Posted on 10/14/2006 11:40:40 AM PDT by voletti
IT'S OFFICIAL: TO BE MARRIED MEANS TO BE OUTNUMBERED...
49.7%, or 55.2 million, of the nation's 111.1 million households in 2005 were made up of married couples -- with/without children -- just shy of majority...
"Did you get a lot of flack for marrying at 19?"
Only from my dad, but not directly because of my youth. He figured I'd been influenced by in-laws that were not of the same (liberal) church or the same (liberal) political backgrounds. But actually, by the time I'd reached 16 I was starting to wise up spiritually and politically and think for myself.
To be entirely honest, I gave *myself* a lot of flack for not being more financially mature in the first couple of years of marriage. "We were poor, but we were in love ..." ; )
51 District of Columbia 21.8I
Whoa, what happened to DC? Even NY has 44%. But DC falls all the way down to 21%. Does this survey include politicians? < :P
Marriage is not the problem, divorce laws are.
It was better in the good old days for society, and that's for sure. The disintegration of common moral values, social institutions and law that reinforced them both is pretty near the root of our modern woes. I would say, however, that for the individual (at least some individuals) marriage is still the same as it has always been. I believe that a shared faith is at the core of successful marriages because it touches every sphere of life and provides the ultimate in direction and reconcilliation to one another. Given that preparation, out of the box, very few marriages would fail. Struggles, yes. Contemplation of murder, perhaps. In the long haul, though, they have all the timeless ingredients needed in a healthy and long-lasting marriage. In fact, passing that legacy onto children is, in this secular and unhinged society, maybe the best thing anyone could do for a contribution to life on earth. My $0.02 worth.
I don't find that odd at all. I think it happens to many people.
My wife and I met in 1990 when I was 16 and she was 14. We married in 1995 and today are happier than ever.
I'm like you.It was never really on my agenda because I saw my parent's marriage as very flawed and then my generation-baby boomers-really soured me on the whole idea.
You have to have a social support network for a marriage to work.I never had anything close to that.My folks trashed every girl I had an interest in.
Even today,my"friends"feel a need to badmouth any female I like.And they do that to everyone else too.
I think they want everyone else to be as miserable as they are.
That's why we need gay marriage, group marriage, first cousin marriage, marriage between children and adults, marriage between humans and animals -- then there will be enough "marriages" to go around. /SARCASM
So then why is it so important that gays be able to marry?
Sure enough, many women will try to take every material thing she can get her hands on. When my husband (who I'd been with for fifteen years) decided I was "no fun" and left me to be with a gal (three time divorcee, but "fun") he'd met at a bar, I didn't drag out the divorce or fight for his money.
MANY people thought I was crazy, including most of my family members. However, material things and money aren't that important to me. I don't need to depend on an ex to support me. I didn't even fight over custody and child support. I agreed to joint custody and no support. I felt that it was more important for my children to see their father as often as possible, than for me to fight for custody and the $$$ it would get me.
I still think he is an idiot, but he loves his kids and would do anything for them. I don't regret the decisions I made.
Therefore, I respectfully disagree with you. Not all women are interested in screwing the man, even when the man has done something awful and hurtful.
Not surprised that New York and Florida are so low. Surprised about Louisiana, unless the black population (which has a higher rate of divorce than white folks) skews the figure.
See #30. Any explanation as to why New Jersey has a high rate of married couples, yet across the river in NY, the figure is lower?
Does this include people with multiple marriages? ;-)
Glad to hear from you.
not too sure. one thing that comes to mind is that about half of NJ is Catholic
Returning after a long absence...
I was just about to post what Coleus did: Could it be the number of Catholics here in NJ? Also, maybe the couples in NJ tend to be older...?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.