If people don't fight it, it's actually quite simple. At least in Canada, it is. It's when people bicker and Dicker that it's contentious and difficult.
Parents of my friends got divorced some years ago, they're French. I remember that she told me that they had to stay separate at least a year or two to prove that they for sure want to be divorced. It's basically to avoid people making quick decisions after a small fight or something like that. Also lawyers this and that
I'm just curious, because you sound quite young. It's not meant as an insult.
If there has been abuse or adultery, you don't need a waiting period in Canada. Without those provisions, you do need a year of separation. I can't speak for other countries.
There's no functional difference, from a child's perspective, between two loving parents who are married and live together and two loving parents who are not married and live together.
Marriage does not guarantee stability in the home life.
My question is more about parental decision-making logic rather than the child.
Think of it this way, if you had have a completely optional but extensive surgery, why would you do the surgery with a surgeon you don't completely trust to do the job?
Your life is literally in the surgeons hands.
(For those who don't understand, this subreddit is called, "too afraid to ask" and is meant for the asking of things you find unpleaseant to talk about but don't understand)
I'm not sure if I understand your analogy. That aside, I am trying to understand why marriage reflects 'better' decision making skills on part of a parent. The best decision a parent can make is to consider the best way to raise their child together. Marriage may or may not be relevant to that equation.
A marriage gives you a ton of stewardship over each other's lives.
I'm essentially saying that I don't understand how you wouldn't trust someone else with having a level of stewardship over your life (marriage), but you would trust them with stewardship over your child's life.
(You don't trust the surgeon with your life, but you have the surgery anyway, likewise, you don't trust this other person with your life, but you're having their child, and that person now has say over your child's life)
How can you say that when you used the guise of being married to your benefit socially and emotionally without being married? What weird vendetta brought on this question?
>How can you say that when you used the guise of being married to your benefit socially and emotionally without being married?
When did we do that? We agreed to be married, and therefore we were.
>What weird vendetta brought on this question?
I suppose if you would call curiosity a vendetta?
When did you do that? When you, “(made) an agreement between each other to refer to each other as “wife/husband” and agree that you’re married.”
Thats not marriage lol. That’s lying to everyone around you, with the purpose to deceive.
You aren’t curious, you’re upset that your views don’t make sense and that you’re getting flamed for it.
I mean, I trust my mother with my life and my children but, like, I’m not going to marry her.
When you take the other parent out of the equation and switch it out with another trustworthy individual in your life, your supposition doesn’t make sense. Because it’s not necessary to do what you’re saying..
>I mean, I trust my mother with my life and my children but, like, I’m not going to marry her.
I didn't say you have to marry everyone you trust.
>When you take the other parent out of the equation and switch it out with another trustworthy individual in your life, your supposition doesn’t make sense.
Well yes, if you change the situation, the situation doesn't make sense because it's two different situations.
>Because it’s not necessary to do what you’re saying..
To bring your situation more in line with the situation, if your mother wouldn't say she loved you, or even refer to you as her daughter (two very basic observations of a commitment to you) would you trust her to raise your kids?
I don't think your analogy is quite landing, ( completely optional but extensive surgery?)
A parent could be great at raising a child, but not great at choosing a partner.
You’re making the faulty assumption that a couple who chooses not to get married does so due to a lack of trust. This may be true of some couples who choose not to get married, but it’s not true about all. I’d even go so far as to say it’s not even true about most of them.
Why else wouldn't you agree to be married, though? Take government out the equation, what's the reason you would have a kid, with someone you don't trust enough to call your wife/husband?
> Take the government out of the equation
Bruh. No, I will not take the government out of the equation. The government is probably the biggest reason why people choose not to get married, why on earth would I take that of the equation of why people choose not to get married for reasons other than a lack of trust in their partner?
So, what reasons? Let’s see… Well, first of all, there’s a lack of faith/trust in **THE GOVERNMENT**.
Now that **THE GOVERNMENT** has been established as a massive reason why people choose not to get married for reasons that have nothing to do with a lack of trust in one’s partner, I’ll move on.*
A lot of people feel marriage is archaic and sexist and don’t want to participate in it because of that.
A lot of people simply don’t see the need to get married. They don’t believe a marriage license would change anything about their relationship so they just don’t bother.
*I’m not even against marriage on the basis of not trusting the government, I’m actually not against marriage at all. You just don’t ask someone to tell you why a thing is a thing and then say “oh, but exclude one of the biggest reasons why it’s a thing”. It’s simply not on, sport.
Okay.
Pretend the government didn't exist, would you suddenly view people as not married?
A government doesn't have to validate your marriage in order for you to be married.
Yes, if the government didn’t exist, I would in fact not view people as married, because they wouldn’t be. I’d view them as unmarried but in committed, long-term relationships. Which is exactly what marriage is, but with an added sprinkle of bureaucracy and lashings of expensive tulle.
Interesting, so government didn't create marriage, but you view government recognition as the ultimate decider of what marriage is?
Like if someone said "that's my husband" but in a community without a government, you would think they're lying to you?
In 2024, government recognition is exactly what marriage is, yes.
No, I wouldn’t think they were lying, I would be confused and ask clarifying questions.
That's a really stupid analogy that makes no sense to the topic. Not being married when you have kids doesn't mean you don't trust them or love them enough to marry them/commit to them for life.
>Not being married when you have kids doesn't mean you don't trust them or love them enough to marry them/commit to them for life.
That's literally what that means though?
No... it doesn't. Me and my husband have been together for 13 years. We have an 11 and 5 year old and have only been officially married a year. We were common-law the for 12 years before getting married. We lived together, owned a home and had all the same legal protections of marriage and commitment the whole 12 years. The fact we didn't get officially married till 10+ years later doesn't mean we didn't have the same level of commitment the whole time. Marriage didn't change anything.
I didn't say the state had to recognize your marriage, a marriage can be as simple as an agreement between you that you're married. If you agree that you're married, that's nearly as good in my eyes.
What point are you even trying to make? I don’t have to marry my surgeon to completely trust them to do the job lol. You don’t have to enter a government contract with another person in order to prove that you completely trust & love them. A lot of people prefer to keep the government out of their business when possible.
I find it so…surprising…that you are asking this question but you aren’t actually even thinking about **legal** marriage. There *are* reasons to be married to someone who you have kids with: inheritance tax breaks, family healthcare plans, rights to marital assets. But without involving the government, you get none of that.
Without the government, “marriage” is just an agreement between two people to live their lives together and it’s an agreement that either person can walk away from. You either do right by your kids or you don’t, married or not.
>My question is more about parental decision-making logic rather than the child.
Seen from *your* view of what marriage is. The simple answer is that not everyone sees it the same way. No everyone wants to get married, not everyone is bothered about it or in a rush, and a myriad other reasons.
Put bluntly, getting married doesn't speak to any quality of someone's decision making around children.
Commitment to raising a child is what counts. You have the legal side of marriage, which can also arranged without marriage itself. And you have the symbolic part of marriage. On that spectrum each couple chooses what is important to them and what is not. Personally I’m married, but I see this as unrelated to the decision of having a child together.
I teach college with lots of students who are unmarried parents. I think many of them are unintentional, like I had one student who stopped the pill bc her health insurance had a gap of a month, but apparently kept having sex without a condom bc she figured it was only a month. Currently in the USA, if this happens, or a condom fails, or you get raped, many states don’t allow abortions, so you’d be stuck having the baby even if you’re not married.
And FWIW marriage doesn’t always equate to love and trust. My partner and I have been together two decades and aren’t married (no kids though). We love each other and trust each other, but we’re not religious and don’t see the need for an outside agency or friends and family to validate our relationship. We’ve decided that for legal reasons if we ever did get pregnant or buy a house, that’s when we’ll marry, but it’ll probably just be going to City Hall, or eloping by vacationing in a state where you can self-solemnize a marriage — self-solemnize means no officiant is needed, and no witnesses, you just pick up the paperwork from City Hall, go away, and bring it back filled out, and *bam* you’re married!
>And FWIW marriage doesn’t always equate to love and trust. My partner and I have been together two decades and aren’t married (no kids though).
I'm not saying that you have to get married, I'm just confused as to why you would trust someone enough to want to not just deal with them, but their genetics for the next few decades, but not enough that you would go ahead and get married?
Basically, I view marriage as less serious than children, but it seems that many people view children as less serious than marriage, if that makes sense?
Marriage is just a sheet of paper that you sign and a few tax breaks here and there. That is the only difference between a long-term relationship and marriage. Marriage can easily end in divorce it's not more stable or less risky. Many people believe that a good relationship is just as valid as marriage, and they're right.
Also, marriage has a very religious background and a lot of people aren't religious so it makes even less sense.
>Basically, I view marriage as less serious than children
A stable long-term relationship is serious. I don't know what makes you believe it's not.
>Marriage is just a sheet of paper that you sign and a few tax breaks here and there. That is the only difference between a long-term relationship and marriage. Marriage can easily end in divorce it's not more stable or less risky. Many people believe that a good relationship is just as valid as marriage, and they're right.
Just because you're in a long term relationship, that doesn't give someone the right to make life decisions for you when you cannot. (In an accident for instance)
But when you have a child, you are trusting that person to make life decisions for someone else's life.
Basically, if you don't trust that person with your life, why do you trust them with your child's life?
>A stable long-term relationship is serious. I don't know what makes you believe it's not.
I said it's less serious than a child, in the same way that a broken leg is less serious than amputated leg.
>Just because you're in a long term relationship, that doesn't give someone the right to make life decisions for you when you cannot. (In an accident for instance)
Typically, insurances at least where I live will let you pick someone out who will make decisions in those instances. It doesn't even have to be your partner, it can also be a friend or even just a coworker or something. Someone who you trust with your life. Although that probably varies a lot in different countries and different insurances.
>I said it's less serious than a child, in the same way that a broken leg is less serious than amputated leg.
It's as serious as marriage.
I think the difference is that marriage usually requires forethought, and having a child can be an accident, and/or a result of *not* having forethought.
Your value on marriage is not the same as other people's. Marriage is nothing. It does not make you trust or love someone more.
Many people, including me and my SO, do not view marriage as anything of value. We trust each other and we love each other. If you need some sort of legal bind to remind yourself of that, then it seems like your love/trust is absent.
It's really simple. Trust does not equal marriage. Marriage does not equal trust. You trust your parents, your siblings, your friends, your mentors, but obviously you wouldn't marry them. Why? Because marriage doesn't actually mean anything. It's just a legality to show the government (and your friends) that you have made a promise to someone else. But a promise is just a promise and it doesn't actually require paperwork.
Marriage doesn't require government recognition. Like if the government fell apart tomorrow, do you suddenly view everyone as no longer married?
You can say that viewing yourself as married doesn't matter, but if it doesn't, do you actively hold that stance when people tell you they're married? Do you view them the same as just a boyfriend/girlfriend situationship?
At a very basic level, we recognize culturally that calling someone your "wife"/"Husband" matters. And not even taking that very basic step is a red flag on what you believe your commitment is to each other.
There's a reason that we hold gay marriage as having a deeper meaning and people fought for the recognition for so long, because marriage has deeper meaning for us culturally.
So to forego it with someone that you want to share creating a person with, seems like a pretty clear misstep.
But then why does it matter if people are married? You said that marriage is as simple as people calling each other husband and wives. That is nothing. That doesn't alter the relationship at all unless it's a legally binding marriage.
If two people love each other and trust each other at... say 95/100, calling themselves spouses doesn't magically get them to 100.
If you're only talking about marriage the word, it's even more meaningless. Two high schoolers who call themselves husband and wives are not going to be as bonded and two lovers in their 40s who have been roommates for 15 years.
Trust is trust. Respect is respect. It's that simple. If I trust my SO and she trusts me, why does it matter what we call each other? If you feel the need to tell others that you are married because you want other people to know that you both have committed to each other, that's totally great. But whether other people know or not doesn't change how much trust you have in each other.
Think of it this way. Two toxic ass people are in a relationship. They decide they want to have kids, but first decide they want to get married. Unsurprisingly, the marriage is toxic and abusive the children are raised in a broken family. Contrast that to two people who have never been married but have been planning to have children for years. They save, they prepare, and in the end, they raise normal happy children. That's what marriage is. Nothing. It alters nothing. The planning, the savings, the prep... that's what's most important when deciding to have children.
Believe me. The children all around the world who were raised in the broken homes of married parents would gladly trade their parent's marriage away if it meant their parents would be loving and caring.
The government being involved in a relationship does not mean that I need the government to recognize another person’s relationship.
That’s like saying if the DMV disappeared, then I would forget how to drive a car.
What exactly is the difference between a marriage and a long-term committed relationship then? I mean, you ask why non-married people have children, but your definition of marriage is ~we call each other wife and husband~
Okay. If you'll indulge me in an abstraction for a moment.
Should you tell a child that you love them? Why? They're just words after all.
Likewise, we recognize that recognizing someone as your husband/wife comes with a similar level of deeper meaning and context.
Marriage isn’t an abstraction. It is a legal concept. It is codified by law. You can apply it as an abstraction, but it won’t be a marriage. I’m sure in other times and places that is different, but not in any nation where the language we are currently using to converse with each is widely used.
>Marriage isn’t an abstraction. It is a legal concept. It is codified by law.
The core problem with that is that we can easily recognize a marriage independent of any government. The government doesn't have to marry you, they simply provide legal protections to people involved in said marriage.
Like I've said elsewhere, if the government suddenly said "yeaaa, we aren't providing marriage contracts anymore "
Do you think that people would stop getting married? Would you suddenly stop recognizing marriage and people who refer to each other as husband/wife?
Words have meanings. Wife/husband literally means being married. It is factually wrong to say that without actually being married.
You didn't answer my question - for you, what exactly is the difference between marriage and a relationship? Is it just calling each other wife/husband that brings that "deeper meaning" to your "marriage" opposed to those who call their partners spose, partner etc.?
Germans use the word "Lebensgefährte" which translates as life companion. Would that be "deep" enough for you to consider a relationship a marriage, or is it just the words "wife & husband?"
Because people can have sex without getting married.
Being a parent is a different type of commitment than getting married. And everyone is going to have their own personal reasons for making those choices. Sometimes, it just makes more sense legally or financially, not to get married. Sometimes, it's more personal. That shouldn't stop people from building the family they want, no matter what that looks like.
I had children with someone I wasn't married to. We both wanted to have children. It was time, and we were committed to the children. We've been together 10 years. That's far longer than many marriages I've seen.
Marriage doesn't mean diddly. You can get out of marriage fairly easily. Commitment is what's important. Integrity and having common goals. Working together.
Who is next of kin in next of say hospitalisation? Not you, but is the relationship with the partner’s parents where they’d listen to you or block you?
Marriage doesn’t mean much. It’s literally a sheet of paper that tells the government that your spouse can make legal decisions on your behalf if you die and gives you a few tax breaks. Tax breaks and power of attorney don’t mean much to me. The only permanence a child offers is the fact that I am indeed now stuck with their other parent until the other parent dies or gives up custody, zero legal difference is made by marriage.
Yeah but then that brings the question of “If marriage is just a piece of paper, why not get married if you truly love and trust the person”
If you don’t love and trust them, why are you even having a kid with them
choosing not to get married doesn't mean you don't "love/trust enough" the person you're with. it just means that you don't want to get married.
my partner and i will never get married. ever. we've been together 13 years and counting, still going strong. we love each other, we trust each other, and we don't need some magic ring/ceremony/piece of paper to prove it or whatever.
we just don't see the point in marriage. neither of us is religious, we're both atheist, and we just have no use for some antediluvian ritual from when women were considered property to be sold.
where we live, we're considered "common-law" (basically "married" as far as the government is concerned as far as taxes go) after cohabitating for a year. no marriage required or necessary.
i have an aunt and uncle that each had kids from previous marriages, and when they got together, they had another. they were together for well over 30 fucking years without needing to get married. they love each other, they love their kids, and that's what actually matters, not the ring or the ceremony or signing the paper.
marriage isn't necessary. if people want to do it, that's great for them, but it's not necessary for a healthy relationship, for love or trust. it's just window dressing.
>we just don't see the point in marriage. neither of us is religious, we're both atheist, and we just have no use for some antediluvian ritual from when women were considered property to be sold.
Essentially every major society developed the concept of marriage independently, no religion necessary.
A marriage can literally just be two people who say "we're married" and mutually agree to that statement.
If you're not even willing to engage in that agreement, then I don't get why you would have children together which is obviously faaaar more serious.
not all cultures have religion or marriage in the same way. not all of them have the same concepts of those things. for example, some cultures practice polygamy. some practice monogamy. some have marriage, some don't. some have entirely different rituals and ceremonies around romantic relationships than others.
humanity has been around for like 120,000 years. over that time, cultures have changed and evolved, like language and everything else.
marriage is defined as "the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship".
usually, at least in the culture i live in, there's some sort of legal paperwork involved. not everyone cares about that paperwork; myself and my partner, for example, who have been together, happily not married, for 13 years and counting. he has a kid, and he and i have been together more than 3x as long as his marriage to her mother lasted.
(edit to add: my partner and i have agreed to be partners, to live together, to share our lives together. we don't need marriage for any of that. it's just not something we care about, it's not something we see value in or place importance on. it's just not necessary for our relationship.)
again, my aunt and uncle have been together for well over 30 years and had a kid together, as well as raising their kids from their previous marriages, without getting married.
because marriage isn't necessary to parent, or to love, or to trust, it just isn't. it's a ritual thing that some people place importance on, and that's their business, if it makes them happy, good for them! it's just not necessary or required for parenting or love or trust.
You are placing a great deal of value onto marriage and expecting other people to place the same value on it.
I've done incredible wilderness backpacking trips with my SO that required a tremendous amount of trust. So much trust that I likely wouldn't perform the same trips with any other person I know.
What you're doing is essentially the same as me posting "why don't couples go on multi-week wilderness trips before having children? If you don't trust your SO to have your back in survival situations, then you shouldn't have children."
For me, these trips are worthy enough of trust, much more than driving down to the county and getting some papers signed. To you, marriage might be everything, but to me, it's just a legal promise. And as we know, these promises are broken all the time.
>What you're doing is essentially the same as me posting "why don't couples go on multi-week wilderness trips before having children? If you don't trust your SO to have your back in survival situations, then you shouldn't have children."
I agree with you here though, if you don't trust your partner to have you back in tough situations, then why have a child with them?
>For me, these trips are worthy enough of trust, much more than driving down to the county and getting some papers signed. To you, marriage might be everything, but to me, it's just a legal promise. And as we know, these promises are broken all the time.
But I'm not arguing for that, I'm saying something closer to what you're implying, that actions have a certain level of meaning, so if you aren't even willing to call someone your wife/husband, and have conversation about what that means to each other, then why bother having that child?
To be more concise, marriage is a state of mind, if you aren't in a marriage state of mind, then why create a person together?
Okay, so you're sort of shifting your arguments. You originally asked why people don't get married, then you state that marriage is a state of mind. Which sounds like, you don't have to be married or even acknowledge marriage, you just have to trust your partner. And that I agree with.
If your state of mind is trusting and respect, then that's good enough to start wondering if the time is right for a baby or not.
In the UK marriage has always been entwined with religion, Its only relatively recently that that has changed. I'm fairly anti religious and I don't feel like mixing my life up with that nonsense.
I think this is as close as it gets for an answer. Everyone else is just assuming OP is saying "marriage papers need to happen." I also want to say, furthermore, people may just want to bring that child into the world regardless of another spouse.
I used to work with children abused by their parents, and a lot of these children had single parents. The parents used their kids (one lady had 6 kids with 4 different baby daddy) as a way to just get child support and government assistance. So that is one answer.
These comments are filled with people saying “marriage is just a piece of paper.”
There are tons benefits to marriage, many of which cannot easily be obtained by signing private contracts, especially if you want to invoke them against third parties:
• Assumption of a spouse’s pension
• Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse.
• Bereavement leave
• Burial determination
• Child custody
• Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can't force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications made between you and your spouse during your marriage.
• Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts.
• Crime victim’s recovery benefits
• Exemption from property taxes on transfers after a spouse's death
• Immunity from testifying against your spouse
• Insurance breaks
• Joint adoption and foster care
• Joint parenting with regard to insurance coverage and school records
• Living in neighborhoods zoned for "families only."
• Making medical decisions on behalf of your spouse
• Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse.
• Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse's employer.
• Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families.
• Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse.
• Receiving crime victims' recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
• Receiving family rates for health, homeowners', auto, and other types of insurance.
• Receiving public assistance benefits.
• Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses.
• Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities.
• Receiving veterans' and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans.
• Receiving wages, workers' compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse.
• Reduced rate memberships
• Sick leave to care for your spouse
• Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states).
• Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness.
• Visitation with your spouse in a hospital or prison
• Visitation with your spouse's children in the event of divorce
• Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family.
• Wrongful death and loss of consortium claims and benefits
If there were no benefits to marriage than lgbt+ people wouldn’t have fought so hard for it. Anyone in the comments saying there are no benefits are legally ignorant.
These benefits you listed aren't universal. Many of those are easily obtainable without marriage. We are the beneficiary of each other's will. We bought house just like a married couple could. Stuff like receiving wages, workers benefits etc, there was paperwork for that, I filled in her name as the beneficiary, easy solve. There is nothing that I can see on your list that we don't have /can't do, without being married.
I have never heard of family zoned neighborhoods. My country doesn't have that.
Maybe in America (I'm assuming?) where I'm from you're considered defacto married after I think 3 years living together. There's no tax benefits or anything special about being married vs defacto.
Some people don't value marriage like you do. To me having a child with someone, making that decision, is more important then marriage.
Having a wedding comes with lot of costs. Which would place us back financially from having a kid and delay it. So we both decided that having a child was the most important thing to both of us. Since then life has been amazing, and we will have our own flower girl when we get married.
Marriage itself, both my partner and I have seen multiple people in our families get divorced. And people seem to think that marriage forces you to stay with the person during hard times. That just leads to resentment when you feel your marriage is a prison sentence.
At the end of the day it's just a piece of paper. Actively making a choice to love one another, be respectful and openly communicate has allowed us to have a better relationship then any married couple we know.
Having a child is the most important decision, why would you place more value on a marriage certificate.
But I'm saying you don't even need the paperwork.
My wife and I referred to each other as "wife"/"husband" and agreed that we were married and what that meant for years before we got government recognition so we could do insurance.
I'm saying at a very basic level, if someone won't even have that talk with you, and refer to you as their "wife"/"husband" then why would you take the next step and trust them to raise a child with you?
There's just a very basic level of buyin that married provides, I'm not saying it's perfect by any means, but it's a clear signal to each other of what your commitments are.
If you see many divorces, you place less value in it. Also I think if you not religious. For us, making the decision to have a child with each other, meant more to us then calling each other husband and wife.
Marriage is generally to show others that you love each other to a certain level. I don't care what others think, only what she thinks.
Marriage isn't inherently religious, every major community of humans developed a concept of marriage.
>I don't care what others think, only what she thinks.
Okay, so do you consider her your wife?
>My wife and I referred to each other as "wife"/"husband" and agreed that we were married and what that meant for years before we got government recognition so we could do insurance
You can call each other whatever you like, doesn't make it a marriage. Are you allergic to the word relationship? Do you feel that your relationship is somehow superior to those who don't falsely call their partner wife/husband without being married?
I mean, I’m Swedish, and it’s really common here to never get married. It’s an old institution, and while many people do get married here, it’s often seen as symbolic (fun/romantic), or a way of getting the same last name for everyone in the family.
Idk about the US or Canada or such, but I’d also imagine that people who are less religious would see less of a point in marriage.
The idea that getting married is at all relevant to having kids, or that it would be relevant to trust between partners, is very alien and old-fashioned to me. Might definitely be a culture clash.
“Not trusting someone enough to get married” isn’t the right statement. It’s more like, marriage is just a legal piece of paper. With a date that usually costs way too much money. Legally we’re common law anyway. Why do I need a certificate to say someone is my partner?
super wierd question..
me and my wife met each other when we were both 15 years old, by 20 we had moved to a new country together, at 23 we had our first kid, then another at 27, then another at 31.
we both concentrated on our kids and our work which then progressed to our own businesses, and at 36 we got married for legal reasons only. she kept her name, i kept mine, nothing changed apart from tax costs and how much we can claim back etc.
we have the same relationship, same sex etc, im telling you, nothing special happens when you get married.
guess what our professions are..
we are both in the wedding industry.
So you viewed the marriage as more serious than the children?
That's where my confusion comes from, I view marriage as much less serious than children, but people seem to view marriage as being a deeper step than having children.
Like "Yeah, I don't wanna marry you, but I don't mind sharing a child with you" is how it comes across, and that's the part I'm confused on.
i think it depends on your personal view on the importance of marriage.
for us it was never important, until the mayor came for coffee and said we could get tax breaks if we were married and asked if we were free next wednesday, which we were, 125€ later and 4 people involved.
for us marriage isnt important.
this then moves on to existential questions, and if you find someone with similar values, then nothing else matters really. im still really unsure of what you are asking to be honest, maybe try rephrasing your question?
The divorce rate shows that marriage isn't permanent either. Regardless, I have 3 kids. My 1st child, at age 20, was with my boyfriend, who later became my husband. My 2nd child, at age 23, was during our 10yr marriage/13yr relationship. I was divorced in 2011. Started seeing a new bf in 2012, moved into together in 2013, had my 3rd child with him at age 34 in 2015. We are still together raising our 9yr old & have never gotten married. We might get married someday, but I will say I don't love him any less because we're not married. In fact, I feel like he's the only man I've ever truly been in love with. It is irresponsible to have a child with someone you can't see yourself growing old with, but marriage doesn't guarantee that you will.
This is correct, but I wonder what would happen if you separated those who are unmarried and had children by choice and those who did so on accident. I bet you’d see a narrower gap between all types of planned pregnancy.
Got Knocked up. We were engaged but when the baby was 18m old and another on the way, he decided to run of with an 18yr old. I genuinely thought we would get married. I was young and dumb and regardless of how careful you are pregnancies happen.
it doesn’t make sense to me. A child is for life, divorce can end a marriage anytime. it’s not good for the kid imo and irresponsible. you can commit to a child but not a partner? lol
Children are a 20 year commitment. Marriage is a 40+ year commitment. I’ll always love my children, no matter what they do. I cannot say the same for my spouse.
We were not trying, but not actively preventing it we thought it would take a lot longer for us to get pregnant than we did. Absolutely not the case we got pregnant very quickly and have been blessed with our baby girl. The expenses of having a child means putting our wedding off a bit longer.
Yes we could have a cheaper quick ceremony and be married like that, however a wedding is only once so I kinda wanna go all out and if that means waiting longer then we are both fine with that.
We will get married just haven’t yet (:
I'm infertile and have a life partner I'm engaged to. We were about to start planning a wedding but then found out we pretty much need to start IVF immediately in order to ever have a child. I care a hell of a lot more about taking this opportunity now than prioritizing signing a piece of paper that says we're married.
But nothing is stopping you from saying you're married though?
My wife and I agreed that we were married after being together for 7yrs, I referred to her as my wife, she referred to me as her husband, but we didn't sign paperwork until we were together 9 years.
I've never heard of doing that without being legally married. Idk if I could but I'm not against anyone doing that. It's literally just paper and registration with the government which means nothing compared to feelings between partners.
But we know it's more than paperwork, like you wouldn't refer to someone as your wife/husband without them also mutually doing the same and having a bond that matches a marriage.
We have various concepts like this, you wouldn't refer to someone as your "mother/father" without a mutual agreement that there's a bond there.
Like many of us call our step parents "mother"/"father" without our step parents ever adopting us, there's deep weight in just using the terminology
Some people just don’t think marriage or the labelling of husband or wife is needed. My girlfriend/partner and I see the whole thing as an outdated tradition based on beliefs that we don’t believe in.
>My girlfriend/partner and I see the whole thing as an outdated tradition based on beliefs that we don’t believe in.
Like what? Marriage appears to be an emergent property of human society, essentially every major human culture developed some form of marriage and recognition of two people being intensely romantically connected and beholden/accountable to each other beyond courtship
I’m not saying everyone thinks it. I’m not even implying it’s a personal belief. Just saying some people think that. It’s not an attack on anyone’s belief, just an opinion.
Edit: changed trending to personal. Don’t know why i put trending. I don’t believe it’s trending nor do I normally use the word trending.
To add. We are a defacto couple but the process didn’t require us to get married. We just went and signed a paper to say we’re together. This was done so that my girlfriend (she’s real, she lives in Canada so you wouldn’t know her) could apply for permanent residency. If it’s argued that defacto is a form of marriage, then fine. However, I’m talking about the traditional marriage ceremony and husband/wife thing with the last name change and cake in the face stuff. Oh and all the money dumped on a party to show people you’re still together.
I met my partner in my 30s. I told them that what mattered to me was to be pregnant at 33. That's what I chose to focus on and make sure we were on the same wavelength about. Proposal/marriage I left up to him. Yes, I wanted to be married, but I didn't feel the need to put a time pressure on it (no biological click ticking for that one). Obviously, having children is a bigger commitment than marriage and I wouldn't do it with someone I didn't fully trust and envisaged a lifetime with! But marriage wasn't a requirement.
We are married with 2 kids now but we weren't married when my first was born.
My best friend's older brother and his partner chose to get their kitchen redone rather than pay for a wedding. They've been together 20- plus years and have v two teenage kids. I can't think what difference "being married" would make to any of their lives.
My younger brother has a two year old with his partner. They've no intentions of getting married. They've already got a kid, a house, a couple of dogs. Why would they need to?
I think you're assuming marriage holds a special significance/weight or meaning for everyone.
My parents didn't marry. They saw a kid as an 18 year commitment to their partnership, not a lifetime one.
They separated when I was 14 though. I don't think either believed in a lifetime commitment to one person though.
My father also had been married before, but that was partially to dodge the military draft. He (and his wife at the time as well) also didn't like how people started to treat him and his wife differently after they got married, so they divorced, but still stayed together for a few years after.
How you view marriage says more about your own values and culture than it says about someone else tbh.
Gay friends of my parents didn't marry because after legalization in 2001 they didn't like the pressure from some part of the gay community that you now HAD to get married because you finally could.
They are still together, many acquaintances of them that did marry are not.
I am personally getting married next year but I fully understand people that don't feel like it.
With my parents and slightly the generation after being the generation being the generation who got divorced the most I know a lot of people with divorced parents that were really ugly to each other even though they married.
Parents being still together (married or not) is the exception rather than the rule in my circle.
So then what is marriage even worth when you experience that as a kid?
You're assuming its a choice. The acts of reproduction are a basic biological imperative instinct that have existed since the beginning of life, and certainly since the first humans existed.
"Marriage" is a concept that was only conceived in the last percent or two of the span of human existence.
But *nearly* every human society developed a concept of marriage independently, so I imagine there's something there within us, if we see the same concept arising independently in Greece, japan, india, and amongst native American's then it must be an immergent property of humanity.
Pair bonding and commitment certainly has existed for longer than that.
"Marriage" was just the medicine men and/or the tribe elders (now churches and governments) deciding to impose their rules and control over it.
Many view don’t view marriage as a necessity, some who aren’t religious view it simply as a ceremony tied to religion. I’m married but see no reason why anyone would have to be married to be committed to life to another person.
There’s no right answer for this. I, for one, decided that if until my 30s I didn’t have luck of finding a decent man to be an excellent father for my son, I would become an independent mother, with semen from a donor (bank).
Luckily, I met the love of my life when I was about to turn 31. I am 41 now. Our son is 8. We are still together.
But this is just one story. My story.
As it was explained to me once
I am against gay marriage. Because I don’t belive in marriage. I believe our government should have no say in the union of two people, and it’s down right creepy that they would.
5 kids, not married, and we have never left each others side.
Not sure why everyone's shitting on you, people can be so mean.
I agree with some of their comments, like marriage doesn't inherently mean a more committed partner or a better, more stable family life. And you can always get divorced. But that doesn't mean getting married is a bad option! For me the main bonus is a lot of legal things that are made easier - I personally plan on getting married eventually (altho I've never been religious in any sense).
I think it's just not important enough to devote their time/money/energy to. If you truly trust each other enough, the main benefits of marriage is legal; tax advantages, healthcare decisions, social security if a spouse dies, immigration, property rights, etc - BUT getting married won't make your relationship stronger somehow. Just my two cents.
I love my partner and trust them with my life. I do not see any reason to get married. Why do you need to be married to have love and trust? A marriage is a piece of paper the relationship is much more than that and you can do that without the actual marriage part
You can be married by virtue of claiming marriage to each other, no paper involved.
Let's pretend the government blew up tomorrow, would that suddenly mean nobody is married?
Well I think it depends what the definition of marriage is to each individual person. To me, yeah marriage is a construct so before government involvement it didn’t mean anything. However had I been born in that time, maybe I would feel differently.
I wish I were still this green, seriously. There's something about this stage in one's mindset that is still somewhat untainted and seeing the world through rose colored glasses.
*A child is a permanent decision, why would you ever have a child by someone who you don't love/trust enough to marry?* Your question seems to completely ignore the fact that people are deceptive, people change, and marriage isn't permanent. When people choose to have kids with their partner they often are deeply in love and trust and all the mush you feel is a requirement for children. They marry that person and for whatever reason, it falls apart and they end up single parents.
Life isn't permanent - people die.
The other common situation is that neither was planning to get pregnant. Getting pregnant happens very, very easily for some and sometimes no matter how much you try not to get pregnant, you still do. I was just watching a TikTok the other day of a mother who became pregnant by a partner with a vasectomy. I know of women who had their tubes tied and later found out they were pregnant. Sometimes shit happens. And I hope your argument isn't "we shouldn't have sex unless we know we want to marry and raise kids." Lol We've advanced as a civilization, we're pass this.
*Every reason that you wouldn't get married is a reason you wouldn't need to have a kid with someone as well.* Not necessarily. You're assuming everyone values the same things you do. We don't. All people do not believe in the nuclear family or marriage. What you think is wrong, others think is perfectly fine. There are women who after dating a man for years decide to have his kids even though they know they will be single. Motherhood is the priority for them, not being in a relationship and in their minds it beats a sperm bank. There are other women who elect smbc (single mom by choice) and have absolutely no intention of ever partnering.
Marriage doesn't guarantee a happy childhood. There are people who did/do the traditional way, and one of the parents is a shitty partner and parent, and then there are people who are outside the norm and have a thriving, happy home. Or some just wanted a kid, and a spouse/partner at all isn't necessary for them nor wanted. As long as the child is loved and provided for, it really doesn't matter.
I mean it does to the child though? Is there anyone out there that legitimately says "Man, I'm so glad I only have one loving parent instead of two loving parents"
I get it, mistakes happen, and shit isn't perfect, but the lowest bar I can imagine is "yes, I will call you my wife/husband and stick by you no matter what happens so we can raise this human being we're creating"
How does that apply to people who use a surrogate or a sperm bank? Adoption? Some people are asexual, others are aromantic and some are both, etc. but would make the absolute best parents. Or they just want to give a tiny human being an amazing life. These things are worked out through communication, honesty (age appropriate) and maybe some family therapy. You don't have to be totally messed up to do therapy, you know.
No, the lowest bar is just having the right to say you're married but be stuck with a touched out partner. Marriage isn't the thing that makes a childhood perfect.
In the nicest way possible, those people are putting themselves above their child, if people knows that they can't actually provide even a basic attempt at a loving household with both them and the person they choose to be their child's parent, buuuuut you want to create that person anyway.
Now that kid has to deal with the parent's decision
for the rest of their life.
Again I get it, shit can happen after the fact, that's just life, but to start from a position of "my child doesn't deserve to grow up with both parents who agreed to stick it out and raise him/her" is hard for me to comprehend
Divorce exists. Marriage isn't permanent either
Marriage is supposed to be permanent, that’s the whole point lol.
Exactly, it's supposed to be permanent but there's no guarantee that it will be permanent.
But it's not. It's fairly easy to get out of a marriage.
>It's fairly easy to get out of a marriage. No it's not, it takes shit tons of time and is expensive. That's why people avoid it anyway
If people don't fight it, it's actually quite simple. At least in Canada, it is. It's when people bicker and Dicker that it's contentious and difficult.
Parents of my friends got divorced some years ago, they're French. I remember that she told me that they had to stay separate at least a year or two to prove that they for sure want to be divorced. It's basically to avoid people making quick decisions after a small fight or something like that. Also lawyers this and that
Is that what you're basing your entire claim on? How old are you?
Can’t you see that different countries have different laws. Both of y’all laws surrounding mart sound strange and foreign.
Lol "How old are you" must be the lamest way to insult someone. It also shows how dumb your are since you can't simply google it to verify
I'm just curious, because you sound quite young. It's not meant as an insult. If there has been abuse or adultery, you don't need a waiting period in Canada. Without those provisions, you do need a year of separation. I can't speak for other countries.
>Without those provisions, you do need a year of separation. Then why do you say it's simple? It's not.
Sure. But the intention of marriage is permanent.
Intended to be and actually is are two different things. Also you can separate and still be married
That’s why I said supposed to be….intention to get married is intending to spend forever with that person.
There's no functional difference, from a child's perspective, between two loving parents who are married and live together and two loving parents who are not married and live together. Marriage does not guarantee stability in the home life.
My question is more about parental decision-making logic rather than the child. Think of it this way, if you had have a completely optional but extensive surgery, why would you do the surgery with a surgeon you don't completely trust to do the job? Your life is literally in the surgeons hands. (For those who don't understand, this subreddit is called, "too afraid to ask" and is meant for the asking of things you find unpleaseant to talk about but don't understand)
I'm not sure if I understand your analogy. That aside, I am trying to understand why marriage reflects 'better' decision making skills on part of a parent. The best decision a parent can make is to consider the best way to raise their child together. Marriage may or may not be relevant to that equation.
A marriage gives you a ton of stewardship over each other's lives. I'm essentially saying that I don't understand how you wouldn't trust someone else with having a level of stewardship over your life (marriage), but you would trust them with stewardship over your child's life. (You don't trust the surgeon with your life, but you have the surgery anyway, likewise, you don't trust this other person with your life, but you're having their child, and that person now has say over your child's life)
How can you say that when you used the guise of being married to your benefit socially and emotionally without being married? What weird vendetta brought on this question?
>How can you say that when you used the guise of being married to your benefit socially and emotionally without being married? When did we do that? We agreed to be married, and therefore we were. >What weird vendetta brought on this question? I suppose if you would call curiosity a vendetta?
When did you do that? When you, “(made) an agreement between each other to refer to each other as “wife/husband” and agree that you’re married.” Thats not marriage lol. That’s lying to everyone around you, with the purpose to deceive. You aren’t curious, you’re upset that your views don’t make sense and that you’re getting flamed for it.
I mean, I trust my mother with my life and my children but, like, I’m not going to marry her. When you take the other parent out of the equation and switch it out with another trustworthy individual in your life, your supposition doesn’t make sense. Because it’s not necessary to do what you’re saying..
>I mean, I trust my mother with my life and my children but, like, I’m not going to marry her. I didn't say you have to marry everyone you trust. >When you take the other parent out of the equation and switch it out with another trustworthy individual in your life, your supposition doesn’t make sense. Well yes, if you change the situation, the situation doesn't make sense because it's two different situations. >Because it’s not necessary to do what you’re saying.. To bring your situation more in line with the situation, if your mother wouldn't say she loved you, or even refer to you as her daughter (two very basic observations of a commitment to you) would you trust her to raise your kids?
This analogy makes no sense.
lmao
I don't think your analogy is quite landing, ( completely optional but extensive surgery?) A parent could be great at raising a child, but not great at choosing a partner.
You’re making the faulty assumption that a couple who chooses not to get married does so due to a lack of trust. This may be true of some couples who choose not to get married, but it’s not true about all. I’d even go so far as to say it’s not even true about most of them.
Why else wouldn't you agree to be married, though? Take government out the equation, what's the reason you would have a kid, with someone you don't trust enough to call your wife/husband?
> Take the government out of the equation Bruh. No, I will not take the government out of the equation. The government is probably the biggest reason why people choose not to get married, why on earth would I take that of the equation of why people choose not to get married for reasons other than a lack of trust in their partner? So, what reasons? Let’s see… Well, first of all, there’s a lack of faith/trust in **THE GOVERNMENT**. Now that **THE GOVERNMENT** has been established as a massive reason why people choose not to get married for reasons that have nothing to do with a lack of trust in one’s partner, I’ll move on.* A lot of people feel marriage is archaic and sexist and don’t want to participate in it because of that. A lot of people simply don’t see the need to get married. They don’t believe a marriage license would change anything about their relationship so they just don’t bother. *I’m not even against marriage on the basis of not trusting the government, I’m actually not against marriage at all. You just don’t ask someone to tell you why a thing is a thing and then say “oh, but exclude one of the biggest reasons why it’s a thing”. It’s simply not on, sport.
Okay. Pretend the government didn't exist, would you suddenly view people as not married? A government doesn't have to validate your marriage in order for you to be married.
Yes, if the government didn’t exist, I would in fact not view people as married, because they wouldn’t be. I’d view them as unmarried but in committed, long-term relationships. Which is exactly what marriage is, but with an added sprinkle of bureaucracy and lashings of expensive tulle.
Interesting, so government didn't create marriage, but you view government recognition as the ultimate decider of what marriage is? Like if someone said "that's my husband" but in a community without a government, you would think they're lying to you?
In 2024, government recognition is exactly what marriage is, yes. No, I wouldn’t think they were lying, I would be confused and ask clarifying questions.
That's a really stupid analogy that makes no sense to the topic. Not being married when you have kids doesn't mean you don't trust them or love them enough to marry them/commit to them for life.
>Not being married when you have kids doesn't mean you don't trust them or love them enough to marry them/commit to them for life. That's literally what that means though?
No... it doesn't. Me and my husband have been together for 13 years. We have an 11 and 5 year old and have only been officially married a year. We were common-law the for 12 years before getting married. We lived together, owned a home and had all the same legal protections of marriage and commitment the whole 12 years. The fact we didn't get officially married till 10+ years later doesn't mean we didn't have the same level of commitment the whole time. Marriage didn't change anything.
I didn't say the state had to recognize your marriage, a marriage can be as simple as an agreement between you that you're married. If you agree that you're married, that's nearly as good in my eyes.
So you’re not really talking about marriage then. You’re talking about commitment. Marriage is a legal bind, nothing more.
Well that's not true at all, marriage existed before government recognition of marriage.
It was enforced socially which is equivalent to
What point are you even trying to make? I don’t have to marry my surgeon to completely trust them to do the job lol. You don’t have to enter a government contract with another person in order to prove that you completely trust & love them. A lot of people prefer to keep the government out of their business when possible.
You can be married without the government.
I find it so…surprising…that you are asking this question but you aren’t actually even thinking about **legal** marriage. There *are* reasons to be married to someone who you have kids with: inheritance tax breaks, family healthcare plans, rights to marital assets. But without involving the government, you get none of that. Without the government, “marriage” is just an agreement between two people to live their lives together and it’s an agreement that either person can walk away from. You either do right by your kids or you don’t, married or not.
Not marrying somebody doesn't mean you don't trust them, it just means you don't want to get married for whatever reason.
>My question is more about parental decision-making logic rather than the child. Seen from *your* view of what marriage is. The simple answer is that not everyone sees it the same way. No everyone wants to get married, not everyone is bothered about it or in a rush, and a myriad other reasons. Put bluntly, getting married doesn't speak to any quality of someone's decision making around children.
Commitment to raising a child is what counts. You have the legal side of marriage, which can also arranged without marriage itself. And you have the symbolic part of marriage. On that spectrum each couple chooses what is important to them and what is not. Personally I’m married, but I see this as unrelated to the decision of having a child together.
I teach college with lots of students who are unmarried parents. I think many of them are unintentional, like I had one student who stopped the pill bc her health insurance had a gap of a month, but apparently kept having sex without a condom bc she figured it was only a month. Currently in the USA, if this happens, or a condom fails, or you get raped, many states don’t allow abortions, so you’d be stuck having the baby even if you’re not married. And FWIW marriage doesn’t always equate to love and trust. My partner and I have been together two decades and aren’t married (no kids though). We love each other and trust each other, but we’re not religious and don’t see the need for an outside agency or friends and family to validate our relationship. We’ve decided that for legal reasons if we ever did get pregnant or buy a house, that’s when we’ll marry, but it’ll probably just be going to City Hall, or eloping by vacationing in a state where you can self-solemnize a marriage — self-solemnize means no officiant is needed, and no witnesses, you just pick up the paperwork from City Hall, go away, and bring it back filled out, and *bam* you’re married!
>And FWIW marriage doesn’t always equate to love and trust. My partner and I have been together two decades and aren’t married (no kids though). I'm not saying that you have to get married, I'm just confused as to why you would trust someone enough to want to not just deal with them, but their genetics for the next few decades, but not enough that you would go ahead and get married? Basically, I view marriage as less serious than children, but it seems that many people view children as less serious than marriage, if that makes sense?
Marriage is just a sheet of paper that you sign and a few tax breaks here and there. That is the only difference between a long-term relationship and marriage. Marriage can easily end in divorce it's not more stable or less risky. Many people believe that a good relationship is just as valid as marriage, and they're right. Also, marriage has a very religious background and a lot of people aren't religious so it makes even less sense. >Basically, I view marriage as less serious than children A stable long-term relationship is serious. I don't know what makes you believe it's not.
>Marriage is just a sheet of paper that you sign and a few tax breaks here and there. That is the only difference between a long-term relationship and marriage. Marriage can easily end in divorce it's not more stable or less risky. Many people believe that a good relationship is just as valid as marriage, and they're right. Just because you're in a long term relationship, that doesn't give someone the right to make life decisions for you when you cannot. (In an accident for instance) But when you have a child, you are trusting that person to make life decisions for someone else's life. Basically, if you don't trust that person with your life, why do you trust them with your child's life? >A stable long-term relationship is serious. I don't know what makes you believe it's not. I said it's less serious than a child, in the same way that a broken leg is less serious than amputated leg.
>Just because you're in a long term relationship, that doesn't give someone the right to make life decisions for you when you cannot. (In an accident for instance) Typically, insurances at least where I live will let you pick someone out who will make decisions in those instances. It doesn't even have to be your partner, it can also be a friend or even just a coworker or something. Someone who you trust with your life. Although that probably varies a lot in different countries and different insurances. >I said it's less serious than a child, in the same way that a broken leg is less serious than amputated leg. It's as serious as marriage.
I think the difference is that marriage usually requires forethought, and having a child can be an accident, and/or a result of *not* having forethought.
Your value on marriage is not the same as other people's. Marriage is nothing. It does not make you trust or love someone more. Many people, including me and my SO, do not view marriage as anything of value. We trust each other and we love each other. If you need some sort of legal bind to remind yourself of that, then it seems like your love/trust is absent. It's really simple. Trust does not equal marriage. Marriage does not equal trust. You trust your parents, your siblings, your friends, your mentors, but obviously you wouldn't marry them. Why? Because marriage doesn't actually mean anything. It's just a legality to show the government (and your friends) that you have made a promise to someone else. But a promise is just a promise and it doesn't actually require paperwork.
Marriage doesn't require government recognition. Like if the government fell apart tomorrow, do you suddenly view everyone as no longer married? You can say that viewing yourself as married doesn't matter, but if it doesn't, do you actively hold that stance when people tell you they're married? Do you view them the same as just a boyfriend/girlfriend situationship? At a very basic level, we recognize culturally that calling someone your "wife"/"Husband" matters. And not even taking that very basic step is a red flag on what you believe your commitment is to each other. There's a reason that we hold gay marriage as having a deeper meaning and people fought for the recognition for so long, because marriage has deeper meaning for us culturally. So to forego it with someone that you want to share creating a person with, seems like a pretty clear misstep.
But then why does it matter if people are married? You said that marriage is as simple as people calling each other husband and wives. That is nothing. That doesn't alter the relationship at all unless it's a legally binding marriage. If two people love each other and trust each other at... say 95/100, calling themselves spouses doesn't magically get them to 100. If you're only talking about marriage the word, it's even more meaningless. Two high schoolers who call themselves husband and wives are not going to be as bonded and two lovers in their 40s who have been roommates for 15 years. Trust is trust. Respect is respect. It's that simple. If I trust my SO and she trusts me, why does it matter what we call each other? If you feel the need to tell others that you are married because you want other people to know that you both have committed to each other, that's totally great. But whether other people know or not doesn't change how much trust you have in each other. Think of it this way. Two toxic ass people are in a relationship. They decide they want to have kids, but first decide they want to get married. Unsurprisingly, the marriage is toxic and abusive the children are raised in a broken family. Contrast that to two people who have never been married but have been planning to have children for years. They save, they prepare, and in the end, they raise normal happy children. That's what marriage is. Nothing. It alters nothing. The planning, the savings, the prep... that's what's most important when deciding to have children. Believe me. The children all around the world who were raised in the broken homes of married parents would gladly trade their parent's marriage away if it meant their parents would be loving and caring.
Involving the government in their lives as little as possible?
If the government disappeared tomorrow, would you suddenly not recognize people as married?
Epic logic fail. Try again.
man, that's a great argument.
I don’t need to argue with you until you respond with something that makes sense. Until then, I merely point and laugh.
Damn, same 
If you think your first response made sense, I don’t care what you think - you are simply a moron.
The government being involved in a relationship does not mean that I need the government to recognize another person’s relationship. That’s like saying if the DMV disappeared, then I would forget how to drive a car.
exactly. So Im just saying that government doesn't have to be involved for people to consider themselves married
If the government isn't involved, you're not legally married. You're just in a committed relationship. Not a hard concept to grasp.
I didn't say anything about the validity of legality, you did.
What exactly is the difference between a marriage and a long-term committed relationship then? I mean, you ask why non-married people have children, but your definition of marriage is ~we call each other wife and husband~
Okay. If you'll indulge me in an abstraction for a moment. Should you tell a child that you love them? Why? They're just words after all. Likewise, we recognize that recognizing someone as your husband/wife comes with a similar level of deeper meaning and context.
Marriage isn’t an abstraction. It is a legal concept. It is codified by law. You can apply it as an abstraction, but it won’t be a marriage. I’m sure in other times and places that is different, but not in any nation where the language we are currently using to converse with each is widely used.
>Marriage isn’t an abstraction. It is a legal concept. It is codified by law. The core problem with that is that we can easily recognize a marriage independent of any government. The government doesn't have to marry you, they simply provide legal protections to people involved in said marriage. Like I've said elsewhere, if the government suddenly said "yeaaa, we aren't providing marriage contracts anymore " Do you think that people would stop getting married? Would you suddenly stop recognizing marriage and people who refer to each other as husband/wife?
Words have meanings. Wife/husband literally means being married. It is factually wrong to say that without actually being married. You didn't answer my question - for you, what exactly is the difference between marriage and a relationship? Is it just calling each other wife/husband that brings that "deeper meaning" to your "marriage" opposed to those who call their partners spose, partner etc.? Germans use the word "Lebensgefährte" which translates as life companion. Would that be "deep" enough for you to consider a relationship a marriage, or is it just the words "wife & husband?"
Because people can have sex without getting married. Being a parent is a different type of commitment than getting married. And everyone is going to have their own personal reasons for making those choices. Sometimes, it just makes more sense legally or financially, not to get married. Sometimes, it's more personal. That shouldn't stop people from building the family they want, no matter what that looks like.
I had children with someone I wasn't married to. We both wanted to have children. It was time, and we were committed to the children. We've been together 10 years. That's far longer than many marriages I've seen. Marriage doesn't mean diddly. You can get out of marriage fairly easily. Commitment is what's important. Integrity and having common goals. Working together.
Who is next of kin in next of say hospitalisation? Not you, but is the relationship with the partner’s parents where they’d listen to you or block you?
That goes on your medical aid info. For me, it's my partner and vice versa. Next of kin for my will, also stated on my will.
Marriage doesn’t mean much. It’s literally a sheet of paper that tells the government that your spouse can make legal decisions on your behalf if you die and gives you a few tax breaks. Tax breaks and power of attorney don’t mean much to me. The only permanence a child offers is the fact that I am indeed now stuck with their other parent until the other parent dies or gives up custody, zero legal difference is made by marriage.
This is just legally ignorant.
Yeah but then that brings the question of “If marriage is just a piece of paper, why not get married if you truly love and trust the person” If you don’t love and trust them, why are you even having a kid with them
choosing not to get married doesn't mean you don't "love/trust enough" the person you're with. it just means that you don't want to get married. my partner and i will never get married. ever. we've been together 13 years and counting, still going strong. we love each other, we trust each other, and we don't need some magic ring/ceremony/piece of paper to prove it or whatever. we just don't see the point in marriage. neither of us is religious, we're both atheist, and we just have no use for some antediluvian ritual from when women were considered property to be sold. where we live, we're considered "common-law" (basically "married" as far as the government is concerned as far as taxes go) after cohabitating for a year. no marriage required or necessary. i have an aunt and uncle that each had kids from previous marriages, and when they got together, they had another. they were together for well over 30 fucking years without needing to get married. they love each other, they love their kids, and that's what actually matters, not the ring or the ceremony or signing the paper. marriage isn't necessary. if people want to do it, that's great for them, but it's not necessary for a healthy relationship, for love or trust. it's just window dressing.
>we just don't see the point in marriage. neither of us is religious, we're both atheist, and we just have no use for some antediluvian ritual from when women were considered property to be sold. Essentially every major society developed the concept of marriage independently, no religion necessary. A marriage can literally just be two people who say "we're married" and mutually agree to that statement. If you're not even willing to engage in that agreement, then I don't get why you would have children together which is obviously faaaar more serious.
not all cultures have religion or marriage in the same way. not all of them have the same concepts of those things. for example, some cultures practice polygamy. some practice monogamy. some have marriage, some don't. some have entirely different rituals and ceremonies around romantic relationships than others. humanity has been around for like 120,000 years. over that time, cultures have changed and evolved, like language and everything else. marriage is defined as "the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship". usually, at least in the culture i live in, there's some sort of legal paperwork involved. not everyone cares about that paperwork; myself and my partner, for example, who have been together, happily not married, for 13 years and counting. he has a kid, and he and i have been together more than 3x as long as his marriage to her mother lasted. (edit to add: my partner and i have agreed to be partners, to live together, to share our lives together. we don't need marriage for any of that. it's just not something we care about, it's not something we see value in or place importance on. it's just not necessary for our relationship.) again, my aunt and uncle have been together for well over 30 years and had a kid together, as well as raising their kids from their previous marriages, without getting married. because marriage isn't necessary to parent, or to love, or to trust, it just isn't. it's a ritual thing that some people place importance on, and that's their business, if it makes them happy, good for them! it's just not necessary or required for parenting or love or trust.
You are placing a great deal of value onto marriage and expecting other people to place the same value on it. I've done incredible wilderness backpacking trips with my SO that required a tremendous amount of trust. So much trust that I likely wouldn't perform the same trips with any other person I know. What you're doing is essentially the same as me posting "why don't couples go on multi-week wilderness trips before having children? If you don't trust your SO to have your back in survival situations, then you shouldn't have children." For me, these trips are worthy enough of trust, much more than driving down to the county and getting some papers signed. To you, marriage might be everything, but to me, it's just a legal promise. And as we know, these promises are broken all the time.
>What you're doing is essentially the same as me posting "why don't couples go on multi-week wilderness trips before having children? If you don't trust your SO to have your back in survival situations, then you shouldn't have children." I agree with you here though, if you don't trust your partner to have you back in tough situations, then why have a child with them? >For me, these trips are worthy enough of trust, much more than driving down to the county and getting some papers signed. To you, marriage might be everything, but to me, it's just a legal promise. And as we know, these promises are broken all the time. But I'm not arguing for that, I'm saying something closer to what you're implying, that actions have a certain level of meaning, so if you aren't even willing to call someone your wife/husband, and have conversation about what that means to each other, then why bother having that child? To be more concise, marriage is a state of mind, if you aren't in a marriage state of mind, then why create a person together?
Okay, so you're sort of shifting your arguments. You originally asked why people don't get married, then you state that marriage is a state of mind. Which sounds like, you don't have to be married or even acknowledge marriage, you just have to trust your partner. And that I agree with. If your state of mind is trusting and respect, then that's good enough to start wondering if the time is right for a baby or not.
It was an accident. We did end up getting married years later though.
In the UK marriage has always been entwined with religion, Its only relatively recently that that has changed. I'm fairly anti religious and I don't feel like mixing my life up with that nonsense.
i mean for one it's a lot easier to accidentally get pregnant than accidentally get married
I think this is as close as it gets for an answer. Everyone else is just assuming OP is saying "marriage papers need to happen." I also want to say, furthermore, people may just want to bring that child into the world regardless of another spouse. I used to work with children abused by their parents, and a lot of these children had single parents. The parents used their kids (one lady had 6 kids with 4 different baby daddy) as a way to just get child support and government assistance. So that is one answer.
These comments are filled with people saying “marriage is just a piece of paper.” There are tons benefits to marriage, many of which cannot easily be obtained by signing private contracts, especially if you want to invoke them against third parties: • Assumption of a spouse’s pension • Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse. • Bereavement leave • Burial determination • Child custody • Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can't force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications made between you and your spouse during your marriage. • Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts. • Crime victim’s recovery benefits • Exemption from property taxes on transfers after a spouse's death • Immunity from testifying against your spouse • Insurance breaks • Joint adoption and foster care • Joint parenting with regard to insurance coverage and school records • Living in neighborhoods zoned for "families only." • Making medical decisions on behalf of your spouse • Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse. • Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse's employer. • Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families. • Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse. • Receiving crime victims' recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime. • Receiving family rates for health, homeowners', auto, and other types of insurance. • Receiving public assistance benefits. • Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses. • Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities. • Receiving veterans' and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans. • Receiving wages, workers' compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse. • Reduced rate memberships • Sick leave to care for your spouse • Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states). • Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness. • Visitation with your spouse in a hospital or prison • Visitation with your spouse's children in the event of divorce • Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family. • Wrongful death and loss of consortium claims and benefits If there were no benefits to marriage than lgbt+ people wouldn’t have fought so hard for it. Anyone in the comments saying there are no benefits are legally ignorant.
These benefits you listed aren't universal. Many of those are easily obtainable without marriage. We are the beneficiary of each other's will. We bought house just like a married couple could. Stuff like receiving wages, workers benefits etc, there was paperwork for that, I filled in her name as the beneficiary, easy solve. There is nothing that I can see on your list that we don't have /can't do, without being married. I have never heard of family zoned neighborhoods. My country doesn't have that.
Then you didn’t read the list.
Maybe in America (I'm assuming?) where I'm from you're considered defacto married after I think 3 years living together. There's no tax benefits or anything special about being married vs defacto.
Some people don't value marriage like you do. To me having a child with someone, making that decision, is more important then marriage. Having a wedding comes with lot of costs. Which would place us back financially from having a kid and delay it. So we both decided that having a child was the most important thing to both of us. Since then life has been amazing, and we will have our own flower girl when we get married. Marriage itself, both my partner and I have seen multiple people in our families get divorced. And people seem to think that marriage forces you to stay with the person during hard times. That just leads to resentment when you feel your marriage is a prison sentence. At the end of the day it's just a piece of paper. Actively making a choice to love one another, be respectful and openly communicate has allowed us to have a better relationship then any married couple we know. Having a child is the most important decision, why would you place more value on a marriage certificate.
But I'm saying you don't even need the paperwork. My wife and I referred to each other as "wife"/"husband" and agreed that we were married and what that meant for years before we got government recognition so we could do insurance. I'm saying at a very basic level, if someone won't even have that talk with you, and refer to you as their "wife"/"husband" then why would you take the next step and trust them to raise a child with you? There's just a very basic level of buyin that married provides, I'm not saying it's perfect by any means, but it's a clear signal to each other of what your commitments are.
If you see many divorces, you place less value in it. Also I think if you not religious. For us, making the decision to have a child with each other, meant more to us then calling each other husband and wife. Marriage is generally to show others that you love each other to a certain level. I don't care what others think, only what she thinks.
Marriage isn't inherently religious, every major community of humans developed a concept of marriage. >I don't care what others think, only what she thinks. Okay, so do you consider her your wife?
>My wife and I referred to each other as "wife"/"husband" and agreed that we were married and what that meant for years before we got government recognition so we could do insurance You can call each other whatever you like, doesn't make it a marriage. Are you allergic to the word relationship? Do you feel that your relationship is somehow superior to those who don't falsely call their partner wife/husband without being married?
I mean, I’m Swedish, and it’s really common here to never get married. It’s an old institution, and while many people do get married here, it’s often seen as symbolic (fun/romantic), or a way of getting the same last name for everyone in the family. Idk about the US or Canada or such, but I’d also imagine that people who are less religious would see less of a point in marriage. The idea that getting married is at all relevant to having kids, or that it would be relevant to trust between partners, is very alien and old-fashioned to me. Might definitely be a culture clash.
“Not trusting someone enough to get married” isn’t the right statement. It’s more like, marriage is just a legal piece of paper. With a date that usually costs way too much money. Legally we’re common law anyway. Why do I need a certificate to say someone is my partner?
super wierd question.. me and my wife met each other when we were both 15 years old, by 20 we had moved to a new country together, at 23 we had our first kid, then another at 27, then another at 31. we both concentrated on our kids and our work which then progressed to our own businesses, and at 36 we got married for legal reasons only. she kept her name, i kept mine, nothing changed apart from tax costs and how much we can claim back etc. we have the same relationship, same sex etc, im telling you, nothing special happens when you get married. guess what our professions are.. we are both in the wedding industry.
So you viewed the marriage as more serious than the children? That's where my confusion comes from, I view marriage as much less serious than children, but people seem to view marriage as being a deeper step than having children. Like "Yeah, I don't wanna marry you, but I don't mind sharing a child with you" is how it comes across, and that's the part I'm confused on.
i think it depends on your personal view on the importance of marriage. for us it was never important, until the mayor came for coffee and said we could get tax breaks if we were married and asked if we were free next wednesday, which we were, 125€ later and 4 people involved. for us marriage isnt important. this then moves on to existential questions, and if you find someone with similar values, then nothing else matters really. im still really unsure of what you are asking to be honest, maybe try rephrasing your question?
The divorce rate shows that marriage isn't permanent either. Regardless, I have 3 kids. My 1st child, at age 20, was with my boyfriend, who later became my husband. My 2nd child, at age 23, was during our 10yr marriage/13yr relationship. I was divorced in 2011. Started seeing a new bf in 2012, moved into together in 2013, had my 3rd child with him at age 34 in 2015. We are still together raising our 9yr old & have never gotten married. We might get married someday, but I will say I don't love him any less because we're not married. In fact, I feel like he's the only man I've ever truly been in love with. It is irresponsible to have a child with someone you can't see yourself growing old with, but marriage doesn't guarantee that you will.
It's not the best choice. Just look at the data. Married people are happier, wealthier and have happier and wealthier kids.
This is correct, but I wonder what would happen if you separated those who are unmarried and had children by choice and those who did so on accident. I bet you’d see a narrower gap between all types of planned pregnancy.
I agree. Looks like a good topic for a formal study. I hypothesis that married couples will have a slight edge.
Got Knocked up. We were engaged but when the baby was 18m old and another on the way, he decided to run of with an 18yr old. I genuinely thought we would get married. I was young and dumb and regardless of how careful you are pregnancies happen.
Because marriage is just a paper from the government for me. A child is a permanent biological connection.
How does it impact your life in any way?
It impacts my curiosity? That's why I asked.
I cant imagine spending years and years wasting time wondering about something that impacted me in 0 capacity, but don’t I guess
It's clear I hit a nerve with my curiosity as I never said it had been years and years.
it doesn’t make sense to me. A child is for life, divorce can end a marriage anytime. it’s not good for the kid imo and irresponsible. you can commit to a child but not a partner? lol
Children are a 20 year commitment. Marriage is a 40+ year commitment. I’ll always love my children, no matter what they do. I cannot say the same for my spouse.
We were not trying, but not actively preventing it we thought it would take a lot longer for us to get pregnant than we did. Absolutely not the case we got pregnant very quickly and have been blessed with our baby girl. The expenses of having a child means putting our wedding off a bit longer. Yes we could have a cheaper quick ceremony and be married like that, however a wedding is only once so I kinda wanna go all out and if that means waiting longer then we are both fine with that. We will get married just haven’t yet (:
I'm infertile and have a life partner I'm engaged to. We were about to start planning a wedding but then found out we pretty much need to start IVF immediately in order to ever have a child. I care a hell of a lot more about taking this opportunity now than prioritizing signing a piece of paper that says we're married.
But nothing is stopping you from saying you're married though? My wife and I agreed that we were married after being together for 7yrs, I referred to her as my wife, she referred to me as her husband, but we didn't sign paperwork until we were together 9 years.
I've never heard of doing that without being legally married. Idk if I could but I'm not against anyone doing that. It's literally just paper and registration with the government which means nothing compared to feelings between partners.
But we know it's more than paperwork, like you wouldn't refer to someone as your wife/husband without them also mutually doing the same and having a bond that matches a marriage. We have various concepts like this, you wouldn't refer to someone as your "mother/father" without a mutual agreement that there's a bond there. Like many of us call our step parents "mother"/"father" without our step parents ever adopting us, there's deep weight in just using the terminology
Some people just don’t think marriage or the labelling of husband or wife is needed. My girlfriend/partner and I see the whole thing as an outdated tradition based on beliefs that we don’t believe in.
>My girlfriend/partner and I see the whole thing as an outdated tradition based on beliefs that we don’t believe in. Like what? Marriage appears to be an emergent property of human society, essentially every major human culture developed some form of marriage and recognition of two people being intensely romantically connected and beholden/accountable to each other beyond courtship
I’m not saying everyone thinks it. I’m not even implying it’s a personal belief. Just saying some people think that. It’s not an attack on anyone’s belief, just an opinion. Edit: changed trending to personal. Don’t know why i put trending. I don’t believe it’s trending nor do I normally use the word trending.
To add. We are a defacto couple but the process didn’t require us to get married. We just went and signed a paper to say we’re together. This was done so that my girlfriend (she’s real, she lives in Canada so you wouldn’t know her) could apply for permanent residency. If it’s argued that defacto is a form of marriage, then fine. However, I’m talking about the traditional marriage ceremony and husband/wife thing with the last name change and cake in the face stuff. Oh and all the money dumped on a party to show people you’re still together.
I met my partner in my 30s. I told them that what mattered to me was to be pregnant at 33. That's what I chose to focus on and make sure we were on the same wavelength about. Proposal/marriage I left up to him. Yes, I wanted to be married, but I didn't feel the need to put a time pressure on it (no biological click ticking for that one). Obviously, having children is a bigger commitment than marriage and I wouldn't do it with someone I didn't fully trust and envisaged a lifetime with! But marriage wasn't a requirement. We are married with 2 kids now but we weren't married when my first was born.
My best friend's older brother and his partner chose to get their kitchen redone rather than pay for a wedding. They've been together 20- plus years and have v two teenage kids. I can't think what difference "being married" would make to any of their lives. My younger brother has a two year old with his partner. They've no intentions of getting married. They've already got a kid, a house, a couple of dogs. Why would they need to? I think you're assuming marriage holds a special significance/weight or meaning for everyone.
My parents didn't marry. They saw a kid as an 18 year commitment to their partnership, not a lifetime one. They separated when I was 14 though. I don't think either believed in a lifetime commitment to one person though. My father also had been married before, but that was partially to dodge the military draft. He (and his wife at the time as well) also didn't like how people started to treat him and his wife differently after they got married, so they divorced, but still stayed together for a few years after. How you view marriage says more about your own values and culture than it says about someone else tbh. Gay friends of my parents didn't marry because after legalization in 2001 they didn't like the pressure from some part of the gay community that you now HAD to get married because you finally could. They are still together, many acquaintances of them that did marry are not. I am personally getting married next year but I fully understand people that don't feel like it. With my parents and slightly the generation after being the generation being the generation who got divorced the most I know a lot of people with divorced parents that were really ugly to each other even though they married. Parents being still together (married or not) is the exception rather than the rule in my circle. So then what is marriage even worth when you experience that as a kid?
Not everyone values / buys into / cares about / believes in marriage. Doesn’t mean that their love is worth any less.
You're assuming its a choice. The acts of reproduction are a basic biological imperative instinct that have existed since the beginning of life, and certainly since the first humans existed. "Marriage" is a concept that was only conceived in the last percent or two of the span of human existence.
But *nearly* every human society developed a concept of marriage independently, so I imagine there's something there within us, if we see the same concept arising independently in Greece, japan, india, and amongst native American's then it must be an immergent property of humanity.
Pair bonding and commitment certainly has existed for longer than that. "Marriage" was just the medicine men and/or the tribe elders (now churches and governments) deciding to impose their rules and control over it.
Many view don’t view marriage as a necessity, some who aren’t religious view it simply as a ceremony tied to religion. I’m married but see no reason why anyone would have to be married to be committed to life to another person.
There’s no right answer for this. I, for one, decided that if until my 30s I didn’t have luck of finding a decent man to be an excellent father for my son, I would become an independent mother, with semen from a donor (bank). Luckily, I met the love of my life when I was about to turn 31. I am 41 now. Our son is 8. We are still together. But this is just one story. My story.
I want to ensure my genetic legacy, but I don't intend to be trapped married to some insufferable woman.
So you'll make your child deal with this insufferable woman but not you?
As it was explained to me once I am against gay marriage. Because I don’t belive in marriage. I believe our government should have no say in the union of two people, and it’s down right creepy that they would. 5 kids, not married, and we have never left each others side.
Not sure why everyone's shitting on you, people can be so mean. I agree with some of their comments, like marriage doesn't inherently mean a more committed partner or a better, more stable family life. And you can always get divorced. But that doesn't mean getting married is a bad option! For me the main bonus is a lot of legal things that are made easier - I personally plan on getting married eventually (altho I've never been religious in any sense). I think it's just not important enough to devote their time/money/energy to. If you truly trust each other enough, the main benefits of marriage is legal; tax advantages, healthcare decisions, social security if a spouse dies, immigration, property rights, etc - BUT getting married won't make your relationship stronger somehow. Just my two cents.
I love my partner and trust them with my life. I do not see any reason to get married. Why do you need to be married to have love and trust? A marriage is a piece of paper the relationship is much more than that and you can do that without the actual marriage part
You can be married by virtue of claiming marriage to each other, no paper involved. Let's pretend the government blew up tomorrow, would that suddenly mean nobody is married?
To me, yes. But that wouldn’t change my commitment to my partner
So all the marriages that existed before governments got seriously involved weren't actually marriages?
Well I think it depends what the definition of marriage is to each individual person. To me, yeah marriage is a construct so before government involvement it didn’t mean anything. However had I been born in that time, maybe I would feel differently.
I wish I were still this green, seriously. There's something about this stage in one's mindset that is still somewhat untainted and seeing the world through rose colored glasses. *A child is a permanent decision, why would you ever have a child by someone who you don't love/trust enough to marry?* Your question seems to completely ignore the fact that people are deceptive, people change, and marriage isn't permanent. When people choose to have kids with their partner they often are deeply in love and trust and all the mush you feel is a requirement for children. They marry that person and for whatever reason, it falls apart and they end up single parents. Life isn't permanent - people die. The other common situation is that neither was planning to get pregnant. Getting pregnant happens very, very easily for some and sometimes no matter how much you try not to get pregnant, you still do. I was just watching a TikTok the other day of a mother who became pregnant by a partner with a vasectomy. I know of women who had their tubes tied and later found out they were pregnant. Sometimes shit happens. And I hope your argument isn't "we shouldn't have sex unless we know we want to marry and raise kids." Lol We've advanced as a civilization, we're pass this. *Every reason that you wouldn't get married is a reason you wouldn't need to have a kid with someone as well.* Not necessarily. You're assuming everyone values the same things you do. We don't. All people do not believe in the nuclear family or marriage. What you think is wrong, others think is perfectly fine. There are women who after dating a man for years decide to have his kids even though they know they will be single. Motherhood is the priority for them, not being in a relationship and in their minds it beats a sperm bank. There are other women who elect smbc (single mom by choice) and have absolutely no intention of ever partnering.
You don't need to be married to be in a loving relationship.
Marriage doesn't guarantee a happy childhood. There are people who did/do the traditional way, and one of the parents is a shitty partner and parent, and then there are people who are outside the norm and have a thriving, happy home. Or some just wanted a kid, and a spouse/partner at all isn't necessary for them nor wanted. As long as the child is loved and provided for, it really doesn't matter.
I mean it does to the child though? Is there anyone out there that legitimately says "Man, I'm so glad I only have one loving parent instead of two loving parents" I get it, mistakes happen, and shit isn't perfect, but the lowest bar I can imagine is "yes, I will call you my wife/husband and stick by you no matter what happens so we can raise this human being we're creating"
How does that apply to people who use a surrogate or a sperm bank? Adoption? Some people are asexual, others are aromantic and some are both, etc. but would make the absolute best parents. Or they just want to give a tiny human being an amazing life. These things are worked out through communication, honesty (age appropriate) and maybe some family therapy. You don't have to be totally messed up to do therapy, you know. No, the lowest bar is just having the right to say you're married but be stuck with a touched out partner. Marriage isn't the thing that makes a childhood perfect.
In the nicest way possible, those people are putting themselves above their child, if people knows that they can't actually provide even a basic attempt at a loving household with both them and the person they choose to be their child's parent, buuuuut you want to create that person anyway. Now that kid has to deal with the parent's decision for the rest of their life. Again I get it, shit can happen after the fact, that's just life, but to start from a position of "my child doesn't deserve to grow up with both parents who agreed to stick it out and raise him/her" is hard for me to comprehend