Date: April 25th, 2003 04:59 am (UTC)From:(Anonymous)
Just a footnote re paternity: having the father's name on the birth certificate does NOT, in law, give him full paternity rights. You have to have his rights declared before a magistrate. The regulations have prescribed a pro-forma declaration which has to be set out, signed and delivered to the court.
It's interesting that the notion of knowing oneself seems to take precendence over the notion of the power of the will. One doesn't commit oneself to "be in love"; one commits oneself to exert one's willpower until death parts one spouse from the other.
But all this comes from the point of view that marriage should not be undertaken lightly or unadvisedly. Any good priest or minister or rabbi or imam will talk to a couple about the "what ifs": what if we hate each other some days, what if s/he gets chronically ill, what if we meet someone else who fires us up more, etc., etc. --- the idea that "marriage encourages you not to think about how things would be split if you split up" is simply, flatly, not true in real life for most couples. It isn't possible to contemplate buying a house together, for example, without the solicitor or the estate agent or both telling you in detail about the disposition of the house and your mutual obligations if you are or are not married.
But enough; as others say, and I agree, marriage is for some people and not others. I think the statistics show that it is more trustworthy and better for children, and that society as a whole has a stake in those issues, but there are lies, damned lies, and statistics, quoth Disraeil, and he was right!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
chiming
paternity/marriage
Date: April 25th, 2003 04:59 am (UTC)From: (Anonymous)It's interesting that the notion of knowing oneself seems to take precendence over the notion of the power of the will. One doesn't commit oneself to "be in love"; one commits oneself to exert one's willpower until death parts one spouse from the other.
But all this comes from the point of view that marriage should not be undertaken lightly or unadvisedly. Any good priest or minister or rabbi or imam will talk to a couple about the "what ifs": what if we hate each other some days, what if s/he gets chronically ill, what if we meet someone else who fires us up more, etc., etc. --- the idea that "marriage encourages you not to think about how things would be split if you split up" is simply, flatly, not true in real life for most couples. It isn't possible to contemplate buying a house together, for example, without the solicitor or the estate agent or both telling you in detail about the disposition of the house and your mutual obligations if you are or are not married.
But enough; as others say, and I agree, marriage is for some people and not others. I think the statistics show that it is more trustworthy and better for children, and that society as a whole has a stake in those issues, but there are lies, damned lies, and statistics, quoth Disraeil, and he was right!