Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site reed.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!decwrl!decvax!tektronix!reed!purtell
From: purtell@reed.UUCP (Lady Godiva)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.singles
Subject: Re: Re: Re: marriage = commitment
Message-ID: <1761@reed.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 3-Aug-85 16:17:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: reed.1761
Posted: Sat Aug 3 16:17:43 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 6-Aug-85 05:43:17 EDT
References: <508@ttidcc.UUCP> <485@oliveb.UUCP> <684@lll-crg.ARPA>
Reply-To: purtell@reed.UUCP (Lady Godiva)
Organization: Reed College, Portland, Oregon
Lines: 60
Xref: linus net.religion:6913 net.singles:7438
In article <591@ihu1m.UUCP> ajmiller@ihu1m.UUCP (a. miller) writes:
>> > >
>> > > My experience with "marriage ruining things" has not to do
>> > > with the "commitment" involved but with the baggage that the culture
>> > > adds to a marriage. When two are living together they are equal
>> > > partners -- if both are working, they expect to keep working.
>> > > Once married, though, there is the role of the stay at home
>> > > house wife that is now a possibility. These things that "hang on"
>> > > the roles associated with a marriage cause most of the tension
>> > > that can destroy a relationship that was once "good" before the
>> > > marriage.
>> > >
>> > > ..!{decvax,ucbvax}!sun!plx!adams -- Robert Adams
>> >
>Marriage from a christian's standpoint is an institution created by God.
>He commanded be fruitful and multiply. Taking this into consideration involves
>having children. For our species to survive children must be concieved.
>To have a good and moral society free from anarchy someone must raise the
>children. The christian beleives this is the wife's duties. With this in
>mind someone must take care of the children. And that means 24 hours a day.
>There is a responsiblity in being married. The most important is raising
>children. The idea of quality time does not exist. What children need is
>to be with their parents and the more time the better. If not the wife
>than the husband. This should be commited before and kept during the marriage.
>If the two cannot agree than they should not have children. I am glad that
>my mom and dad concieved and raised me so that I can enjoy life now and later.
>
> Andy Miller
I can see that I've "n'd" over this discussion far too long. As to
Robert's comments - I agree for the most part. But I honestly believe
that there are people who just are not born or have not been raised to
be able, or happy, to commit themselves to one person for a long period
of time. I'm beginning to think quite seriously that I am one of them. I
don't know if this is a sign of emotional immaturity or if it's just the
way that some people are. I rather think (or at least hope) that it's
the latter. I love people deeply, and become close to people, but I
really suck at commitments.
As to Andy - I've heard the claim before that it's not right for a
Christian to marry unless they plan on having children. I'm not sure if
that's what he's saying or not, but it is a view that I totally disagree
with. I plan on never having a child (whether I marry or not) although I
do want to adopt one someday (whether I'm married or not.) As to one
person having to stay at home and take care of the child, I definitely
disagree. I also disagree that there is no such thing as quality time. I
know some wonderful parents who both work. I come from a single parent
home. I went through a lot of tough times and spent a lot of time on the
streets. But I enjoy life now, and I expect to enjoy later. Not to say
that my childhood was one that I would wish on anyone, but you can't say
that just these certain elements (one parent not working, spending a lot
of time with the kids, etc.) makes a good parent, a good family, or a
good child.
cheers -
elizabeth g. purtell
(Lady Godiva)