Religion has consolidated its power by making people take it for granted that cheating on your spouse is wrong morally. Other examples of morally wrong include stealing or murdering the innocent. But as nobody can really own you it follows that sleeping with somebody other than your spouse is only a violation of how the spouse will feel. It is not a moral violation for you cannot own your spouse nor can your spouse own you.
Marriage is based on adultery being immoral and fidelity being moral. This is nonsense.
And even if the argument for immorality had a point, trying to make two people own each other through marriage is worse.
Marriage law insists that the couple need to have sex to consummate the marriage, or make it marriage. That is profound ableism and is not true respect for the partner. Marriage does not respect the married in itself. And the partners are led to tacitly disrespect each other.
How could a marriage be real when the man and woman are egoists or just care about their own desires? They might consummate but the reason for the consummation is to fulfil desire and not to consummate properly and have mutual self-giving. We know philosophically and 100 % that there are no such things as altruists or non-egoists so marriage as understood by the Church which has extended its unhealthy influence into the state is an empty ritual.
If I am only interested in good because of how it makes me feel I am marrying my perception of the other person and what they can bring into my life not the other person. It follows that even if religion is right that we are not like that people that want to marry must prove it right first. Why? Because there is no real marriage unless I establish that people are not egoistic. I cannot make my vows validly without clarifying that. Brighter minds than mine say that man and woman is egoistic.
There is nobody to witness or prove that the married couple properly consummated their marriage. You can’t have witnesses to verify a wedding that is only a potential marriage until consummation and none to prove that the marriage has been sealed and fulfilled and has become legally binding. It is prostitution all right for it is not a marriage at all at least in the eyes of the consistent and perceptive souls among us until children come who can be proved to be fathered by the husband. The wife and husband give their property to one another for sex. This makes the way religion and society treat prostitutes to be scandalous for it is hypocritical. In brief, I am saying that nobody knows if the marriage is real until the children start coming and yet they approve of the couple having various kinds of sex until that happens. So it is possible sex outside real and valid marriage that they are approving of. The husband and wife are encouraged to sell themselves to each other in order to have children.

A partner should compliment your life and not be the pivot of it but marriage demands that the husband love his wife like his own body (I got that from the Bible in Ephesians 5 and it is an accurate description of the requirements of marriage). It is impossible to love anybody that much. It is also unnecessary and therefore destructive for love hurts. Every person should be independent and be able to move on without too much difficulty if the relationship fails. Marriage requires that the couple depend on each other for everything for there is something unreal about a couple who say they love one another as themselves but who do not depend on each other for life and health and happiness for then there is no reason to believe it is anything more to it than words. Marriage would forbid the wife to go out and earn her own money. The husband makes the money while the wife looks after the home and the children in return. There is no other way to make a marriage real. Couples who believe in equality and independence for each other definitely cannot contract a valid marriage though the Church and state still have them going through the ceremony. Marriage should be seen as bad as slavery is.
Marriage is insulting for a couple that are really committed don’t need a ceremony. Marriage only works if the commitment is there. It is not marriage that works but the commitment because marriage is not going to work without the commitment. The romantic trappings of marriage are deceitful and intended to blind you to the fact that marriage is a sham and is just asking the permission of other people to have sex. They may have said nothing when you lived in so-called sin but that was sex without their permission nevertheless.
Catholicism says marriage requires that you be open to life in all the sex in your marriage. You don't use artificial contraception but you use natural birth control which allows God to create a life should he wish. It says that artificial contraception treats the child as an accident and natural contraception doesn't. This is utter nonsense for God can let you use condoms and still be open to life. If you avoid conception using the natural or artificial method you may still be regarding any child that results as a calamity and as an accident. The Catholic Church treats marriage as an implicit agreement not to use artificial contraception. Is marriage valid if the man and woman intend to use and/or believe in such contraception? The Church would have to answer no for it says when a man and woman give each other their bodies in the marriage bed they are giving their fertility and their whole selves. Artificial contraception then is a grave defilement of marriage. It must be worse to use it in marriage for marriage is so sacred to God than for unmarried couples to use it.

If a couple are committed then they have no need for marriage. There are better ways than marriage to make a person work at a relationship, like financial agreements or children.
Catholicism teaches that marriage is a sacrament. A sacrament is a sign that actually gives the power from God and the supernatural help of God that it pictures. For example, baptism pictures God washing sins away and so when a person is baptised God really takes their sins away when the rite takes place. Suppose marriage is a sacrament. It is grace given to help the man and woman live together and be good to one another and be good parents. Above all it is meant to make them holier and to help them prepare each other for Heaven. Few will tell you they felt more attraction to God and religion after getting married. And what happens if they break up in a month? Is the sacrament reversed or what? It can't work any more. Perhaps the man and woman should try all their lives to fix the marriage and get back together so that the sacrament can re-activate. The worst sin when a marriage breaks up is resistance to the power of the sacrament not the heartbreak caused. God comes first. The suggestion that marriage is a sacrament certainly implies that it is a grave sin to fail to keep trying. If the husband starts a new relationship, his wife should do all she can to break it up. There is miracle power ready to give them a chance even after all that. They have no excuse. Unless you agree with all the thinking in this paragraph, and you will if you are consistent, you cannot mean the marriage vows if marriage is a sacrament.
The commandment of God and Jesus that you must love your neighbour as yourself contradicts the idea of marriage. Marriage implies you love one person as yourself and everybody else in second place. Catholic marriage isn't impressive in the love stakes! The vows really say, "I take you as my spouse until death us do part. If we part you will still have to be faithful to me for the marriage still exists though it doesn't. A marriage where people live separate lives is not a marriage at all." That sounds more geared towards control than love! It is more about law than love!
To get married you have to vow to stay with your partner for life no matter what. You do not know what will happen. The fact that a bride loves her man and finds him sexy and charming only means she feels that way now. If he aged forty years overnight her love would soon evaporate which shows that marriage is always shallow though society and the Church do a good job of dressing it up as something terrifically noble.

There is always some way to keep even the worst marriage together. Believers in separation or divorce and especially divorce cannot contract a true marriage because they intend to divorce and remarry if all turns sour. They are not giving everything to the other person so their vows are just words that do not unite in matrimony. When you are supposed to give your body to the other partner you are symbolically giving your life. Marriage implies that divorce is wrong therefore marriage is evil. It is trying to put a ball and chain around the necks of two people. Marriage is a threat to human progress though it encourages progress that only looks like progress provided you don’t get behind the veneer. Divorce only recognises that a marriage is no longer a marriage for the couple can’t stand each other. It is only the recognition of a fact and is the only way to happiness and freedom for many.

You cannot mean it when you tell your wife or husband at a wedding ceremony that you take them for better or for worse forever for that is really promising that you will not change for change makes it harder for the partner to accept you and remain loving you. You are giving up your very important right to change which goes with the for worse part. You are abnegating your right to revamp your identity. When you hate yourself enough to try and make yourself a stick-in-the-mud how could marriage be a union of lovers? How could it be a union at all for love is union? Love is communion.
If you are committed, you are committed. A ceremony is not going to make any difference.
Marriage is only a pile of superstition and illusion dressed up to make it appealing. Its purpose is often to facilitate the manipulations of the people by the clergy and religion. It has been powerful politically as a cursory overview of history will show. It is a tool in the small and bigger society. 

A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, Catholic Truth Society, Westminster, 1985
Believing in God, PJ McGrath, Wolfhound Press, Dublin, 1995
Biblical Dictionary and Concordance of the New American Bible, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington DC, 1971
Divorce, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, 1946
Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, Uta Ranke Heinmann, Penguin, London, 1991
Moral Questions, Bishops Conference, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1971
New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
Preparing for a Mixed Marriage, Irish Episcopal Conference, Veritas, Dublin, 1984
Rome has Spoken, A Guide to Forgotten Papal Statements and How They Have Changed Through the Centuries, Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben (Editors), Crossroad Publishing, New York, 1998
Shattered Vows, Exodus From the Priesthood, David Rice, Blackstaff Press, Belfast, 1990
Sex & Marriage A Catholic Perspective, John M Hamrogue C SS R, Liguori, Illinois, 1987
The Emancipation of a Freethinker, Herbert Ellsworth Cory, The Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, 1947
“The Lord Hateth Putting Away!” and Reflections on Marriage and Divorce The Committee of the Christadelphian, Birmingham, 1985


No Copyright