Log in to check your private messages
The Purpose of Marriage
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The EUCantina Forums Forum Index » The Meditation Grove View previous topic :: View next topic  
 PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:57 pm Reply with quote  
Message
  Caedus_16
Master
Master

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Posts: 4768
Location: Korriban

Cerrinea wrote:
Caedus, the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt definitely had multiple wives. The main wife held the title of "Great Royal Wife", and it was her son who succeeded to the throne (if she had one. If she had a daughter, that daughter was married to the next pharaoh. The other wives were known as minor wives.

For the rest of the ancient Egyptian population, monogamy was the rule, although they did have divorce which wasn't hard to attain, but it was expensive. It's interesting to note that while adultery was grounds for divorce, only women could commit adultery. Married men were exempt from that.

With the Hebrews, childlessness was actually the most common cause for divorce, and polygamy was permitted although not practiced that much.


Didn't know that about Egypt, thanks.

On Judaism childlessness was indeed a cause for divorce, but men who committed adultery could be stoned. Polygamy wasn't permitted, indeed you could be cast out of your tribe for it. It became permitted as a political advantage but not until the end of their reign in the Middle-East. For generations they only permitted one spouse. Even re-marriage was looked down on unless taken up by the blood relative of a spouse. Women could take them, but men usually didn't re-marry unless they had no offspring before the death.
_________________
Perfection is a lifelong pursuit requiring sacrifice. The only way to get it quicker is to sacrifice the most.


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger

 PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:55 pm Reply with quote  
Message
  SidiousThrawn
Knight
Knight

Joined: 07 Feb 2012
Posts: 358
Location: USA

Caedus-polygomy was permitted. Read Gen 25:6, Abraham had multiple wives.

Jacop had two wives,

David had multiple wives.

Women could only have 1 husband and could not have sex with any man other than her husband, if she did so, she would have been stoned.

In the 11th Century AD Rabbenu Gershom, changed the Jewish tradition of multiple wives to one man/one woman.
_________________
"Study art...", said Thrawn.

"Vote for Papa Palpatine".


View user's profile Send private message

 PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:55 pm Reply with quote  
Message
  Reepicheep
Master
Master

Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 6722
Location: Sailing into the unknown

Abraham and Jacob weren't technically Israelites. Solomon would probably be the best example (he's described as having 700 wives!). Biblically speaking, the laws of Israel seemed to fluctuate on polygamy (as they did on idolatry), but God never seemed to be happy about it.
_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

 PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:15 am Reply with quote  
Message
  Dog-Poop_Walker
Master
Master

Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Posts: 943
Location: Official Med. Grove Troublemaker

Again the cynic in me sees monogamy from a materialistic standpoint. In a society that follows heredity along patriarchal lineage, monogamy is important so that a man knows who his children are. The old rules against adultery are to enforce this. In a matriarchal society, or a society that has collective ownership, polygamy and polyamory would be more widespread. A woman always knows who her children are.


View user's profile Send private message

 PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:57 am Reply with quote  
Message
  Darth Skuldren
Moderator
Moderator

Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 6419
Location: Missouri

It today's society it wouldn't be an issue because of paternity tests. Would be interesting to see that become a trend: women with multiple husbands.

One thing I don't understand with modern marriages is the fact that everyone still says that stupid line "till death do us part." With the high rate of divorce, most marriages are sealed with a lie. Very few people stick to that whole 'death do us part' part. They really ought to change it to "till death or divorce do us part."
_________________

"I believe toys resonate with us as humans, we can hold them them, it's tactile, real! They are totems for our extended beliefs and imaginations. A fetish for ideas that hold as much interest and passion as old religious relics for some. We display them in our homes. They show who we are. They are signals for similar thinking people. A way we connect with each other...and I guess thats why I do toys. That connection." -Ashley Wood


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

 PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:43 am Reply with quote  
Message
  Corellias Dream
Knight
Knight

Joined: 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 105
Location: UK

Not everyone says 'till death...'.

It's certainly not a required part of the UK civil ceremony, which pretty much allows you to choose your own vows. All that is required is the statement that you are legally allowed to marry,and the words of the contract (some version of 'I take thee..').
You can make your own choice of vow at ring giving, which could include 'till death..' but is more usually along the lines of 'I give you this ring, as a token of my love, and a symbol of our marriage.'


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

 PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:30 pm Reply with quote  
Message
  Reepicheep
Master
Master

Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 6722
Location: Sailing into the unknown

Darth Skuldren wrote:
One thing I don't understand with modern marriages is the fact that everyone still says that stupid line "till death do us part." With the high rate of divorce, most marriages are sealed with a lie. Very few people stick to that whole 'death do us part' part. They really ought to change it to "till death or divorce do us part."


I don't think it's a stupid line, and I fully intend to keep it in my vows. In some cases divorce is necessary (e.g. in an abusive relationship), but nine times out of ten divorce happens out of pure selfishness. The reasons people give make me sick. I would never marry someone who wanted to put "till death or divorce do us part" in our vows. Either you want to make the commitment or not.
_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

 PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:30 pm Reply with quote  
Message
  SidiousThrawn
Knight
Knight

Joined: 07 Feb 2012
Posts: 358
Location: USA

Darth Skuldren wrote:
It today's society it wouldn't be an issue because of paternity tests. Would be interesting to see that become a trend: women with multiple husbands.

One thing I don't understand with modern marriages is the fact that everyone still says that stupid line "till death do us part." With the high rate of divorce, most marriages are sealed with a lie. Very few people stick to that whole 'death do us part' part. They really ought to change it to "till death or divorce do us part."


Adding divorce implies that you do not think the marriage will work. Folks should not get married if they think that it will not last.

I think too many people rush into marriage since, they feel that is what is expected of them by family and society.
_________________
"Study art...", said Thrawn.

"Vote for Papa Palpatine".


View user's profile Send private message

 PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:24 pm Reply with quote  
Message
  Corellias Dream
Knight
Knight

Joined: 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 105
Location: UK

I think some people go ahead with marriage because they want the 'Big Day'. I suspect this is more likely to be women - the man may be looking for a long term relationship, but the woman wants the wedding, with the dress etc. I do know someone who had been thinking about her wedding day since her early teens. She did get married aged about 22, with a big church wedding, but the marriage only lasted a couple of years. Someone remarked that she 'wanted the wedding but not the husband'. Since the divorce, she's been living with someone else for a few years (no wedding) and her ex-husband has married someone else.

It depends on where you live of course, but there's much less pressure of couples to get married now. Among the couples I know, marriage seems to be more likely if they intend to have children. Some marry as a public statement of their love, even if they don't want children; marriage is a public commitment to one another. I also know couples who see no need for a legal ceremony: their commitment is buying a house together. No one else, even parents, are really bothered about whether they marry or not.


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Post new topic   Reply to topic    The EUCantina Forums Forum Index » The Meditation Grove

Page 2 of 2
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2

Display posts from previous:

  

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights 2 by Scott Stubblefield