• Ronno@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe an unpopular opinion, but I think this should apply to everyone. It is good practice to give your new relationship some time before jumping in the marriage boat.

      • JasSmith@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        In a world in which marriage didn’t confer any special rights or obligations, I would agree. But marriage is a state-sponsored activity which affords the married all kids of benefits and obligations. Inasmuch, the state does have a say in how it is conducted. Personally, I’m fine with getting the government out of marriages. Everything should be done via legal agreement. No more de facto marriages and alimony. Adults can make informed decisions about their future. They should have the right to make their own choices about what’s fair and reasonable.

    • 3425asdfqwer4@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I only superficially agree with this take because of the many cultural implications of marriage. E.G. Kids, housing, money. Decisions that
      may carry serious implications and cannot easily be undone should not be rushed into.

      With that said, marriage is not a prerequisite to any of these potentially problematic aspects of relationships, which makes the entire idea of the restriction-by-association a bit silly. Especially because it is not placed on ‘new’ relationships, merely on the the transferring of relationship statuses in a very particular manner.

      I think marriage itself is a bit of an antiquated institution that needs a modern re-work to better fit it to societal needs.

      I fully support the current marginal waiting periods for marriage licenses because I feel like this minor barrier does not meaningfully inconvenience the vast majority but may prevent cases of abuse or caprice.

      TL:DR - Liberalism and guardrails.