Arranged Marriage

[FinalEnigma]

Throughout much of human history and culture (and still, in some places), Arranged marriages were a common practice. The questions here are , is arranged marriage a logical practice? and is it a moral practice?

Some would argue that the practice of arranged marriage is tantamount to treating women like cattle to be bartered off for alliance or profit. Is this true in theory? is it true in practice?

Other would say that most people will marry for poor and superficial reasons, resulting in a lower chance of lasting happiness, and that arranged marriages are a good way of finding a good match for each person. Is this true in theory? Is it true in practice?

[Wootah]

No one really knows the person they are marrying and family and upbringing are important factors in determining if someone will be a good partner. I believe two Christians with Christ at the centre of their relationship will have a wonderful marriage all their days.

Why are divorces mostly between Christians?

Maybe they aren't putting Christ first?

[Hamsaka]

Throughout much of human history and culture (and still, in some places), Arranged marriages were a common practice. The questions here are , is arranged marriage a logical practice? and is it a moral practice?

Some would argue that the practice of arranged marriage is tantamount to treating women like cattle to be bartered off for alliance or profit. Is this true in theory? is it true in practice?

Other would say that most people will marry for poor and superficial reasons, resulting in a lower chance of lasting happiness, and that arranged marriages are a good way of finding a good match for each person. Is this true in theory? Is it true in practice?

It is difficult to entirely eliminate my deeply enculturated 'modern' values around marriage. But I can suspend some of them and see that arranged marriages in and of themselves, apart from any culture's personal twists on them, are neither good or bad. The arranged marriage comes from such a different worldview that most Americans like me can't understand how they could be anything but 'bad', mainly because most Americans are unfamiliar with how arranged marriage evolved as a very common . . . er, arrangement.

If arranged marriage is a cultural 'given', as it is in India (for instance), and originated from essentially pro-social impulses, such as maintaining the strength and resources of the extended family (thus improving the survival and thriving of offspring), then as human progress marches on, there's a solid 'good' basis to work from.

That said . . . arranged marriage is almost always entrenched in a culture where women don't share equal social status with men, as is true in India (though Indian culture is rapidly westernizing as we speak).

In spite of women's lower status than men, clearly there can be well being and 'thriving' of all concerned in such a marriage. But when one or the other betrothed do not agree with the choice, mayhem ensues! It may change over the years, as I've heard said, and a strong marriage bond wins out, but I doubt that happens a majority of the time.

I predict as Indian women become more educated and their social status becomes similar to mens' (as it has in the US), arranged marriage will naturally become less and less common; or, it will change into something more like a legal contract between two equal citizens.

I can't get past how PRACTICAL arranged marriage can be within certain cultural contexts. It wouldn't be practical in a very westernized and/or secular culture for obvious reasons. But that doesn't mean it is 'wrong' in cultures that aren't westernized/secularized.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 12 by Hamsaka]

You might consider how arranged our Western marriages are. Is it so random that two university students meet? Isn't it basically true that we are equals to those in our environment?

For instance there is a world of places money prevents me from going to. Doesn't that effectively act as a screening/arranging process (and money would be one factor)?

[OnceConvinced]

No one really knows the person they are marrying and family and upbringing are important factors in determining if someone will be a good partner.

This is why I feel that getting married first before moving in with someone is a mistake. It's not until you live with someone that you really get to know someone and then discover the things you really dislike about them. But by then it's too late. You're stuck in that relationship.

In some ways arranged marriages probably are a good thing in that other people get to judge whether a person is right for you. Takes away the emotional side from it, which as we know in new relationships can cause you to rush into marriage because you think the person is so wonderful.

However I think there is more negative than good. People should not be forced to marry someone they don't love. And what if the people who are arranging the marriage are putting you together for the wrong reasons? eg out of loyalty to friends, for money and wealth, just to get their child married off, or whatever. Just how much thought really goes into compatibility? Often marriages are arranged from when the couple are children. How can you really know they will be compatible as adults?

And what if you find out too late you can't stand living together?

I believe two Christians with Christ at the centre of their relationship will have a wonderful marriage all their days.

Reality shows us otherwise though. In this day and age the divorce rate amongst Christians is the same as non-Christians.

I can speak as a person that was in a Christian marriage. We even had counselling by the church we were in to ensure we were right under the eyes of God. We had the whole promise of "A three strand chord is not easily broken" over us. Us and the holy spirit = a strong marriage.

In the first year my wife cheated on me. The first year! Not my fault at all. It was all her stupidity. However being a Christian I believed God wanted me to forgive so we kept on going, But she was unfaithful again later on. The unfaithfulness wrecked the trust and it never really recovered. We stayed together for 11 years because we felt that was what God would want.

So no, even with Christ at the center there are no guarantees. But of course if you believe that God would have you stay together no matter what, then of course you're more likely to stay in that relationship. Doesn't mean it's going to be a happy one or rich or fulfilling or anything like that.

edit: And get married young. Life is too short to not spend it with a life partner.

I did do that. Was 22 and she was 18. My first girlfriend.

I actually now regret that because I should have experienced life a bit, had several different girlfriends and not settled for the first one that came along. The thing is because she was my first it was so exciting and I thought that God was blessing me. Because I was so excited about all this I ended up rushing into marriage. Perhaps if I had gained some more experience and a little more wisdom I might have ended up with the right women.

It's not until you're older, more experienced and wiser that you realise what it is you actually need, not just what you want. I know what I need now and am a lot more particular with who I end up in a relationship with.

I think I have found the right woman now. Met her 4 months ago. But I am not rushing into anything. However we will be moving in together before we even consider marriage! It's the only really sensible thing to do.

I regret my years of dating, stringing women along. Not just for that but for the fact that it means there are years of my life that i cannot share memories of with my wife.

Being single and dating does not mean you have to string people along. In the last 11 years I have dated many women. Two I remained with for 3-4 years. It took living with them to realise we weren't right for each other. In between those two relationships I have been having a blast on the dating scene. Gaining experience, boosting my confidence and self esteem. Realising that women actually do desire me and I don't need to settle for just anyone. And I didn't have to use or abuse anyone.

My new partner and I have heaps to talk about and plenty of experiences to share with each other. And we have a whole lot of exciting things yet to come, things we will get to do for the first time together (starting with a trip to Rarotonga next week). There's just so many experiences to be had, you can't do them all with just one partner anyway! And second time around is so much more sweeter with someone different.

I do not regret my previous relationships and am grateful I got to make up for the lost time I wasted as a Christian by experiencing life and meeting and dating many wonderful women. I would recommend that before settling down with just one.

Having said that, it's also nice to not have to be on that dating scene anymore. I have been there done that now. Now I can hopefully grow old with the one I am with.

[McCulloch]

[Replying to post 1 by FinalEnigma]

If I were a bible believing Christian unmarried person, in communion with a church that had elders qualified according to Paul's instructions to Timothy, then I would have to believe that those elders would be better able than I to evaluate and select the most suitable life partner for me.

[OnceConvinced]

No one really knows the person they are marrying and family and upbringing are important factors in determining if someone will be a good partner. I believe two Christians with Christ at the centre of their relationship will have a wonderful marriage all their days.

Why are divorces mostly between Christians?

Maybe they aren't putting Christ first?

How does one ensure that they are putting Christ first in a marriage?

Actually I thought I would start another thread on this topic:

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 471#736471

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 1 by FinalEnigma]

If I were a bible believing Christian unmarried person, in communion with a church that had elders qualified according to Paul's instructions to Timothy, then I would have to believe that those elders would be better able than I to evaluate and select the most suitable life partner for me.

That is often what happens. It is just not done in a formal fashion. You don't think those young adult groups are just there because millenials and 'teens are all looking to become hard core theologians do you?

[Hamsaka]

[Replying to post 12 by Hamsaka]

You might consider how arranged our Western marriages are. Is it so random that two university students meet? Isn't it basically true that we are equals to those in our environment?

For instance there is a world of places money prevents me from going to. Doesn't that effectively act as a screening/arranging process (and money would be one factor)?

Sure it does, and maybe in a deeply philosophical or existential way, the traditional arranged marriage is on one end of a spectrum and the traditional western 'marriage for love' is on another end. It's hard to not address the relativity between them, and though I'd have to squeeze it a bit, I can see your point.

But what do you think of our opportunities for marriageable candidates in the age of a world wide internet? My girlhood friend met her husband of 13 years on America Online, while each lived on opposite ends of the US. Neither were wealthy, but you can get cheap airline fares and avoiding the cost of a hotel for "Hi, I'm Millie, so let's go jump in the sack' saves even more money. There are Christian (Muslim, Buddhist, and so on) 'meet up' websites to introduce people from every spot on the globe.

The intense priority of 'falling in love' long distance makes the issue of money, distance and time somewhat irrelevant. There are too many problems occurring from this 'dating' method to mention, but using your same comparison, any method of 'dating' or meeting up has it's inherent flaws. My point is, time, distance and money aren't the solid barriers they used to be, thus making the relative nature of 'arrangement' as you noted above a 'middle road' between strongly personal/love choice-based marriage and the traditional arranged marriage.

[Paprika]

What I am attempting to do is define it in such a way that a marriage with constant bickering and unhappiness or one that ends because one or both partners could not stand the other or did something wrong (adultery which ends the marriage) would not be considered a good match, but a marriage which ends because one partner went missing for 5 years and was declared dead and the other remarried would not be considered a bad match, nor, now that I think about it, should a marriage that ended because both partners realized that though they had started with similar life directions, they had grown differently and amicably chose to end the marriage so that they could seek partners more suited to the direction in life that they were taking (incredibly rare as this would be).

This is quite clear. But I hardly see how one is able to accurately make fair samples of 'bickering and happiness' across cultures throughout space and human time so that meaningful comparisons can be made.

Acknowledged (with my definition revision). I have difficulty with the idea of framing it any differently though, because it would seem to be that to frame it to encompass successful variants of every kind of marriage in every time would result in it being so broad as to be useless or tautological. such as "A good marital match is one resulting in a marriage that serves the intended purpose".

I would suggest an approach that first explores the various types and see what types of goods each one tends to produce - for man, the woman, the children, the extended family, and society - instead of trying to a priori determine that certain goods are primary.