Here's a thought:

[growler_south]

If you want to change the law to protect the 'sanctity of marriage' then how about this: a couple may only get married after they have been in a relationship for five ok lets make it two years, same criteria as being deemed a couple for immigration purposes in civilised countries.

Of course, the tabloids would go out of business (Who's Britney going to marry today?) but I see that as a good thing...

FURTHER THOUGHTS:
Since the vocal fundies are claiming biblical authority for their interpretation of what marriage is, perhaos we should look at what marriage actually meant in biblical times and reinstate that practise? I'm pretty sure your average israelite couldnt meet someone at a club and get married in a drive-though marriage booth the next day...

Comments

[smellykaka.livejournal.com]

If you want to change the law to protect the 'sanctity of marriage' then how about this: a couple may only get married after they have been in a relationship for 5 years.

Could be a problem if a couple of mid-30s wannabe breeders meet. They'd want to be dropping sprogs in advance. I bet that wouldn't do much for the sanctity of marriage in the eyes of the Bible Belt. "Fancy those sinners having children out of wedlock! Oh, the humanity!"

[growler-south.livejournal.com]

If you're into the whole 'no sex before marriage' thing then a 5-year test of your conviction would be a good thing. How 'sanctified' is marriage if you're just doing it so you can fuck without guilt?

[smellykaka.livejournal.com]

How 'sanctified' is marriage if you're just doing it so you can fuck without guilt?

That's an extremely good point. I'm annoyed I didn't think of it.

[filmgeeknz.livejournal.com]

Agreed. I know so many Christian couples getting married very quickly after getting together, and I'm certainly not the only one who's thinking they're doing it to fuck without the guilt. Granted, most of them had been friends for years, but friendship is a different kettle of fish to a relationship (although it helps).

But at the same time, there is the alternative of arranged marriages to think about; "In California, one in every two marriages is expected to fail. Compare this to the divorce statistic for Saudi Arabia, which is surprisingly high relative to the rest of the Middle East: There, one in every five marriages fails. Quite possibly, the higher rate of divorce in the United States results from the transformed image of divorce as not being negative in any way. People in the East, or at least in Saudi Arabia, are hesitant about breaking a marriage. Sadly, the social stigma still remains." (taken from here (http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=33331))

Mostly a failed marriage can be attributed to the way people in the West look for a partner; they tend to go for love, sex, beauty etc then become disenchanted with their partner. In the East they focus on integrity, diligence, ambition, humility, generosity, etc and let the love grow.

Maybe we just look for the wrong things?

[growler-south.livejournal.com]

Sadly, the social stigma still remains.

Sadly?! Social stigma in the west is what kept many couples together- the pressure to make it work, figure out what to do once the first flush of giddiness has passed (and it will, and it does) rather than just saying "oh well, the love has gone, lets call it quits"

[smellykaka.livejournal.com]

I know so many Christian couples getting married very quickly after getting together, and I'm certainly not the only one who's thinking they're doing it to fuck without the guilt.

When I meet the occasional couple who married at a young age and had kids straight away I tend to assume

a) they're Christian and were getting frisky, but didn't want guilt trips
and
b) they belong to a denomination that frowns on contraception.