glad they're broken up or otherwise my mom would probably be dead by now.
EspressoSnail is offline  
Old 06-02-2003, 01:27 PM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: edge of insanity
Posts: 1,609
Default

there is a post about the morality of being a single parent which i opined that the "nuclear" family is ALWAYS best ("nuclear" meaning 2 happy, competent parents absent abuse, drugs, etc.) my personal feelings is that if there are children involved, both parents have a responsibility not only to the kids, but to each other as well to make sure they each do what it takes to make the other happy, along with the kids. of course there are limits to this philosophy, but I think if you are having a bunch of fights because he won't clean up after himself, and those fights are around the kids, then it is his responsibility to grow up and clean after himself. now obviously if your fights are about drugs, alchohol, gambling or something slightly more serious than chores then divorce should be an option only after seriously trying other options such as relationship counseling and so forth.

i understand that marriage is rough sometimes, and with kids (i have 3 myself) it can be even harder, but that should be taken into account before you get married, and if you don't feel like you would be able to handle it, then perhaps you should not get married in the first place.
auto-da-fe is offline  
Old 06-02-2003, 02:46 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 7,351
Default Re: Divorce

Quote:
Originally posted by Thomas Ash
I just wondered what anyone else had to say on divorce, which is typically seen as a more 'religious' area of concern. I'd personally have to say that it's a serious negative where children are involved, and that a marriage is far and away the best setting for bringing up children. But what we can do about the alarmingly high divorce statistics, and what the cause of them is, I don't know (hangdog look.)
Right now, it is very easy to get married in most places. This means that people can do it without giving the matter the appropriate amount of thought. So this means that many people are married who should never have gotten married. That is why they need to get divorced later.

So, if you wanted to reduce the divorce rate, just make it harder to get married in the first place. This could be done in a variety of ways, such as having a six month waiting period from the time when the application is first made to when the license can be picked up, or there could be some sort of test that both must pass or they must wait another month to apply again, or some other method of making it more difficult to get married.

Historically, there have been few divorces in certain periods of the past for two reasons, one, simply not allowing divorces, and two, total financial dependence of the woman on the man, so she cannot leave him no matter how much he beats her, without risk of starvation. I don't think these are good alternatives, and the current high divorce rate is much better than people staying married who should never have gotten married in the first place.

In my opinion, divorce isn't the problem at all. It is getting married that is the problem.
Pyrrho is offline  
Old 06-02-2003, 03:59 PM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,842
Default Re: Re: Divorce

Quote:
Originally posted by Pyrrho
In my opinion, divorce isn't the problem at all. It is getting married that is the problem.
The "messiest" divorce I had the displeasure to witness was of two friends who got married when she was 18 and he was 21. Maybe if they'd had to wait a bit longer before getting hitched they would have recognized the personality differences which drove them apart 5+ years later, after two children.

Then again, I think they got hitched because they wanted to screw, and couldn't because of her religious upbringing...
Ab_Normal is offline  
Old 06-02-2003, 04:36 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 7,351
Default Re: Re: Re: Divorce

Quote:
Originally posted by Ab_Normal
The "messiest" divorce I had the displeasure to witness was of two friends who got married when she was 18 and he was 21. Maybe if they'd had to wait a bit longer before getting hitched they would have recognized the personality differences which drove them apart 5+ years later, after two children.

Then again, I think they got hitched because they wanted to screw, and couldn't because of her religious upbringing...
That brings to mind another idea: Requiring that the participants all be at least 21 years old in order to get married. The idea that you are too young to decide whether or not to drink alcohol (in the U.S.), but old enough to get married, is positively asinine. One beer is no big deal, but one marriage is.
Pyrrho is offline  
Old 06-02-2003, 06:00 PM   #16
Obsessed Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Not Mayaned
Posts: 96,752
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Divorce

Quote:
Originally posted by Pyrrho
That brings to mind another idea: Requiring that the participants all be at least 21 years old in order to get married. The idea that you are too young to decide whether or not to drink alcohol (in the U.S.), but old enough to get married, is positively asinine. One beer is no big deal, but one marriage is.
Agreed.
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old 06-02-2003, 07:36 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 533
Default

Both my husband and I come from three generations of divorce (or seperation). We are going on seven years of marriage. Before we got married, we spent a lot of time discussing how to communicate (of that makes sense). We also went to a counselor once before wht wedding to make sure we knew how to fight "right". We had one really bad patch last year. I almost left. The thing that kept me there was the fact that our lives are so intertwined that leaving would have been much worse than trying to work it out. So we worked it out. It's been slow, but I am glad we are still married.

I know I would have been much more screwed up than I already am if my parents had stayed together. My mother is nuts. How nuts? Let me put it this way, my Dad got custody of me in 1977 when I was two years old and an only child. In the 70s, Dads never got custody of their children.

Staying together for the kids won't work if one of you wants to leave. You may grow to resent the kids for forcing you to stay in a bad situation. And even if you don't resent you kids, don't you think they would have issues with the fact that because of them, their parents are FORCED to be together. It is better for kids to be around one well adjusted, happy adult than two people who hate each other.

I know for myself, the fact that so many of my family have divorced, I have a pretty good grasp of what NOT to do in a marriage.
trekbette is offline  
Old 06-03-2003, 02:31 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Meridian, MS
Posts: 18
Default

Monogamy is one of, if not the, rarest trait in the animal kingdom. I find it unhealthy to rope ourselves off from basic needs and urges in this way. Forced - i.e., by the legal and religious systems - monogamy have caused so much more heartache than has been saved.
fundamental spawn is offline  
Old 06-03-2003, 05:40 PM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 7,351
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by fundamental spawn
Monogamy is one of, if not the, rarest trait in the animal kingdom. I find it unhealthy to rope ourselves off from basic needs and urges in this way. Forced - i.e., by the legal and religious systems - monogamy have caused so much more heartache than has been saved.
Monogamy is not that rare in the animal kingdom. Many species of birds are monogamous; penguins being good examples of this.

I like monogamy. I like the fact that I do not have to worry about prophylactics and sexually transmitted diseases. And I am not interested in having sex with a bunch of different people anyway. I don't want to have to train a bunch of different people in how to be good and give me what I want. And, of course, I would want to learn what each of them wants. No, it is far easier and better to be monogamous. But if you wish to deal with the hassles of sex with multiple people, I'll not stop you.
Pyrrho is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:30 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.