Given that for much of human history, 'marriage' has essentially involved the exchange of women and material goods between groups of men, it's hardly surprising that the model no longer comfortably fits our society.

Whether it's now done in the eyes of the Church or the State, I can't really see that the institution of marriage itself retains much intrinsic relevance. Love, families amd couples can and do flourish in our society in the absence of silly romantic and religious rituals - and in my own experience they seem to do better.

I think that the notions of both "divorce" and "the eyes of God" are obsolete - or at least would be in a more intelligent and rational society :)

Spanky,

Clearly there has been a shift in attitude toward marital vows. I suspect this correlates more with easy divorce laws and promiscuity then women being rescued from horrible marriages. Reinforcing this belief is the statistical lack of success of the divorce and remarriage solution.

However the reasons for the changes are probably multicausal. All factors cited in here so far probably play some role in the problem. However some of the beliefs expressed are probably part of the problem. For example the view that marriage was always bad but now people (particularly women) aren't trapped, the belief that people should generally focus on self rather than family/spouse/children and seek happiness from taking rather than giving. Obviously some (particularly with the latter beliefs) don't consider divorces or breaking vows to be a problem.

It takes vast resources to properly raise a human child and they are dependent for a long time. My belief is that it is a case of the more (resources) the merrier. Children are entitled to be nurtured in a stable family situation and if there is no committment to this then people shouldn't get married and have kids. In this regard I'm concerned that child nurturing is becoming so devalued. It seems to devalue children themselves.

CJ,

“I think that the notions of both "divorce" and "the eyes of God" are obsolete - or at least would be in a more intelligent and rational society”

I invite you to reconsider that assertion as comforting as you might find it for any relevant mistakes in the past. It seems to fly in the face of over 40 years of available evidence.

mjpb, I grew up in a single parent family (as have many others), but due to death not divorce. I can safely assure you that one parent is quite capable of nuturing the children produced by the marriage and producing fairly balanced caring adults from those children. The main damage caused to children from divorce is not the fact that mum and dad are no longer living in the same building, but from the animosity that usually builds between the divorcing adults. In actual fact its probably the conflict from before the divorce actually went ahead than the result of the seperation itself. Apart from the celebrity set, I doubt many divorces are lightly entered into. Most people recognise the finality of it, and the potential for harm to the children of the relationship. Humankind is not yet as callous as some would have us believe.

I can't get my head around the idea that people enter into pre-nuptual agreements then promise to stick together for as long as they live. God or not.

Well.. CJ is up to par on the MIUAUG program.. "I think terms as in the eyes of God and divorce are obsolete".. whereas .. a slight change would be more appropriate

I suggest such terms are 'absolute'.....rather than obsolete.

From the Westiminster Confession:

1. Marriage is to be between one man and one woman: neither is it lawful for any man to have more than one wife, nor for any woman to have more than one husband, at the same time.

2. Marriage was ordained for the mutual help of husband and wife, for the increase of mankind with a legitimate issue, and of the Church with an holy seed; and for preventing of uncleanness.

3. It is lawful for all sorts of people to marry, who are able with judgment to give their consent. Yet it is the duty of Christians to marry only in the Lord. And therefore such as profess the true reformed religion should not marry with infidels, papists, or other idolaters: neither should such as are godly be unequally yoked, by marrying with such as are notoriously wicked in their life, or maintain damnable heresies.

6. Although the corruption of man be such as is apt to study arguments unduly to put asunder those whom God hath joined together in marriage: yet, nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the Church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage: wherein, a public and orderly course of proceeding is to be observed; and the persons concerned in it not left to their own wills and discretion in their own case

Food 4 thought....

Boazy: "And therefore such as profess the true reformed religion should not marry with infidels, papists, or other idolaters: neither should such as are godly be unequally yoked, by marrying with such as are notoriously wicked in their life, or maintain damnable heresies."

Well, if that's not an obsolete basis for an enduring sexual relationship between adults, then I don't know what is. "Damnable heretic" I may be, but the clear inference from such an anachronistic view of 'marriage' is that not only is such an institution completely outmoded in contemporary society, but so also must be the divorce that is apparently inevitable for 50% of deluded individuals who sign up to such a stupid contract.

As for "the eyes of God" - give us a break!