Marriage

[Kyuuketsuki]

Like I say ... at risk of using the NTS fallacy, if you don't get it, you don't get it but I'm married and I do get it, I know why that commitment is important, I've 51 years of life (say 35 of it being able to understand the concept) and 25 years experience that tell me it was absolutely the right thing to do.

And no, sounding like Frodo, I can't prove it. Maybe you'll get it when you've been married awhile (I gather you aren't right now) or perhaps when you realise you love someone THAT much that you have to commit and that when they do to it's ... well ... magic. Maybe it's like trying to explain blue to a blind man?

Kyu

[fr0d0]

Commitment is a natural end point of love IMO. People 'commit' to each other because they need to. They want to do it because it expresses what they really feel, not the other way around. It isn't an imposition.

Love without commitment keeps love as an uncertainty. Love can't grown any further. I believe you limit love by removing the possibility of commitment. Love is more than the first throws of love.

Love without any security limits love. You get to a point where you trust each other and want to share everything you have. I wanted to give my wife everything and committed to that.

[Kyuuketsuki]

I wanted to give my wife everything and committed to that.

So did I ... trouble is she kept saying, "No!" hock:

Kyu

[Edwardo Piet]

Well maybe I show my love in a different way? And maybe I want to love someone who doesn't see commitment really as 'the be all and end all' yeah?

As I have said...I personally feel that if I really love someone and they really love me then that is enough.

And I personally (at least) think that 'commitment' is superficial BECAUSE - what's the point if you can leave anyway? It seems manufactured to me....

If the love is strong you can stay WITHOUT 'commitment' and if the love isn't that strong (or the strength goes) the the couple can UNcommit from the commitment anyway, and if they're married they can get a divorce regardless of how much they DID love each or and for how long.

So is it really the commitment that gives the strength if relationships can die WITH commitment and they can STAY and stay strong WITHOUT it? (because the couple just stays together naturally because Love.../is enough?)

That's how I feel about it personally anyway...

Now...I think commitment is a COMMON by-product of genuine love yes - that's how people commonly SHOW their love...so I can understand how the two of you (Kyu and fr0d0) believe love leads to commitment...

Now it may be a COMMON way to SHOW IT....but I don't think it's the commitment itself that is the Love and that matters...I think the commitment is just a common by-product of love and perhaps comes from attachment too.

I think commitment is a common way of SHOWING Love...and a common BY-PRODUCT of Love...rather than the other way around...

I think it's the love itself that really matters...and I personally find the 'commitment' superficial, I mean if you can stay together WITHOUT it...then that's awesome.
And if you can also make a 'commitment' and UNcommit anyway then I think that shows just how superficial the commitment really is. If you can just break it anyway then how's it really a commitment? (people do...regardless of 'commitment'...people can be loyal WITHOUT it and people CAN still BREAK the commitment WITH it).

And if you have good reason to break it, i.e: if you don't love each other anymore wouldn't you be RIGHT to break the commitment (excluding staying in the relationship 'just for the kids', etc)? And if you DON'T have good reason, if you still love each other and are going to stay together ANYWAY, regardless - why would you need the 'commitment'? Once again I think it would just be superficial.

This is just how I feel about it, y'know? The way I see it,

1: If the relationship is going good and you love each other then why would you even need to commit? It seems superficial and a by-product of love rather than the other way around.

2.:If the love has gone and the relationship is going bad...and you want to break up - why would you still stay committed? (excluding exceptions like staying together 'just for the kids', etc) And if you can UNcommit anyway regardless of the previous 'commitment' then I think that shows how superficial 'commitment' really is (I think it's a by-product of Love rather than the other way around, but it's also more about attachment than compassion ( Unlike love which I think is more about compassion than attachment)).

EvF

[fr0d0]

I think you're being honest Evie. You're not to know what we've found. You just state what makes love ideal for you. Nothing wrong with that.

Sure a relationship can break down for whatever reason, but that's no reason to be non committal. Not committing is shying away from the real thing. One step away from diving in. It's be like being happy with a driving sim and shying away from real driving. Sure it's fun but it doesn't get you from A to B, which is sort of the point :p

[Edwardo Piet]

I don't see how commitment is the real thing. I think it's a blanket that goes OVER the real thing, a by-product of the real thing rather than the other way around. An attachment, not compassion. Fear of losing the other person etc, attachment - that's why you commit. You want to stay together - but it can still go wrong anyway. And surely the attachment, the fear of losing, the wanting to commit means that you believe (at least partly) that there's something to worry about?

Surely if you can stay together WITHOUT 'committing' TO, and just stay together naturally - then that shows you're just getting on great together rather than attaching yourself because you 'dont want to lose each other'.

I think Love is more about the joy, wonder, awe, inspiration, and love in general, etc, etc of being WITH each other - rather than the attachment and fear of LOSING each other so you commit because you don't want to lose....I just think people often love each other so much that they START feeling "What would I do if they lost them?" BECOME (at least more) attached and WANT TO 'commit'. I just think that love would still be better without it, whether it's uncommon or not.

Commitment may be a sign of love because it's a common by-product of love. But I still think love at it's best is IDEALLY better of without it because commitment is more based on attachment whereas genuine love IN ITSELF is based more on compassion (and lots of other good things, awe, wonder, inspiration and all the rest).

It's just what I feel. I don't have the experience but then I guess I also don't have those experiences to be jaded and/or mislead by either - and I've kind of been an observer on others more instead. Learnt from other people's mistakes, etc.

EvF

[chatpilot]

I think that at least here in the U.S. marriage is influenced by two factors.Those factors are religious and societal.By getting married a couple stays true to his or her religious roots by getting married and not to mention it will make alot of the family members happy.Free cake and booze for everyone all in the name of the marrying couple.And it is a symbol of acceptance by their immediate family members and the society in which they belong to.Not to mention all the wonderful legal benefits and goodies you aquire once you put that ring on that finger and seal the deal.

Marriage in a sense these days has lost alot of its so called religious significances and has now become more of a secular rite.In my opinion you dont have to prove to someone that you love them by committing yourself to them and vowing to be with them eternally.Love is an emotion that must be manifested in deeds.Your partner cant see the love you feel for them but they can certainly see and feel appreciated by the way you treat them.Marriage is over rated and a perfect waste of time and money.

[Edwardo Piet]

In my opinion you dont have to prove to someone that you love them by committing yourself to them and vowing to be with them eternally.Love is an emotion that must be manifested in deeds.Your partner cant see the love you feel for them but they can certainly see and feel appreciated by the way you treat them.Marriage is over rated and a perfect waste of time and money.

I completely agree chatpilot. Wholeheartedly.

[fr0d0]

"I guess I also don't have those experiences to be jaded and/or mislead by either"

It seems you're quite jaded already

Commitment 'because you have to' or 'because of some reason other than love' ISN'T love. Simple. Yeah sure there may be people committing out of fear. Personally this is exactly what I think of when you talk about not committing. You live in constant fear that your relationship could end at any moment. Any time a problem arises the partners have the very easy option of giving up and walking out. It's immature love to think this is what love is.

I hate the idea that because of your prejudice towards religion you dismiss marriage. Marriage is meaningless ritual. Commitment isn't marriage. Marriage in church for non believers is superstition.

[chatpilot]

Here in the states most people associate marriage with religion and traditional values.I agree that marriage because of any other reason than love is not true love.But I personally because of the way I was brought up have also looked upon marriage as a religious institution (more like a mental institution) so being atheist and considering marriage a religious institution makes me reject them both outright.