I have an envious respect for Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn.

That is all. Carry on.

I've been married for just shy of 30-years without regret. It wasn't based on anything religious we got married at a hotel - "God" wasn't mentioned once. It's been a successful tradition in both of our families and we saw no reasonable argument against it.

It sounds like a large percentage on this site started out religious.

It's a long term financial contract engaged for the purpose of creating a positive environment for child rearing. Otherwise just be a couple without the financial entanglement.

After trying it once and giving it everything I had, I don't see it in nearly the same way that I did before.

Going into it, I saw it as romance and a commitment to someone, that we'd have each other's backs. A few years in, it suddenly became her picking and choosing what parts of what she was doing that I got to join in on, what things she deigned to let me know what was important to her, and outright refusing to let me know how I could make things better when I saw a sudden drop in her engagement. Despite being shut out and isolated, I still was committed to fixing and improving things and saving the relationship right up until the day she moved in with one of our friends and his parents.

Now I see that marriage itself doesn't guarantee anything other than legal considerations. There is no extra dimension to the relationship that the costly ceremony adds - if you didn't have an exceptionally strong relationship that just works before getting married, you won't have one after.

I would still get married to the right person - there's the tax benefits, inheritance, medical decisions, and it's been shown to be be a major benefit to any children's development. I won't change how I treat my partner in the relationship, I'll still give it everything, but I won't take the fact that they married me as any indication of commitment beyond their behavior and treatment of me before we were married.

I certainly won't be having a religious ceremony, I've already had too much smoke and sunshine blown up my ass in that respect.

Something else that has tarnished my view of the institution is that in the last dozen years or so, I've seen marriage weaponized. Very many churches have been pushing their own particular set of beliefs as the only valid definition of marriage and used that to espouse hate towards people that don't belong to that particular faith (and it's narrow definitions of sexual orientation and gender) - despite it being present in more or less every religion mankind has dreamt up since we came up with ways to record records of it, they think they alone have a claim on the practice. I think that as a society, we should separate the legal and religious portions of the institution - all legal benefits and obligations come from a civil union, and all religious entanglements come from a separate, independent ceremony that carries no weight of law or legal requirements/enforcement. If you want the same thing that your parents had, you'd have to go through both ceremonies. If you want something functional, you get just the civil union, and if you want delusions, you go to church.

There are still economic and legal issues involved. Marriage should be right for all but certainly not obligatory.

Depends on where you are in life. I'm glad I had 38 years of marriage and that we both had the protection of that piece of paper when it came to Financial issues. I'm also Overjoyed that I was lucky to find what I would consider a soulmate. I would love to have another soulmate but life's too complicated for older folks when it comes to marriage so I have no desire for marriage even though I do believe in that level of commitment.

For me personally, no. I won't speak for anyone else.

Not for myself. If it works for others, who am I to say that it's not a good idea?

For the right person I’d do just about anything.

I went with maybe because I don't see the need for it but if my partner needs it. I think 2 people can live happily ever after without it. I know there are some women that say without marriage there is no commitment but if you trust the person you want to marry it doesnt matter if you marry them or not.

So sad so many people project failed marriages upon future possible successful marriages. .. I feel much of "dating" is NOT modern courtship but instead cheap sampling temporary intimacy not intending towards marriage. ...that means boys lying to fuck and girls wanting cheap thrills...it's a statistical fact men will die 8 years earlier @ 81 alone, while women don't need partners to live 88 years

I sure don't believe in big weddings, such a waste of money and a lot of stress on a bride and groom who need to concentrate on what they're getting into rather than dazzling the kinfolk with a great show. As for marriage, it really depends on the relationship between the two partners.Some folks are so proud of the match that they really want to have a wedding to celebrate and affirm their commitment. If they would feel more committed and make a greater effort toward making their relationship a lifelong success because of the legal obligation, then maybe they need it. However, love and commitment can certainly exist in a relationship without a license. In today's world, however, there are tax benefits to marriage and legalities that can be more easily addressed, particularly with kids and the death of a spouse. But if you decide not to stay, the legalities can be a royal pain to resolve. My wife and I were technically married for 30 years (but lived apart for the last five), ending in a non-adversarial divorce. Later I was in a relationship for a couple of years that we.thought would be for the rest of our lives, but it wasn't. At this point and for me, I would see no benefit in a licensed marriage... as long as she and I are clear in our intentions and have resolved any concerns about what happens when impairment or death occur.

Marriage... I came close once. She vanished. She must have had sense.

My multiple marriages are a result of marrying women that I either listed for but had nothing in common with or seemed to be nice but it just didn't feel right. It's a result of my poor self esteem.

Yes, I still believe in it which kinda surprises me.

I've been down that road twice. I'm skeptical that I am capable of doing it again. It would have to be someone really incredible, smart, sexy, sassy, funny, fun, optimistic, POSITIVE, and diverse. I might as well be asking for a fucking unicorn that shits $100 bills.

I said 'yes', but I need to add caveats. First, it depends largely on the intents and purposes whether it should be marriage in the 'legal' sense, marriage in the 'traditional+legal' sense, or a solemn commitment between the participants.

The 'legal' and 'traditional+legal' both have the common element of being recognized by the state and there are manifold intents and purposes involved. Tax and property are generally accepted elements that are frequently not benefits of a personal commitment by the two parties without state involvement. Children from such unions have the benefit of an accepted identity with the state that may or may not be important, but it appears that it is more often important down the line.

If just the personal commitment is desired, then there is no need for the other two options. I the parties are religious or associated with some cultural traditions, the the 'traditional+legal' option -- or just the 'traditional' without state involvement is good.

Another of those 'chance-choice-pick a winner' deals.

It's a matter of personal expectations and decisions. My wife and I have been happy together for 32 yrs. My parents were together (as far as i could tell happily) for over 50 yrs. 'til she passed. And all my siblings are still In their 1st tries in their mid 30 yrs.
I don't know. Maybe we're (and our wives) all just boring.

I firmly believe that to have a marriage, the couple must have personalities that work together!