Comments about ‘'I do' becoming 'maybe later' or 'maybe not': Number of marrieds drops to 51 percent’

This information makes me sad. There is much that is good in marriage, and if both put forth effort it is truly miraculous.

The feelings I have developed for my wife remind me of watching our garden grow. From a small seed to a production and beautiful flower or fruit. When we were first married I couldn't have imagined the heart filling feelings I have each time I think of her.

For those of you who think marriage is not 'all that'. Just remember none of us are perfect and that it takes two to tango.

Merry Christmas.

Let me first state that I am a firm believer in marriage. One marriage with one partner that will last forever. I believe I have such a marriage. There have been many changes to the laws in this country since the 60's and I believe some of those changes are having an impact on these statistics. Men are, for the most part, subject to a much greater risk should they marry and should that marriage end in divorce. I think the changes to the laws are a positive thing and are helping to equalize what happens after a man and woman marry if they had elected to have the woman stay home and raise the children and then divorce occurs. Men have a much higher risk nowadays in paying spousal support and course child support and the courts are becoming more proactive in collecting this support. May the real men step up to the plate and marry. May the losers continue to see the legal consequences of divorce as too much risk and remain single.

Marriage has lost it's magic and it's utility in the eyes of younger Americans. Why? Because they have seen the marriages of their parents. Some of them married for money. Others married because it was expected by society or their church (or both). Many married because of the romantic illusion about living happily ever after.

But with around half of marriages ending, and those who preach the importance of marriage at the same time denying it's benefits to same sex couples, the younger generations are legitimately asking: "what is the point of marriage?"

And nobody has good answers that explain why hetero-couples should marry but SS couples should not.

You can love someone and be committed without that piece of paper. All the divorces prove the paper means nothing.

Being "happier" is the result of living a genuine life. If you genuinely believe in marriage, you will be happier married.

When studies spout the benefits of marriage, none of that resonates. Do you expect people to marry because it will help them live longer? Or to make more money?

I married for love. Not for god or church or society. That was 25 years ago.

Dare we call it what it is; sin?

@Mountanman
"Dare we call it what it is; sin? "

You can, but that's not a legal reason to ban gay marriage. If you can think of one, let the Prop 8 legal defense team know, since they're still looking for one.

I understand there are times and circumstances when divorce or not getting married is the best option and needs to be done. I don't know why the numbers would drop, there are studies that show since women have better paying jobs now than in the past, they are able to leave a bad marriage. Along with that, if they get fed up being a mother or a wife they can also leave. Same with the man. So financial independence just opens up an option where at one time, people would stay in a marriage for financial security or work things out.

We also live in a society, if we don't like where we are or what we have, we walk away from it. To a degree a lesser sense of long term loyalty to jobs, marriage, education, even political offilication. Look at the love affair people had with barack and threw themselves at his feet. About 3 years later, most people can't wait to get rid of him. Which maybe that's not loyalty but people opening up their eyes to how bad he is.

The average age for first marriages out here in NY is in the early thirties. many people are waiting until they have completed college and/or have gotten more finically staple before marrying. Why does this matter you ask? Because it means when they do these surveys there are more young adults that have not yet married so it shows up in the data as a drop in married adults but it does not mean they will never marry. Other research has shown that those that wait longer to get married are also far less likely to divorce. In other words while this is an interesting study it does not necessarily reflect on the over health of marriage. It does however make great fodder for a whole lot of hand wringing.

'We also live in a society, if we don't like where we are or what we have, we walk away from it.' - Liberal Ted | 3:01 p.m. Dec. 14, 2011

I completely agree.

Here are some example. You might be aware of them.

Kim Kardashian, 72 day marriage.

Britney Spears, 55 hour marriage.

Bristol Palin, had a child outside of marriage.

I guess Mountanman | 2:26 p.m. would call them...

'sinners.'

Another fluff piece on Marriage.

I would suggest the above article readers dig up a copy of November's Atlantic magazine with the Cover story article titled "What, me Marry"? The challenges to choosing a marriage partner are daunting. More women are going to college than men. With the educational barriers down preventing women from pursuing professional careers in Law, Medicine or Business the concept of "marrying up" has been turned on its head. These professionally accomplished women when they hit 30 something, find a famine of suitable mates. They are left with the choice of "Marrying Down" or remaining single. Accomplished Women of color even more so. Here is a statistic that will warm everybody's heart: 30 percent of American children born today are to single mothers. One quote in the article caught my eye, to paraphrase" "50 years ago if you weren't married (at a certain age)you were considered "strange" ". Let me add 60 years ago if you were a divorced woman. You may have well just paraded around town with a Scarlett Letter sown on you dress. Whats the solution? Creating jobs would help. But I'm sure other readers have a laundry list of Ideas.

BYU Track Star | 3:40 p.m. Dec. 14, 2011
"Here is a statistic that will warm everybody's heart: 30 percent of American children born today are to single mothers."

And the sad thing is that many of those children's biological fathers are not single.

Something is wrong with this report. Having recently lived in New York City, most people in Manhattan were not married, but nearly everyone in Queens and the boroughs were. So, my Sophomore guess is 60-70% of New York adults. Even higher marriages in Chicago.
So, who's bringing the stat down? ...California? Texas?

This article is important in examining the evolution of our cultural values. I understand that many would consider it a devolution of values, but the article points out one very specific trend in the realization that dogmatic institutions such as marriage do not necessarily benefit 100% of society. Marriage is a wonderful institution for those who desire companionship or whichever benefit they feel they garner in tying the knot. There are plenty of highly educated people that feel they will be just as satisfied in their lives without marriage and who refuse to live life in a way that does not conform to their own wants. Is it selfish? Some say yes, many, however, say no.

Over the last few years, many in society have done their best to destroy marriage. Massachusetts, New York, Iowa, California, etc. Instead of marriage being defined as a man and a woman, it is becoming defined as anything we can imagine. Which means it is becoming nothing.

Perhaps that is why the extreme drop in marriage rates. It no longer has any meaning. Society has destroyed it.

'Over the last few years, many in society have done their best to destroy marriage.' - sjgf | 5:09 p.m. Dec. 14, 2011

Your right.

Kim Kardashian, 72 day marriage.
Britney Spears, 55 hour marriage.
Bristol Palin, has a child outside of marriage.

If this is your 'definition' of marriage...

is it any wonder you see a drop in marriage rates?

@Razzle2 |
wow what a gross over generalization. Care to provide any statistical proof for that claim. If you are basing it on your antidotal experience I would dare say it may have been the crowds you where running with. I live in Manhattan have for yeas, the vast majority of people I know (gay and straight) are married or in a civil union.

@sjgf
You may want to take another look at the numbers the states you listed have lower then average divorce rates. care to try again?

@sgjf

Massachusetts 1.8%, New York 2.5% , Iowa 2.5%, California N/A (sadly) so how does Utah rank against these states that are "destroying marriage?" Utah has a divorce rate of 3.5% (source CDC ) So tell me again how the states you listed are destroying marriage when Utah has a significantly higher divorce rate then any of them? I am sorry but your emtpy rhetoric just does not stand up to the statistical realties.

* 'Over the last few years, many in society have done their best to destroy marriage. Massachusetts...' - sjgf | 5:09 p.m. Dec. 14, 2011

George totally called you on this sjgf!

*'After 5 Years of Legal Gay Marriage, Massachusetts still has the lowest state divorce rate.' - Bruce Wilson - AlterNet - 08/24/09

'Massachusetts retains the national title as the lowest divorce rate state, and the MA divorce rate is about where the US divorce rate was in 1940, prior to the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor.'

So, not ONLY is Massachusetts factually NOT harming the divorce rate, as you claimed...

They have had the LOWEST divorce rate in the country...for going on 60 years now!

That was Pearl Harbor!

Of course, people against marriage, can just MAKE UP claims, right?

George and I hold to a higher standard.

This data was collected from the 'National Center for Vital Statistics.'

@George
I actually agree with you. The article says that the national average is 51%. So, I say Manhattan is probably around 49% and the boroughs are much higher. So, my question remains. Who's bringing the average down?
I'm thinking that the the article should have been titled, "Young People Delay Marriage." I'm not convinced that marriage is on the way out.

@Mountanman;

"Sin" is a religious construct and it is only "sin" if you believe in that particular religion and fail to adhere to the particular belief.

@sjgf;

It isn't the GLBT who want to marry who are destroying the institution of marriage, it is those heterosexuals who marry and then cheat or divorce who are doing the destroying. You're not very good at cause-and-effect.

There are those of us who would get married if we could but people like sjgf refuse to admit that our marriages won't harm their own. Somehow, a glbt couple getting married is going to cause sjgf's marriage to implode. I'm at a loss as to how that will happen and sjgf has failed to explain it adequately, but his fear is real. It is also illogical seeing as how my partner and I have already been together for over 13 years and his marriage hasn't imploded yet. Will legalizing our relationship really cause so much havoc to his?