You'd need to get them down to agreeing that there is a natural law.

Either way, got to find out what he cares about and play off that

And as such an objective truth.

Therefore banning divorce is a maintenance of the natural law.

Damaged childhood, for instance. Everyone cares about the children

I've a whole resource on that, similar to sodomy, but that's still in draft mode

Lax divorce also leads to promiscuity

Which would lead into the other sources.

Yea, its a comprehensive resource on everything family

Here is what she said:

"I agree with you insofar as I don't think people should be in institutions they fundamentally disagree with. Someone whose concept of marriage is egalitarian shouldn't be in an evangelical marriage; someone who is opposed to the idea of marriage shouldn't get married at all. But I wouldn't go so far as to say that only people interested in lifetime commitment should get married. I think there is room for different types of marriages and that the practice of writing one's own vows and designing one's own wedding (as opposed to all weddings taking place in a church) support that.

Even with the possibility of divorce, marriage is still a commitment. People in dating and cohabiting relationships try to work through their differences and try to maintain closeness despite the fact that their relationship isn't permanent. Some people derive a lot of meaning from the permanent element of marriage, which is fine, but I don't think it's necessary in order for people to be motivated to grow in their relationship. In fact, I think trying to force people who won't or can't work through their issues to stay together can be quite harmful."

After I said "people who don't want a lifelong commitment shouldn't get married"

Remind him that the sole purpose of marriage is to create a strong network for raising children. Not to have fun, not to get a tax write-off.

*her

She is overcomplicating issue by attaching all kinds of baggage to it like "co-habiting", "relationship", etc

Marriage isn't for fun and games. It's a sacrifice.

You leave a part of yourself behind in order to become one with another person and build a future together.

Agreed

Feel like I'm gonna be opening a can of screeching worms once I say marriage is about procreation though

But I guess that's where the fundamental disagreement lies

That is entirely what it's for though.

The idea that marriage is purely a romantic gesture is an idea that was whored out by Hallmark and Disney.

And the whole reason that divorce has risen in the first place; people stopped thinking of marriage as being for children and rather just for warm feelings

Even when you read 17th-19th century literature talking about "love", their very core understanding of what "love" is is an entirely different one to the one we have now.

How so?

In the example above, people courted and experienced "love" in a very short space of time.

Essentially, "love" in such stories was merely physical attraction. However at this point, we didn't have the ideas of contraception and the separation of the sexual act for its intended purpose.

However, the understanding was you were attracted to people and you understood *all* of the ramifications of such attraction. ie. Matrimony, Procreation, the fading of your physique and appearance.

What people today see marriage as is an expression of that love, not as a progression of it.

That's a great point

Even on old movies they are in love and ready to marry after knowing each other in just a short time

It's why so many people get divorced these days, they've got this crazy idea that your marriage must be over when that initial attraction is over.

Basically, we have separated marriage from about 5 or 6 of its constituent (incredibly important) elements.

You also have to take into account that back in ye olde days people didn't take as many lovers as the average person would today. As such, despite the short courtship, they would've bonded far quicker than people these days could probably imagine.

"not only people interested in lifetime commitment should get married"
"not only triangles should have three sides"

Nigger, marriage is by definition a lifetime commitment that is needed to have an actual family, which requires the intent to have children. Remove any of these and by definition you don't have marriage, but a couple of retards using each other as human sized sex toys. Of course, these retards, who know no decency, or morals, or wisdom, are apalled by ideas like "responsibility" or "commitment". Don't like this commitment? Don't worry, you are free to practice abstinence.

Agreed

There will be much screeching lol

To be fair, I used to screech at that too

You still do

Not as much though! I'm getting better

One missing englishman says no

Englishman can go || redacted ||

I may try to fix that