Law, moral standards and etc. are all set for public welfare (either for human species or a subgroup). They will go against certain group of people’s personal interests by definition. Because if it is to your benefit, you would do that automatically. For example, we can, but we don’t need to set a law saying that people should go eat when they feel hungry. But we set a law saying that you CANNOT eat someone else’s food without their permission. In a plain language: there’s no need to regulate people to do something people would do anyway.
This, leads to an interesting question — marriage. With above being said, it implies that getting married and obey the vow and comply with the law is going against your personal interest. But, most people get married anyway. The society approve these people because it is for the good of the entity human society – you reproduce the offspring and you educate them for the society and etc – you do your duty, good. On the same time, this is also a main reason for the singles who passed their “should get married age” and LGBT people to bear social pressure, because they put freedom or love or some other reason – something that can be argued as more personal interest, above their “making offspring duty”.
Notice here, for married people who have affairs, they got blamed not because they are not allowed to pursuit love or happiness or whatever. They received criticism because they failed to comply to another rule: the society expect you to do what you said you would do, obey your vow and be responsible. If you manage to make your wife happy and your children well educated, in principal, you should get treated as “who cares what you do after hours?” However, that’s not the case, the society still can’t give you approval even you are super rich and so on. Why? Still because of public welfare, there are some stupid people who don’t have the money/time/energy to take care of multiple wives or husbands, but still want to f*ck around. If the society publicly gives green light to some people but not others, there will be an uproar.
When you read to here, are you thinking it is unfair? Well, in other situations, the protocol for handling this kind of situation is to make tiers and differentiation. For example, in paying salary, you get paid more if you work harder (in principal). So why this is not happening here? Well, my guess is that there are too many reasons people are reluctant to bring up this issue to a level that requires a change (People just talk, it will take a lot of courage for someone to lead such a reform movement. So bottom-up is hard.), and the law makers doesn’t think this is a big enough problem because they charge fees on both getting married and getting divorce (No top-down motivations).
Do you think this is the underlying reason for “Marriage is the tomb of love“? With the divorce rate rockets up, does it come to a time for the society to rethink about marriage and change the regulation?
Share your opinion.