MARRIAGE VOWS CANNOT BE MEANT
 

An arrangement where people pledge selfless love to each other is insincere.  Marriage is the worst form of that where two people promise selfless love to each other forever.  Selfless love is loving without seeking or consenting to get anything back.  But in marriage you use selfless love as a bribe to get something back.  Selfless love that you want paid for with selfless love is not selfless love at all.  The truly selfless person will choose to give their fortune entirely to the poor rather than to receive anything from anybody else. If they accept anything it is resultant acceptance: “I only accept it for they have to be allowed to be selfless too.” But joyfully agreeing to let another be selfless to you as in marriage in return to you being selfless to them is self-deception. That is getting something back and arranging it. The reward for you pretending you are selfless is that you get somebody to treat you as if they were selfless.

Marriage is the core unit of the Catholic Church.  Thus if it is deceptive it is right to say the whole Church is.

Legally a contract is not binding unless you understand what you are doing and the contract clearly states what is involved. Those who get married are not really married at all. There is no mention in the ceremony or the contract about their duty to have sex penis-vagina at least once. Or that they must jointly own all they have. Or what husband and wife means.  
 
The Church says that sex should only take place between a husband and wife who are validly married. If a couple trust one another completely then why can't they have sex whether married or not? Marriage does not mean that the partners will have a complete trust in one another. Also, even if a couple is united by trust that trust might be small one day and huge the next. It is ridiculous to say that people should only have sex if they are married. That is saying that this law is what matters most and not the level of trust that they have for one another. It is anti-personal. It is anti-respect.
 
Marriage is supposedly the husband and wife giving themselves to each other in a covenant of loving sacrifice. The vows state as much but the vows, “I N. do take thee N. as my lawful wedded husband/wife to have and to hold from this day forward, in sickness and in heath, for richer or for poorer, to love and to cherish till death us do part.”
 
The Bible teaches that all people are sinners and none of them are good and that good works are impossible except for the saved. All other good is just a pretence. In this scenario, what use can marriage vows be? If people are too selfish to really be genuine about others then why believe their profession of vows?
 
The Christian Church and most of society in general get by on telling lies. One of the main lies is that you can love the wrongdoer or sinner but hate or condemn the wrong or the sin. To say that you condemn the sin but not the sinner is so ridiculous that everybody knows it’s a contradiction. Evil is that which should not exist. If I say John did evil I am saying John is evil and it would be better for him to be annihilated and replaced by a clone who freely commits no evil. Humanists often deny free will and are happy to because they see that to say we have free will is exactly the same thing as saying that hatred as long as you don’t admit to hating is commendable. The marriage vows could not be taken unless you hold that you will and should love your partner until life ends. So that means you are resolving to love your wife and not her sins but that is impossible so you cannot really have the required intention to create a valid marriage. There is no marriage in this world that can be called valid. And relationships cannot be built on lies and marriage is built on lies so the relationship is more false and fake than people realise.
 
You don't feel about a lightning strike the same way as you feel when a person hurts you. The anger and hatred if they happen feel personal. Marriage is a declaration that a man and woman will love each other but hate one another's sins for life. But this is impossible. You cannot hate a person's sins like they were things. You feel personal when a person hurts you but you don't feel that way if a robot hurts you. You hate the person even if you love them at the one time. Marriage is based on a lie. It is paying homage to Christian hypocrisy. Marriage is a lie. The Church says you must give your whole heart to a person in sex in marriage. Yet its hypocritical doctrine makes this impossible - hating the sin is hating the sinner. The husband hates his wife in so far as he hates her sins and vice versa.
 
The love sinner hate sin idea commands that you must always hate sin in others. It won't be easy keeping a marriage going with that kind of attitude. The idea demands that you hate sin or you don't love the person in reality. If hating the sin is hating the sinner then this love is pretend. Even Hitler could say that he loved the Jews for he didn't want them to be Jews and that it was Jewishness not Jews he intended to hurt. As with love sinner and hate sin it is a distinction without a difference. Hatred is a form of warped love. That is why indifference, not giving a toss about a person if they live or die or are happy or not, is the real opposite of love. The person who hates you hates you because of something you support or are a part of or do. They do not hate you because you are a person. They attack you and are angry at you because of something else. There is no difference between this and loving the sinner and hating the sin.

If you cannot like the sinner and dislike their sin then how can you love the sinner and hate the sin? If you dislike the sin and you still like the sinner as much as ever then it follows that you don't dislike the fact that they committed the sin but that the sin had unpleasant results. So it is not the sin at all you dislike. The sin is not an action or the results of sin but something that a person becomes. To dislike or hate the sin is to dislike or hate the sinner.

Marriage is legalised prostitution because both partners lie to one another about all this sacrificial love and self-giving that marriage is said to be about. How can your sacrifice be a sacrifice when done just for benefits and how can you give yourself when it is only the fulfilment of desire that you are after? Your desires always mean more to you than the thing desired so we are egoistic animals. Prostitution is less wrong but only in that it is more open and honest. In married love, it is only the way the person looks and the good treatment they give and not the person that counts.

Marriage is legalised prostitution because both partners get benefits for having sex. Marriage is entered into for these benefits which include material benefits. It is not right to punish a woman for selling herself to one man outside of marriage when she can do this legally by marrying him. And Christianity likes to pretend to care about prostitutes when Jesus was so nice to them!
 
You do not love any person but your judgement of that person. It is all in your head. Therefore marriage is an illusion. The vows cannot work. It is totally false to say: “I take you as my wife and I give myself to you as your husband”. It is your perception of her that you are after, not her. Marriage is about persons but you cannot marry a perception so marriage IS just a piece of paper.
 
The Catholic Church admitted in a book of apologetics (page 165, The Emancipation of a Freethinker) that a survey done under the auspices of a psychological laboratory of Pharsalia, Oregon found that very few people, only 5% practice altruism or unconditional love when they do good works. Everybody else was after pride of workmanship, feeling self-important, loving the interfering end, looking for gratitude and so on. This survey took place in a time when people were more religious and less materialistic than they are now. So it’s a lot less than 5% today! Altruists if they exist would surely tend to be unmarried so that they can be free to engage in philanthropy.
 
How could many marriages be valid when people are failing to be truly loving?