4 ms·

The hell are you talking about

overcast 9y ago
I'm trying to understand what the act of being married, has to do with sharing your life with someone at any age. You can't be with someone, share you life together, and not be married?
- mikebenfield 9y ago
  You don't seem to understand the difference between a proposition and its converse. "If a person wants to get married, s/he wants to share his/her life with someone" is (more or less) true, and is the premise everyone is working under. The converse of that proposition is "If a person wants to share his/her life with someone, s/he wants to get married." That is what you for some reason appear to believe is the premise we are working under. But it's not.
  - gehwartzen 9y ago
    I don't think he is trying to state the converse of your original quote. Seems clear all he is saying is that you can share your life with someone regardless of being married. You can live with a boyfriend/girlfriend and experience sharing life all the same without the religious or legal institution of marriage. Unless the assertion is that things like filing taxes together somehow prevent this
    - cookiecaper 9y ago
      This is an intentionally obtuse perspective. Marriage is a significant social institution in a way that a mere interpersonal commitment can never be, because marriage is a commitment with a third entity: the community at large. The social structure accepts and enforces the marital union, providing significant legal protection to itself, the children, and the married partners. This grants a solid staying power, borne of the subconscious knowledge that no party can really "just leave" and be done with it. This staying power should not be underestimated; it is effective and real regardless of how little one believes they will need to rely on it.
      - gehwartzen 9y ago
        I certainly get that marriage has a social and legal structure which makes it more difficult to split. I just don't think it is paramount to sharing your life with someone. I am married but lived with my wife for 8 years prior and can say, personally, it made no difference in my feeling or commitment for her. During that time I certainly felt I was sharing my life with someone.
    - true_religion 9y ago
      In many cultures, as soon as you're living like boyfriend/girlfriend together in the same building for more than 3 months, you're considered married unless you go out of your way to actively deny it. In the US/UK, you don't have to preemptively deny it, but if people begin to assume you're married and you don't correct them... then you're married under common-law. I have a dear friend who has been 'dating' his girlfriend for almost twenty years. Their eldest child is 14, and they own a home together. As far as sharing their lives together, they've done it without being married legally---but in the eyes of all their friends and their kids? Oh those two are so married.
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  In many places you cannot. You would be considered married by common law. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage
Dangisapussy 9y ago
You sound like a faggot
dang 9y ago
We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the HN guidelines. If you don't want to be banned on HN, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

I'm trying to understand what the act of being married, has to do with sharing your life with someone at any age. You can't be with someone, share you life together, and not be married?

mikebenfield 9y ago
You don't seem to understand the difference between a proposition and its converse. "If a person wants to get married, s/he wants to share his/her life with someone" is (more or less) true, and is the premise everyone is working under. The converse of that proposition is "If a person wants to share his/her life with someone, s/he wants to get married." That is what you for some reason appear to believe is the premise we are working under. But it's not.
- gehwartzen 9y ago
  I don't think he is trying to state the converse of your original quote. Seems clear all he is saying is that you can share your life with someone regardless of being married. You can live with a boyfriend/girlfriend and experience sharing life all the same without the religious or legal institution of marriage. Unless the assertion is that things like filing taxes together somehow prevent this
  - cookiecaper 9y ago
    This is an intentionally obtuse perspective. Marriage is a significant social institution in a way that a mere interpersonal commitment can never be, because marriage is a commitment with a third entity: the community at large. The social structure accepts and enforces the marital union, providing significant legal protection to itself, the children, and the married partners. This grants a solid staying power, borne of the subconscious knowledge that no party can really "just leave" and be done with it. This staying power should not be underestimated; it is effective and real regardless of how little one believes they will need to rely on it.
    - gehwartzen 9y ago
      I certainly get that marriage has a social and legal structure which makes it more difficult to split. I just don't think it is paramount to sharing your life with someone. I am married but lived with my wife for 8 years prior and can say, personally, it made no difference in my feeling or commitment for her. During that time I certainly felt I was sharing my life with someone.
  - true_religion 9y ago
    In many cultures, as soon as you're living like boyfriend/girlfriend together in the same building for more than 3 months, you're considered married unless you go out of your way to actively deny it. In the US/UK, you don't have to preemptively deny it, but if people begin to assume you're married and you don't correct them... then you're married under common-law. I have a dear friend who has been 'dating' his girlfriend for almost twenty years. Their eldest child is 14, and they own a home together. As far as sharing their lives together, they've done it without being married legally---but in the eyes of all their friends and their kids? Oh those two are so married.
cookiecaper 9y ago
In many places you cannot. You would be considered married by common law. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage

Dangisapussy 9y ago

You sound like a faggot

dang 9y ago

We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the HN guidelines. If you don't want to be banned on HN, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.