The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / Love  % width posts: 310

Unmarried couples in Poland = pathology


pgtx 30 | 3,156
30 Sep 2010 #151
Yep, fits the Lib credo...

having a two sides of a story, we might have a nice fitting middle...

At least they proved themselves.

yes, it worked for quiet some time... but times change; we develop, progress and move forward, not back... that's a good thing, isn't it?

The question remains: who pays for it?

and who has paid for it already?
trener zolwia 1 | 939
30 Sep 2010 #152
it worked for quiet some time... but times change; we develop, progress and move forward, not back... that's a good thing, isn't it?

One would have to define "progress". The deterioration of marriage and the associated documented costs to society I think are a stretch to call "progress" or somehow "good".

It's actually quite backwards, going back to a primitive time before the concept of marriage even existed. But then most of what passes as "progress" from progressives is backwards and harmful, misguided...
Bzibzioh
30 Sep 2010 #153
trener zolwia
No, seriously, people keep saying about their rights and freedoms, but what if that freedom is getting them into a trouble? Why we, as a society, are expected to pay for their bad choices and pay, for example, for fighting their gambling addiction?
convex 20 | 3,978
30 Sep 2010 #154
What we are coming to understand more and more in our society is that free will can indeed be exercised all the way into despair.

It's easy, leave people to their own devices. We should reintroduce personal responsibility and consequences for an individuals actions. No need for government coddling or moralizing. Once that person violates ones rights, whether property of personal, at that point governments need to step in.

Just out of curiosity, are most of you city folks? Anyone come from the country or live in the countryside now?
trener zolwia 1 | 939
30 Sep 2010 #155
No, seriously, people keep saying about their rights and freedoms, but what if that freedom is getting them into a trouble? Why we, as a society, are expected to pay for their bad choices and pay, for example, for fighting their gambling addiction?

I'm with ya, babe! One's freedom ends where it starts to cost others. Or it should.

It's easy, leave people to their own devices. We should reintroduce personal responsibility and consequences for an individuals actions. No need for government coddling or moralizing. Once that person violates ones rights, whether property of personal, at that point governments need to step in.

Excellent. Full agreement. (see above)

Just out of curiosity, are most of you city folks?

I'm a 'burbs boy. Always have been, always will be. It's the best of both worlds.
convex 20 | 3,978
30 Sep 2010 #156
Excellent. Full agreement. (see above)

Right, but there is no need to punish everyone because some people can't control themselves. Those are personal problems that need to be dealt with by family, friends, and spiritual advisers for those who are so inclined. No need to legislate morality.
trener zolwia 1 | 939
30 Sep 2010 #157
there is no need to punish everyone because some people can't control themselves.

That's how ever single one of our freedom-restricting laws came about. Some jerks couldn't get along properly in society so we have to limit everyone's freedoms because of them. We all end up paying the price for the jerks. Doing so dumbs down society to control the lowest common idiot/ selfish prick.
f stop 25 | 2,513
30 Sep 2010 #158
I wonder if he does know we're still talking about marriage...

;)
convex 20 | 3,978
30 Sep 2010 #159
That's how ever single one of our freedom-restricting laws came about. Some jerks couldn't get along properly in society so we have to limit everyone's freedoms because of them. We all end up paying the price for the jerks. Doing so dumbs down society to the lowest common idiot/ selfish prick.

That's a terrible tradeoff. There were already laws on the books to take care of people who infringe on others rights.
trener zolwia 1 | 939
30 Sep 2010 #160
I wonder if he does know we're still talking about marriage...

Tee-hee. :s No one is suggesting legislating marriage as mandatory. But certainly it is in a nation's -society's- best interests to promote and reward it, given it's benefits and the alternative with its many documented downsides...

You just can't seem to understand this simple truth.

That's a terrible tradeoff.

Yep. The next time you feel encumbered by some ridiculous law thank the selfish jerks and their lacking ability to handling freedom responsibly...
f stop 25 | 2,513
30 Sep 2010 #161
well played, convex.
pgtx 30 | 3,156
30 Sep 2010 #162
No one is suggesting legislating marriage as mandatory.

well, that would be just insane... :)

freedom

yeah... freedom is just an empty slogan....
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
30 Sep 2010 #163
freedom is just an empty slogan....

"Freedom's just another word for nothing left to loose
Nothing, I mean nothing honey if it ain't free, no no
Yeah feeling good was easy Lord when he sang the blues
You know feeling good was good enough for me
Good enough for me and my Bobby McGee.
"............................Janis Joplin
trener zolwia 1 | 939
30 Sep 2010 #164
me and my Bobby McGee."............................Janis Joplin

Kris Kristofferson
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
1 Oct 2010 #165
Well yes, Mr Kristofferson wrote that song as well as some other great ones. I just like the way Janis sang it.
markskibniewski 3 | 200
1 Oct 2010 #166
1. after marriage life is finished--- This is one of the biggest problems with people getting married today. This statement is true but in a good way. One's individual life is over and becomes one with thier spouse. Two people are supposed to act as one in the best interest of the family. Sounds like your parents did great.

2. after marriage life is sad--- Having children is sad?????

3. marriage is a state full of grudges and remorses-- life in general can be full of both of these. You can't blame marriage for an individuals short comings.

4. when you are married and you have children then you are stuck for good--- This is the biggest disapointment out of the 5 statements you made. You should want to be with your spouse forever. Marriage isn't untill we see someone who looks better, makes more money, or we are feeling a little down. It is permanent or should be (civil law screwed that up) It wasn't your parents that gave you this idea ..it was society that has allowed the end of marriage to become too easy and almost expected in todays selfish society.

5. when you have children then you are obliged to sacrifice in the sake children unless you want to be called bad mother/father.--- I really hope you don't have any children if you don't feel this is a good thing.

a) rises in the conviction of being the bee's knees
b) has remorses that ruin their parents lifes, feels the pressure to fill parents' ambitions and if he/she won't be succeed then has even worse remorse of letting down parents

I am not sure what to make of a). Were you an only child?? If you have remorses about your parents lives thats on you not them. Have you ever heard of the 5th comandment.

Have you ever spoken to your parents about thier marriage? A true parent is proud of thier child regardless. As there is no such thing as the perfect marriage , there is also no perfect child.

I am sorry you are feeling down about life , I hope things turn around for you. Your parents as far as I am reading seemed to everything right. Not sure why you have interpreted thier marriage the way you have.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
1 Oct 2010 #167
after marriage life is finished--

after marriage life is sad--

After marriage women get the gold mine and men get the shaft.
markskibniewski 3 | 200
1 Oct 2010 #168
Not in all catholic churches, especially in the US

Not sure what Catholic church you are attending but all Catholic churches require marriage preparation classes prior to getting married.
Teffle 22 | 1,321
1 Oct 2010 #169
Wow.

Spoke to a Polish friend about this - she said with a wry slightly embarrassed smile that it was possible to get around this requirement.

I didn't pursue it as with her being a fairly staunch catholic and me agnostic, it was bound to end in an argument.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Oct 2010 #170
Nope, Catholic marriages are highly regulated. There is no getting round that. Even bribes don't work here :)
dtaylor5632 18 | 2,007
1 Oct 2010 #171
Even bribes don't work here :)

You sure about that...;)
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Oct 2010 #172
Not in the slightest bit ;) ;)
markskibniewski 3 | 200
13 Jan 2012 #173
Society has destroyed the sanctity of marriage as a whole. There will always be non positive influences on your child, however , I would state that a person capable of being a loving parent is perfectly capable of being a loving spouce. People today do not take marriage seriously. Civil divorse has cheapened it. Gave everyone a get out of jail free card. If people would be more concerned about the welfare of there spouce instead of there own selfish needs there would be much less divorse today.

Dunno, I guess I'd rather just be happy in life. It's working out pretty well so far.

Marriage is not for everyone and I do not fault anyone who isn't. Do I think children should be born out of wedlock ...ideally no.

If a couple is willing to commit to the responcibility of raising a child I think they can be equally committed to a successful marriage.
OP Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
13 Jan 2012 #174
markskibniewski
Some on this thread have gone off on tangents not intended. In hardly any situation is something ALWAYs or NEVER the case. You could probably find a loving bixesual threesome raising a healthy, happy kids, but that should not lead to the conclusion that this is a good or preferable arrangement to normal sacramental marriage between a man and a woman.

My point was not that married couples NEVER create pathological situations nor that unmarried arrangeemtns ALWAYS do. The point was that informal arrangements tend to cause more dysfunctional situaitons in terms of:

STABILITY, CHILD-REARING, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ABUSE OF GIRLFIRENM'S CHILDREN, DURATION OF FAMILY UNIT and LONGTERM IMPLICATIONS.
markskibniewski 3 | 200
13 Jan 2012 #175
Infidelity is automatic grounds for divorce even in the eyes of the church. There is no reason for these women to feel like a failure because the failure was not theirs.
f stop 25 | 2,513
13 Jan 2012 #176
I don't think that governments should sanction marriage at all!

Wow, that's some good sht! ;) I can't believe I exerted so much effort here once..
markskibniewski 3 | 200
14 Jan 2012 #177
Some on this thread have gone off on tangents not intended

Sorry if you feel I went off topic. I merely agree or disagree with some of the statements made and chose to comment. for example:

Stability- absolutly agree

Child rearing- already commented but don't agree entirely... not everyone can be a good parent but if they can be a good
parent they can most probably be a wonderful spouce. Getting married doesn't automatically make you a
better parent. It can make it easier fiscally (single parent/divorcee) and give a child a stable structure to
strive for (sets good example) but I am sure there are many well adjusted happy bastards running around
in the world.

Domestic violence - Have to disagree with you here. There are as many married jerks as there are unmarried. Married
abuse tends to go on unreported in greater numbers I am afraid, but these numbers are
becoming more and more skewed because of falling marriage rates. It looks like there are a greater
number of reports for non-married couples but percentage wise they are very close.

Child abuse- sorry to generalize here but in this case you are dead wrong as most child molesters tend to be married.

Duration of family unit - Agree

Long term implications - We all have problems in the long run.

That should not entitle you to any special priviledges, tax breaks, special treatment at Thanksgiving dinner... I think it's one more way in which religion imposes laws. Religious groups are on a campaign to revive the "traditional" marriage (it's worth remembering that includes no sex before marriage!).

I think it absolutely should. We as a society should encourage positive choices. What is wrong with imposing moral laws.
f stop 25 | 2,513
14 Jan 2012 #178
I think that's the great fallacy here - that getting married makes you more moral.
Richfilth 6 | 415
14 Jan 2012 #179
What is wrong with imposing moral laws.

This is a staggering statement. The problem is that who are you to decide whether my relationship with my partner is any more or less moral than anyone else's?
sa11y 5 | 331
14 Jan 2012 #180
F stop, absolutely agree, moreover, the OP is trying to make a link between living together us unmarried couple and pathology. I think it's the other way round, social pathology can't be bothered to take any responsibility (including getting married or even divorced from previous marriage). They shack up with random partners so surely kids suffer. It wouldn't changed anything if they suddenly married. Whoever thinks otherwise is delusional.


Home / Love / Unmarried couples in Poland = pathology
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.