Dio, you are quite simply wrong. Arranged marriages have become quite modern, and matrimonial websites are booming.
It’s really not that different than online dating, except that you can be sure that both of you are looking for marriage and not flings, the specifics (salary, desire for kids, etc.) are right out there and you don’t have to try to weasel it out of your partner or face surprises when you are already invested, and your parents usually help pre-screen the dates. And of course the “dating” part is usually a bit less important.
Seems like a better system than screwing around until you hit 30, realizing the biological clock is ticking, waiting around hoping the guy will propose, and then marrying the first guy who does and hoping to make it work despite whatever differences you may have. I, for one, would appreciate it if my mom weeded out the weirdoes and losers on OKCupid and helped me find someone who is interested in marriage and kids on the same timeframe that I am.
No I’m not. It’s not like computer dating. It’s parents doing all the “screening” and making decisions that the kids are not free to say no to (they can sometimes turn down specific candidates, but they cannot turn down having a marriage arranged or marry for love).You don’t have to romanticize every backwards, barbaric practice on earth. I’m just waiting for your Paean to female genital mutilation and your long pork recipes.
Case by case surely? I knew a guy at work who vetoed several of his parents proposed matches after several meetings/dates with the prospective partner, before meeting the woman he agreed to marry. Whilst this isn’t for me, I see no reason to issue a blanket condemnation of the entire institution.
It’s like saying that until gay marriage is legalized, all marriages between men and women are involuntary, because people are forced to choose their spouses from a limited pool of candidates.
It’s kinda sorta like that I guess, though with a bigger pool of candidates, Arranged marriage situations are basically racist. You must marry within your specific ethnic group.
No. And you must know that already or you’ve just not thought about the question at all.
Now, there are plenty of situations - probably the majority even - where I’d say adultery is selfish and hurtful to the SO and the marriage/relationship and something to be avoided. That in itself does not make it immoral. Stupid and selfish, yes. Unethical, maybe, sometimes. Immoral, meh - maybe if you’re doing it just to hurt your partner(s).
Forgot to add: I completely fail to see why the OP is only addressing marriage - aside from the technical definition of adultery. In fact, I’d say his case would be stronger if he stipulated any kind of supposedly monogamous relationship (and a marriage doesn’t have to be one).
(a) the arranger will only arrange a marriage with someone from within your ethnic group
and
(b) you can only enter an arranged marriage.
I accept that (a) is commonly true - but it’s also commonly true for people who choose their own marriage partners.
As for (b), I have a friend from a community in which arranged marriage is common. He dated a number of women, some of them arranged by his parents with a view to marriage, some introduced to him by wider family or friends with the same view and some that he met himself, at school, at work or socially. He eventually married a woman introduced to him by his sister with a view to marriage. He assures me that there was no issue at all about his having rejected all the women suggested by his parents, and that there would equally have been no issue had he married someone that he had met himself.
Yes, the woman he married was of the same race as himself. But I don’t see anthing particularly racist about the process as a whole.
Dismissing the “rape” aspect, which has absolutely nothing to do with adultery, are you referring to your personal morality, or to a morality based on an outside source (i.e. religion)? If personal, can you really comment on any person’s action other than your own? If based on an outside force, would it pertain to those who who do not recognize the same source of morality as you?
I would go one step further and say that if it doesn’t violate the terms of the marriage it’s adultery only in the same way that a woman can be both sexually active and have an intact hymen: she’s a virgin in the technical sense only, and an adulterer where all parties involved are happy with it is an adulterer only in the technical sense.
Not sure I would call that an “arranged” marriage system. It is merely parents and siblings introducing you to other women and in the end you make your own choice from that pool or someone else you find on your own.
Jesus did not condemn the woman caught in the act of adultery, plus removed all her accusers. (John 8:1-11)
I feel that if the marriage is of the heart and done in a way that places Love as it’s highest value, adultery can not happen. If that is not the case however adultery has already happened, called spiritual adultery, which is a precursor to a ‘physical sin’ such as adultery. The act of adultery is not the fault of the person, as they are already a slave to that sin.
So adultery is just a end result of a imperfect marriage not fully bonded in Love. Committing the act can serve as a wakeup call, a chance to find out what is really wrong, perhaps a time to get rid of the wrong partner.
Well, even then, people are forced to choose their spouses from a “limited pool of candidates”: people who will consent to marry them, people who are currently alive, people who are of legal age…
I’ve heard of it working the way that even sven And One and Only Wanderer mention it. The way my mom explained it to me (and no, I’m not getting into one) is more like parents or relatives will introduce you to some people–kind of a set up. It’s no more forceful than a blind date or matchmaking.
So for those of us not up on our Ayn Rand, what did she do?