Yes To Love, No To Marriage

Kudos to the author for bucking society's expectations. Truly, she and Jeff ARE the only ones who know how committed (or not committed) they are to each other. However, what she doesn't seem to realize is that, for better or worse, marriage is the main way that our culture views whether or not a [heterosexual] couple is committed to each other for life. I hope she understands where her partner is coming from if they choose not to make a huge trek and spend a lot of money to attend her commitment ceremony. They are used to certain cultural norms, and even if the author is "independent-minded," she can't logically expect everyone else to be. And as for her implication that she is against marriage because gays can't get married -- well, I certainly applaud her support of gay rights, but I believe some of the major gay-rights organizations have come out and said that they do NOT want heterosexuals boycotting marriage as some sort of solidarity. Why not help them fight for equality instead? Check out Lambda Legal and Human Rights Campaign, for instance.

While I fully respect the author's decision to reject legal marriage, the only argument she makes against it that I do not find offensive is her statement about the exclusion of gay couples from the institution. Everything else was belittling, presuming that all married people need a formal marriage ceremony to feel good about themselves and their relationship. Many "official" weddings are no different from the commitment ceremony she herself describes planning, a celebration with one's friends and family, white dress or no. The choice to obtain that "piece of paper," as well, is simply another way to communicate the nature of one's relationship to the community at large. Eslinger talks a lot about not "needing" a ring, dress, piece of paper, etc. to feel secure in herself and her relationship. But her need to make this argument in dismissive blanket statements betrays, at least to me, an underlying insecurity of her own.

What a refreshing article. It's a wonderful country that allows us to choose what relationships we choose to participate in. I'm in a loving relationship that we have chosen not to justify with a marriage certificate. I don't think that how I choose to love my partner is condescending any more than those who choose marriage are condescending to me. It's just a choice...

Bonnie, congratulations for spending the time to evaluate what your relationship means to you. Writing this public declaration of your love expresses how much this relationship means to you. That speaks volumes in my mind...

The issue isn't how you love, but that you love, and that the relationship works for both people in the relationship. I'm not sure why anyone's relationship should so influence others outside of the relationship enough to lead them to find this public expression of love as condescending.

I also felt this was condescending when I read it. I have a live and let live attitude. As part of that, I do not impose my judgements or will on other people. By writing this article, she has taken a strong stance that marriage is a waste of time and she is above such foolish whims. Based on all of her assertions, it is logical to assume she must pity all of us poor fools who did fall into the trap of marriage, as she is clearly above that. I am happy she is living life the way she wants, the way that makes her happy. That doesn't mean that she should be so judgemental (that is how her article felt) of those of us who chose different paths and did get married. There is also a lack of discussion on her part of how Jeff really feels about this whole thing. The fact that he proposed suggests he doesn't view marriage as the big sham that she does. I just hope her strong views aren't as one-sided in her relationship and she and Jeff are really entering this road together, as she states.

I celebrate this author's commitment to the bigger picture. Her example, intent , and thought -ful actions, consider how her choices effect more than herself and her family. She is a conscious of the hypocrisies of the institution of marriage and sensitive to the unfairness of states that will not see that any couple in love deserve the same rights by law. Ms Eslinger i applaud your choice and wish you a long and happy relationship. You obviously have a healthy start .

Could Bonnie suck anymore charm out of the idea of two people in love? I wouldn't want to come to her party. She's way to humorless.

,jhgkjhgkjhg

Comment: 1) The author wonders if Jeff's family will come to the commitment ceremony. If they don't, they will probably do so on the grounds that they love the couple dearly, but don't feel the need to participate in an obligatory ceremonty to demonstrate their love 2)pompous and condescending 3)perhaps not so much pompous as adolescent. Segments of the article sound eerily similar to comments from our 16 year old.

1asdfafdf

In my opinion it is a beautiful committment to choose to be together-- not as mandated by a legal document, or because it's what expected in our society-- but because it's that person you want to be with every day. Some people may find marriage (the legal aspects) or a wedding (the ceremony, tradition, the dress, rings, etc) to be important to symbolize of the committment of lifelong love, and that can be so meaningful and beautiful to some. But there are those who don't have this option, and for others marriage just isn't necessary.
Whether or not to make the traditional, legal, or a symbolic committment is up to the couple to decide, and if people forego it, it in no way signifies some kind of deterioration of our society. Relationships exist within the institution of marriage, and exist defiantly outside of it, but we should be less concerned about the institutions, and more concerned about the relationships themselves.

The decision to "get married" and to "be married" are not one and the same... I believe that many failed marriages, especially very short ones, occur because the participants believe that the ceremony is all that matters. The decision to "be married" is what counts. Years ago (early 1940s) my mother's theology professor asked who makes a man and wife a married couple. After all the students answered, he told them they were wrong. It isn't the state, or the Church, or the person officiating. The man and woman (remember, this was 1942!) are the ones who make themselves married, their commitment. The ceremony is a public and legal acknowledgement, but it is the partners who make it official.

I hope she and Jeff have prepared legal documents granting power of attorney and health care proxy, if they want to be the parties responsible for one another when illness or mental deterioration enter their lives. If not, Jeff's sister or her adopted daughter will have the upper hand in deciding what's best for their legal relative.

I have an issue with "the words 'husband' and 'wife' don't even begin to desrcibe our relationship." What does she think those words mean, then? Does she think other married couples do not regard themselves as lovers, friends, and partners? I think the author feels that her relationship is so much more meaningful and deep so as to transcend marriage, when she is describing her mate as millions of women would describe their husbands. I am happy for her that she has found love, but need she be so dismissive of other married couples in the process? Pretty presumptuous, in my opinion.

Yes of course! To profess one's love for another isn't enough... How could one possible believe his or her partner's words, thoughts, emotions and actions? Sounds like blasphemy! Trust no one... say you love him or her... but, don't ever fall into the trap of trust.

This article has blatantly violated the rotting fabric of institutionalized marriage. It has cast some light into a dark, false and pretentious custom epitomized for centuries because humans lost their trust in themselves and as a result, in others.

It???s so glaringly pure that the world won???t be able to swallow it into its miserable depths.

???

It is those who fear voluntary commitment that succumb to documenting a relationship. One can have a host of excuses to justify the institution of marriage but nothing explains its validity. As for the common question I???ve been asked in the past??? ???But, If you love someone, why don???t you marry her??????? ???You fear commitment, don???t you??????? All I could offer this friend in reply is that ???It is precisely because I love her that I refuse to deface our relationship with the tag of marriage.???

I quote the author, ???I am Jeff's partner, his friend and his lover, and he is mine. The terms "husband" and "wife" wouldn't even begin to describe our relationship.??? Those who understand this will understand what I mean. It takes a lot of honesty in dealing with this issue??? honesty with yourself and then your partner and then the rest of the world.