I equate marriage to a commitment to the continuation of the relationship. It's not love though love may have been the catalyst that inspired it. Many couples in northern europe don't bother to get married because they realize that over time they may grow apart and marriage would just make the split that much more difficult especially if children are involved.

After an intense backpacking trip in Zion National Park that culminated with a climb up Angel's Landing I asked a park ranger for advise. I asked him if there was a term for being in a great deal of pain while simultaneously experiencing blissful euphoria. Someone nearby heard the question and suggested bittersweet. That was close, but not quite accurate to describe the physical turmoil and ecstasy of self that can arise from a backpacking journey. The park ranger looked at me square and flatly answered, "Marriage."

I definitely don't believe love and marriage go together like a horse and carriage (with apologies to Frank Sinatra), but I think the institution persists because it's seen as the "next step" in a relationship or in life generally, it's considered traditional, it's a religious rite of passage, and it's a way of expressing one's love of another to the community and of feeling validated. That's not to say that I think marriage is good or healthy. I consider it rather destructive. Placing artificial boundaries upon an otherwise good relationship often makes people feel trapped or allows them to more easily take one another for granted. I also don't think a decision I make today is a valid commitment for the future, and I never want to question whether I or my partner are together only because there's an obstacle to leaving and it's just easier to stay.

Just an observation, but you seem to be mixing two different things - marriage, and a legally binding contract (of which marriage is just one type). I'm not sure if your question is specifically to do with marriage, or any type of contract (such as a civil partnership).

Marriage can mean a lot of things to a lot of people. My late wife wanted to get married to prove commitment (remember trust but verify). After a few years she asked why did we bother? In actuality it turned out love was involved. When one loves another the last thing they would want is to put an undue burden on the other. I am a disabled, Vietnam era vet and so have health benefits. Our marriage extended those benefits to her. If either of us had health issue the other would not be hit with a financial burden. In the end she got a brain tumor which cost $130K. This could have gone either way and I could have gotten the tumor. Marriage helped us from putting an undue burden on the other.

Not always. No. Marriage is historically and realistically about legalities. Realty, financial rights, medical decisions, all kinds of things. Without the contract (which is what marriage is) there is no legal partnership. That's largely why it's so important for GLT marriage. Bi's can already marry without issue but I'd suggest with honesty about it. I do think that love, or a deep respect and admiration for each other develops over time. I don't really believe in love at first sight.

I had one brief marriage and it was just such a mistake! The gal wanted to marry me just to have a chess piece to play in her ongoing war with her mother.......After she dragged me down the aisle-whining and moaning about how I needed to save her-she then started bitching me into dust about everything.....Plus it turns out she didnt like sex so at 21 you can imagine what a big shock and disappointment that was.....Truth is truly stranger than fiction cause then her mother and her reconciled.....So I was married at 21-divorced at 23 ......Whew what a head spinner that experience was......

Many people don't need it, and have made a conscious decision to avoid it. Marriage in general, is not only occurring later in life, but is now ssen as more on an option - even when children are involved.

All that said, for some it is the ideal situation, and for them - it works. Whatever ...

I don't think we need the legal version (unless you're vying for a tax break). I know some get married so they can legally migrate. It's all legalities, which make it easier for someone to profit from. Love has nothing to do with marriage and marriage seems to have very little to do with love.

Marriage is a rite begun to protect women and children. In many cases people enter into marriage with real love. In a minority of cases that love persists for a long time.

Nope. It is a socio-legal contract, useful for sorting out property and the custody of children, but, if easily dissolved, not worth much beyond that.

Given the social ugliness surrounding the same sex marriage debate, I probably would avoid the institution altogether, were I to find another to consider growing old(er) with.

No. Historically, marriages were business transactions. Marriage for love has only become a practiced ideal over the last few centuries, with the most change in tht direction durign the 20th century.

Everyone has their "ideal mate" pictured in their minds, but when it comes to love, seldom does the one they marry fit the ideal picture in their mind. Persons who do marry their ideal picture usually divorce, because they fell in love with their ideal, the idea they built in their mind of who they thought the person was, and not the actual person for who they were. They fell in love with an illusion that didn't actually exist.

The legal contract of marriage is very useful when it comes to property obtained after the contact began. The contract does not reflect,enhance. Or minimize the love of the partners. It only protects their assets.