namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
The danger is this: What if it goes further than the government simply 'suggesting' abstinance or 'looking out' for its people? What if the government decides that what's best for the people is that pre-marital sex should be outlawed? What if that's the kind of thing it leads to? And what if that sets a kind of precident that would lead to the government deciding it should regulate VIA LAW how many children people can have and who are fit to be parents? They have that in China AND IT'S CALLED COMMUNISM. I realize I'm stretching things but this is genuinely the concern that I have with this subject.
As for the subject itself: If you are in a commited, monogomous relationship with somebody, you are in a commited, monogomous relationship with somebody, whether or not there is a marriage license somewhere with your two signatures on it. That's the end of the discussion. Unmarried people love fully, married people love fully. Unmarried people cheat, married people cheat. Marriage doesn't change who people are, people change who people are, and the idea that two signatures on a marriage license makes everything safer and more wholsome is ridiculous.
As for the subject itself: If you are in a commited, monogomous relationship with somebody, you are in a commited, monogomous relationship with somebody, whether or not there is a marriage license somewhere with your two signatures on it. That's the end of the discussion. Unmarried people love fully, married people love fully. Unmarried people cheat, married people cheat. Marriage doesn't change who people are, people change who people are, and the idea that two signatures on a marriage license makes everything safer and more wholsome is ridiculous.