Marriage is on the brink — not because of the model or concept – but becasue of your described or implied consequences for the husband, father, or man. As one entry eluded, “financial incentives” have tipped the balance vaulting “no-fault” divorce into the realm of a king’s ransom.

To continute on your theme, the chasm between traditional Christian marriage and the state’s treatment is so distant that the quest is merely a mirage of a contract…or anything of commitment.

With such distance comes the potential for the church to reassert its role in marriage…and exile the state marriage on the basis of utter failure and greed.

Only that in many areas it has far overreached its bounds.

I would argue that biochemically speaking, until a couple has moved in together and are physically together under the same household for a few months, the “blissful” feelings still hold for a while. This was much more the case when cohabitation was socially unacceptable, so marriages began with more of a honeymoon phase. Today, you are correct that many couples make a more rational, clear-headed decision with regard to marriage.

If you mean Communist countries, I’d argue that Marxism (or Maoism, Juche, etc.) has all the requisite characteristics of religious belief.

Not necessarily communist countries, but generally cultures in which parents and relatives have a large say in their children’s marriages, to the point of arranging marriages or introducing potential mates to their children, and at the very least the process of “approving” the marriage prospects. In other words, there are no holy connotations, but the sense of tradition and structure with regard to marriage is strong. That had happened in the West, but has mostly gone away with cultural shifts in the direction of individualism, personal happiness and less emphasis on sacrifice and the family unit.

You make some good points, but I’d be interested in knowing which cultures do not have “holy or religious connotations” regarding marriage. If you mean Communist countries, I’d argue that Marxism (or Maoism, Juche, etc.) has all the requisite characteristics of religious belief. I cannot think of any other non-Western examples of cultures that do not include religion in the concept of marriage. But you are correct in that fidelity is (or was) almost universally enforced by cultural norms. I’m writing about the reasons for that, but have not finished yet.

Love marriage was never really even the norm in the West, either. Even today it isn’t exactly common. How many people these days get married while in the blissful first few months of a relationship? Most wait until things have cooled off, and then make what they believe is a rational decision (I would argue that despite their calculated approach, they are still making a mistake). Certainly, there is affection, but that is far from what is known as “love” by the standards of Hollywood movies, romance novels and the like.

Lukobe: There are indeed serious indications that state involvement is harmful to the concept of marriage. But doesn’t that suggest something profoundly disturbing about the state itself?

In some cultures marriage is not wrapped up with holy or religious connotations, and that may be a problem with marriage in the West. The decline of Christianity and the secularization of the West in part means that the Christian style of marriage is faltering. Fidelity is another demand made by Christianity (thou shalt not commit adultery). This is culturally, but not religiously, reinforced in other places.

You did neglect to mention that women are the ones who are overwhelmingly initiating divorce, oft-quoted as being over 70% of the cases (I’m not fact-checking this one, just parroting what I have read). It seems that women are the ones wanting both to enter marriage and escape from marriage.

The intermingling of passionate romantic love with marriage is another cause for its failure, particularly on the part of women initiating divorce. This was the cause of easy divorce during Roman times as well. When people married out of economic necessity, familial duty or political expediency (in cases of nobles in the past), the marriages were perhaps less intimate but more stable.

The younger generation is increasingly skeptical of marriage, men and women both, but by a certain point most average people do enter into it. The popular culture endorses the idea that love should lead to marriage, and those who fall in love start thinking of marriage almost immediately. However, there are signs that the young no longer rush into marriage, as stigma against cohabitation is removed and the young simply begin cohabiting through their youth. In essence, they are having more trial marriages, with some of the economic consequences upon splitting, but without the legal and social ramifications of divorce.

Get totalitarian government policy out of peoples homes and decrease affirmative action (discrimination) and the rate of marriages will increase quick smart.