3 ms·
Perhaps, then, you could explain where the commenter you are responding to's misunderstanding lies, for the benefit of him/her and the rest of us?
by deathanatos 8y ago
Perhaps, then, you could explain where the commenter you are responding to's misunderstanding lies, for the benefit of him/her and the rest of us?
- DanBC 8y agoThe point of marriage is to pool money to provide for each other and your potential children. Once you get married it's not "your" money any more, it belongs to both of you. That's from the States PoV, and since they make the laws that govern marriage it's a reasonable position to take. All the other stuff (eg religious baggage) that comes along are optional extras.
- belorn 8y agoAs I explored in an other comment, it used to be that once married the community viewed the family as a single entity and as such the money did not belong to a single person but rather to the family. Very similar, debt also did not belong to a single person but was an property of the family and in cases of death of the parents it also transfered to the children. From the banks PoV, it was a reasonable position to take that it was every family members responsibility to uphold the family honor and repay any debt. This 18th century view was thankfully mostly abolished by later centuries. We don't see children going into debt slavery just to repay their parents or grandparents sins. An other 18th century concept is that children starved and died if they did not have a supporting family. There was no welfare state or no social net. A major progress in the way government operates today is that government operates on individuals. The PoV of the state is that there is individuals that need food, healthcare, and social support. Those individuals could be a child in which a lack of essential needs cause the state to bring in social services. The family is only a factor when evaluating the available support an individual has, but in the end its the individual that the government focus on. 18th century marriage law did not look at the individual, and as such it made sense that marriage was a single entity that formed a family which members had legal responsibility to each other. The state issued the laws that defined a family, the family protected each member, and the chain of command (and law) was simple, clear and established.