# marriage



## Flatlander (Jun 6, 2004)

I'm wondering what all you thinkers think about this statement.

"the family that prays together, stays together"


----------



## michaeledward (Jun 6, 2004)

Approximately 50 % of marriage's in America end in divorce.
Approximately 75 % of American's state they are of the Christian faith.

The statement doesn't seem to hold any truth to it.

Mike


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 6, 2004)

Well Mike it depends upon where you live eh? 
Married couples that do hold true and faithful to the vows they took upon the altar (or judge/justice o' peace) and understand and have faith in God and in each other have a better chance to last. 
I know of couples with large families who have been married for more than 20-30 years... HAPPILY. 
And yes, I do know of couples who divorce after the 2nd or 3rd kid for one reason or another and they've been together less than 10 years. I even know those who divorce less than a year of marriage. 
Of those divorces, in my experience... they left God out of the equation. Even those of different faiths, if they found a way to compromise and know and respect each other's boundries... they could've managed to stay together... as long as they prayed, believed, relied upon the God of their choice. 

But then... that's just my opinion...  :asian:


----------



## Ender (Jun 6, 2004)

Macarver makes some valid points in the a family that shares goals and values will undoubtely increase their chances of staying together. Another point would be the state of values in today's society. It is so much easier to get a divorce today than, for example, our parents generation. There were financial considerations, Divorce court, and the overall disapproval of divorce by society. Today there are "No Fault" divorces and "Irreconcillable Differences" . Who wouldn't have irreconciable differences with anyone? Couple that with people going into a marriage with the outlook that "if I doesn't work out, We'll just get a divorce". Well of course the divorce rate has increased. Add to the mix of "repeat offenders" who are on their 3rd or 4th marriages, then yes, the divorce rate would increase. But I think if you look at long term successful marriages, you'll find a commitment to shared values, and that would include praying together.


----------



## michaeledward (Jun 6, 2004)

MACaver said:
			
		

> Well Mike it depends upon where you live eh?
> Married couples that do hold true and faithful to the vows they took upon the altar (or judge/justice o' peace) and understand and have faith in God and in each other have a better chance to last.
> I know of couples with large families who have been married for more than 20-30 years... HAPPILY.
> And yes, I do know of couples who divorce after the 2nd or 3rd kid for one reason or another and they've been together less than 10 years. I even know those who divorce less than a year of marriage.
> ...


These are all anecdotes. They do not provide evidence to the point in question. 

Does prayer promote successful marriages? I do not know. The vast majority of people in America state that they practice a formalized religion, and yet half of those that choose to marry end up in a failed marriage. The facts argue against the thesis.

I am an athiest. I do not pray. My marriage (so far) is doing better than most, although it is too soon to state which side of that 50 percentile my wife and I will end up on.

The premise (Family that prays together, stays together), like most arguements for formalized religions, is difficult, if not impossible, to prove. I understand that religion brings a great deal of comfort and support to practitioners, but that does not prove any points about civil life.

Do we have any clergy who read this board that can participate in this discussion? I think some first hand references might be insightful (although, not necessarily evidentary).


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jun 6, 2004)

MACaver said:
			
		

> Well Mike it depends upon where you live eh?
> Married couples that do hold true and faithful to the vows they took upon the altar (or judge/justice o' peace) and understand and have faith in God and in each other have a better chance to last.
> I know of couples with large families who have been married for more than 20-30 years... HAPPILY.
> And yes, I do know of couples who divorce after the 2nd or 3rd kid for one reason or another and they've been together less than 10 years. I even know those who divorce less than a year of marriage.
> ...




MACaver et al,

No disrespect to religion in any form.

I have also know those who were happily married for years until death of one. Some have been both religous, and others neither was religous, and in one it was mixed, yet neither one expected the other to change.

I also have to say that most of these were people before my age. There are some my age who have been continuously together, and some have religion, maybe not in the beginning, but over time. Others do not have religion.

In my experience it related not only to people who share goals, but to a willinigness of both parties to compromise and support the other person. It takes two people working all the time, together with the other. Yet, many times a single person either feels they are unhappy and it is the other person's fault for their unhappiness. No one but yourself can allow yourself to be happy. No drug, or alcohol or person will correct this unhappiness. My opinion at least.

 :asian:


----------



## tsunami (Oct 8, 2004)

I think the statment could just as well be " the family that does anything together, stays together". An involved family that is engaged and participates in each others lives has a tighter bond than those who do not. This is hard work but nothing of substance ever comes easy. 

George


----------



## jfarnsworth (Oct 8, 2004)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> I'm wondering what all you thinkers think about this statement.
> 
> "the family that prays together, stays together"


I'm the worst person in the world to ask about marraige issues


----------



## loki09789 (Oct 8, 2004)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> I'm wondering what all you thinkers think about this statement.
> 
> "the family that prays together, stays together"


The saying, as I understand it, simply points out that having a common value structure that you actively participate in can help build a strong family connection.  I would say that it is 'true' as a valid and useful tool to make stronger and more productive family relationships.

Mward makes the statistical point that 50% divorce rate and a 75% polled Christian population as proof that it isn't 'true.'  I disagree.  It isn't suppose to be 'true' because of popular admission of being Christian (or any other religion) because saying you believe a certain way doesn't mean that you are active or focused on using that value system for building a strong family bond.  There are many a Jewish/Christian/Muslim...what ever person who identifies themself as such simply as a cultural/heretige association and not as a practicing member.

The idea IMO is that by actively sharing a common set of values (key word ACTIVELY) that it can enrich the family bonds, thats all.  A tighter family is less likely IMO to be a 'broken' family.


----------



## michaeledward (Oct 8, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> The saying, as I understand it, simply points out that having a common value structure that you actively participate in can help build a strong family connection. I would say that it is 'true' as a valid and useful tool to make stronger and more productive family relationships.
> 
> Mward makes the statistical point that 50% divorce rate and a 75% polled Christian population as proof that it isn't 'true.' I disagree. It isn't suppose to be 'true' because of popular admission of being Christian (or any other religion) because saying you believe a certain way doesn't mean that you are active or focused on using that value system for building a strong family bond. There are many a Jewish/Christian/Muslim...what ever person who identifies themself as such simply as a cultural/heretige association and not as a practicing member.
> 
> The idea IMO is that by actively sharing a common set of values (key word ACTIVELY) that it can enrich the family bonds, thats all. A tighter family is less likely IMO to be a 'broken' family.


I made no claims to the population of the United States that claims 'Christian' religion. I said 'formalized' religion. By which, I meant their religions had common attributes: a preacher, a building, a teaching structure.

Now, you mention 'Jewish', 'Christian', 'Muslim' and 'cultural heritage' as attributes by which married and divorced couples identify themselves. Which of these self-identified groups teaches that divorce is acceptable?

According to your disagreement, those that claim to be practicing formalized religion are either a) lying or b) not practicing their beliefs.

I think you are arguing that people who say they are practicing religious beliefs are not really practicing religous beliefs. I can agree with that. If that is not what you are saying, I am curious as to what your intent is.


----------



## loki09789 (Oct 8, 2004)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I made no claims to the population of the United States that claims 'Christian' religion. I said 'formalized' religion. By which, I meant their religions had common attributes: a preacher, a building, a teaching structure.
> 
> Now, you mention 'Jewish', 'Christian', 'Muslim' and 'cultural heritage' as attributes by which married and divorced couples identify themselves. Which of these self-identified groups teaches that divorce is acceptable?
> 
> ...


No, I am saying that the quoted phrases validity isn't something to be measured in quantity standards so much as quality standards, which was the approach you presented with your comparison between the divorce and religious identification statistics (sorry about the assumption/quick read and Christian only label). The phrase is anecdotal at best and intended as a way to promote active use of religious values as a way to build deep relationship connections.

None of those listed faiths 'approve' of divorce but they all have conditions and procedures that allow for a 'good' divorce (so to speak).  Even the way that a family - deeply rooted and bonded in a faith - handles a divorce/separation/anulment can be a testemony to their faith.  They can either be cruel and abusive or try to be fair, understanding and as loving (in the human kind way, not the romantic way) as possible to reduce the unavoidable pain and damage that such a thing can bring.

Of course, the 'evil'/'good' aspect comes into play if you pose the question:
"What if the family that is praying together, stays together because they are praying in a way that was taught to them by some hate based group that uses religion as a manipulation tool to perpetuate hate, like KKK/white race groups/Religious based terrorist groups....?"

Of course that isn't good for the general public, but it will make a strongly bonded family none the less. Now someone will say that I am for terrorist training or something like that .


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Oct 8, 2004)

Although I think divorce is a very sad thing, I wish people wouldn't talk about it like it is the downfall of society.  

I think that people who share a faith - or the same approach to life - may be more harmonious or in-step to begin with.  But circumstances may change that closeness or similarity of perspective.  In the couples I have seen, sometimes a shared faith/community *encourages* them to stay together, because the resulting fallout of divorce would be so tremendous on both people.


----------



## loki09789 (Oct 8, 2004)

Feisty Mouse said:
			
		

> Although I think divorce is a very sad thing, I wish people wouldn't talk about it like it is the downfall of society.
> 
> I think that people who share a faith - or the same approach to life - may be more harmonious or in-step to begin with. But circumstances may change that closeness or similarity of perspective. In the couples I have seen, sometimes a shared faith/community *encourages* them to stay together, because the resulting fallout of divorce would be so tremendous on both people.


Good point FM,  I would say that by today's standards the "Greatest Generation" that grew up in the tail of the depression would probably have been categorized as 'dysfunctional families' or 'broken families' and look at what was accomplished during WWII.

"Family" takes on different forms for sure.  It is the love and respect level - even in the worst moments - that are indicators of how much quality is put into that family regardless of the structure.


----------



## michaeledward (Oct 8, 2004)

If only we could go back to the point where human life expectance was 35 to 40 years of age. Then we could all get married in our teens, procreate the next generation in our early 20's, raise the offspring, and die, leaving room for the next generation.

Now that everybody is living to their 70's & 80's ... we end up being married for 40, 50, or 60 years. That's the real problem.
O.K. ... that is an attempt at humor. "Live Long and Prosper."


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Oct 8, 2004)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> If only we could go back to the point where human life expectance was 35 to 40 years of age. Then we could all get married in our teens, procreate the next generation in our early 20's, raise the offspring, and die, leaving room for the next generation.
> 
> Now that everybody is living to their 70's & 80's ... we end up being married for 40, 50, or 60 years. That's the real problem.
> O.K. ... that is an attempt at humor. "Live Long and Prosper."


That's actually very funny Micheal!  Those vows _until death do you part_ have been around for a long time.  So with the life expectancy being much longer today maybe people need to think a little harder before making that decision, which they'll have to live with for an extra 40 years perhaps!


----------



## Flatlander (Oct 8, 2004)

Perhaps then, "'til the kids _finally_ move out do us revisit the issue of parting" would be more appropriate.


----------



## loki09789 (Oct 8, 2004)

Funny thing is that the idea of romantic 'love bond' marriage is a relatively recent fashion around marriage.  Marriages, historically, were more about family contracted business collaborations and such.  Marry off your daughter to the Duke with the shipping fleet and you can send your livestock to France cheaply and both you and the new in laws make money....

Women were the legal equivalent of children in the eyes of the courts/society and were traded off with a Dowry to sweeten the pot...

As far as divorce statistics go, that idealogical shift may have as much to do with the divorce rates as anything else.  People would tolerate more when the expectation wasn't necessarily romantic bliss but only contractual stability - anything more was icing on the cake.


----------



## loki09789 (Oct 8, 2004)

tsunami said:
			
		

> I think the statment could just as well be " the family that does anything together, stays together". An involved family that is engaged and participates in each others lives has a tighter bond than those who do not. This is hard work but nothing of substance ever comes easy.
> 
> George


 
Agreed, look at the 'Hockey families', Gymnastic families, family run businesses that create a reason for cooperation/interaction and problem solving beyond just family harmony.  It adds that common cause/team/goal aspect to family dynamics...much like the mafia


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Oct 8, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Funny thing is that the idea of romantic 'love bond' marriage is a relatively recent fashion around marriage. Marriages, historically, were more about family contracted business collaborations and such. Marry off your daughter to the Duke with the shipping fleet and you can send your livestock to France cheaply and both you and the new in laws make money....
> 
> Women were the legal equivalent of children in the eyes of the courts/society and were traded off with a Dowry to sweeten the pot...
> 
> As far as divorce statistics go, that idealogical shift may have as much to do with the divorce rates as anything else. People would tolerate more when the expectation wasn't necessarily romantic bliss but only contractual stability - anything more was icing on the cake.


And the fact that since women were considered children or chattel, they often had nowhere to go out of their marriage, whether it was blissful or cold or abusive.


----------



## Raewyn (Oct 8, 2004)

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> I'm the worst person in the world to ask about marraige issues


 



Me too.  Mine did not work out as I had hoped!!!  Maybe if both my ex and myself and some sort of faith it may have worked out..............but even then I really dont think so.  Hindsight is a wonderful thing!


----------



## Ray (Dec 30, 2004)

Heck...staying together takes a lot of work and committment.  I'm coming up on 29 years soon.   There are explanations for the divorce rate which mostly boil down to: it is easier (financially for the wife) and more socially acceptable than it once was.

Families that have regular activities together do have an advantage over those that don't (as far as staying together).

Husbands and wives that cherish each other and subordinate their wants (fairly and when appropriate) to the needs of the relationship have a good chance of staying together.


----------



## shesulsa (Dec 30, 2004)

I think unless each of the two people who form a couple are willing to lay all their cards on the table and discuss absolutely everything together in an honest, frank and safe fashion, there cannot be any hope of successful marriage.  Not all failed marriages end in divorce or death - many dead marriages are still intact in the eyes of the law.

If one is not willing to bare one's soul - all of one's dirty little secrets and nasty laundry - in the interest of healing and helping, we cannot hope to be each other's soft place to fall.

With the convenience of divorce and technological advances today it is much easier to give up, whether that means giving up and leaving or giving up and not trying hard enough to keep someone in one's life.  It's easy to get counseling - easier, though, to NOT get it.


----------



## Ping898 (Dec 30, 2004)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> I'm wondering what all you thinkers think about this statement.
> 
> "the family that prays together, stays together"


 

Hmm...so my thoughts on this are coming kind of late, but thought I would throw them in anyways...

I don't think that praying together means always staying together staying together.  But there are many different interpretations of this quote I have heard to that like the family that eats together stays together.  Personally I think if you look at the broader point of the quote it makes sense.  Seems to be a family that prays together spends time together.  My family used to eat dinner as a family every night until my sister went off to college and I started karate, mom, sis and I went to church every Sunday together.  We played games as a family, and other stuff too.  I mean you need all the other skills of communication and compromise to stay together too.  But I think that spending time together also plays a big part in keeping a family together, cause if you never together how can you learn to communicate or even really have the ability to.  Just my thoughts....


----------



## markulous (Dec 30, 2004)

That's one major problem with society.  You are taught by your parents and teachers that one of your goals in life need to be getting married.  If I met the right girl then I wouldn't hesitate to get married.  But I have known people that get so depressed without someone that they find someone that treats them like crap and marries them because they don't want to be "lonely".  Marriage is like having sprinkles or syrup(whatever your fancy) on ice cream.  You don't need it and if it's crappy or rotten it will ruin ALL of your ice cream.  But if you manage to find the perfect one that matches the flavor of your ice cream then why not use it?

And "the family that prays together stays together", I don't agree with.  If all that means is being active in the church with each other then I have seen that fail many times.  I have seen evil people go to church and act like they are actually upholding values.  But when in reality that couldn't care less about anyone but themselves.


----------



## The Prof (Jan 3, 2005)

There is some validity to that statement.  (Only some)  We pray together in our family every day at the dinner table.  We also pray together in church.  

I know many falilies that pray together and still have had divorce, adultry, abuse, etc.  I know other famlies who rarely pray and they seem to be quite happy and well rounded.

My theory is that the more you do together as a family the better your chances are to survive as a family.  

Praying together works for us.


----------

