https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/79d6ee4a-4d22-302d-94a6-1e7c8f663a3a/ss_why-does-the-united-states.html

The article claims that 20 odd states do not have a minimum marital age and that a study showed girls as young as 12 in America being legally married.

I would imagine that is a very rare occurrence, but nonetheless opens the discussion on how marital minimum should be determined.

To me, if a minor can be emancipated at 16, I believe they should be permitted marriage if they can prove ability to care for themselves or have parental consent.

with the exception of pregnancy, if pregnancy is involved, I believe marriage should be permitted, for the sake of the child to be, with parental consent.


Do you know your states minimum marriage age? Do you agree with it?

Hi, I assume you're talking about American people, born and bred?
This subject is always a problem when we ( as in western countries ) have different cultures ie eastern, Indian, afghan,some African and other similar people trying to integrate to our way of life. They have a very much different view and ways when it comes to this and it doesn't go well with us, nor should it, my opinion. The difference is that a lot of those are arranged or forced at an early age, 8,9,10!
Going back to what you said, I'm not familiar with u.s. laws but I agree to some extent on your point of view.

thanx

I believe it also has to do on the cultural expectations of 'marriage'

most in the US are brought up on the ideal of 'love', which requires personal choice period, it is a rare marriage where sex isn't a huge part in this type of culture
(we want to marry whom we 'love')

others are brought up on the idea of stability and family, which requires consideration of those beyond self, it is a rare marriage where sex IS a huge part in this type of culture
(they want to marry who will be a good provider or a good nurturer for the family they will have)

we can of course, fall out of love with the one we marry, and others can fall in love with the ones they marry too

I believe, its all about what purpose a culture has given to 'marriage'.


But in America, because we tend to place such significance on how much better children allegedly do with married parents, I feel there should be the option of marriage at any age in which someone has already become pregnant.

The state of Ohio declares females to be of age at 16, with parental consent.
Males on the other hand have to be 18, otherwise needs to go thru Juvenile court if under age 18.

I have no issues with the law the way it is.

In Texas (18 obviously) but from 14-18 they can marry with parental or legal guadian consent. Consent must be given within 30 days of applying for a marriage license.

Personally, I wouldn't give consent but I wouldn't impose it on others

the thing about govt marriages is the govt is issuing a worthless piece
of paper

the govt says it s a lifetime contract (that wording needs changed)

it is a contract till it aint

anymore you can void that contract for almost any reason and if both
want to void it you dont need a reason

so why bother all govt marriage does is promote a financial system that
is more corrupt than the mob

its not about the facts its about the money

first thing that happens the lawyers want financials then they know how
much they can milk the couple for before the judge can grant the
breaking of a lifetime contract ---

the judges and the lawyers are doing everything but sleeping together
(well some may even be doing that)

govt marriage is nothing but a scam and if you want it you should be at least 30 lol

The problem with some laws is simply..enforcement.
Governments face having to jail under-age lawbreakers.

Say a 14 and a 15 year old have sex, get pregnant and
wish to wed..(a natural event when unsocilaized) what
to do with them? Right now it is hard time.

Personally, I believe there should not be any law at all concerning marriage. That is a personal or a family thing that the government has no right to be involved with.

If families teach their children morality and wisdom they should be able to make those decisions themselves. Most do.
Of those that don't, it is certainly not up to the government to rectify their misjudgement.

But then, I believe we have allowed the government too deep into our personal lives in many ways. Families no longer need to teach some morals and wisdom to their children because there are laws to do that for them. Critical thinking skills are being lost. Parenting gets easier but at a price.

In Missouri, you must be at least 15 to get married with parental consent, and must be 18 or older to marry without consent. Only one parent or legal guardian needs to consent for each party under 18. The "Show-Me" state allows minors younger than 15 to get married "under special circumstances and for good cause."

Adj and Tom4


I believe, once upon a time, Government marriage was a way to support and encourage family stability,, that children and potential family would have the stability of a mother and father in a commitment to each other and therefore to the children, the idea that stable families create stable communities

it provided legal responsibility/culpability for the children who resulted

it provided legal responsibility/culpability for each other


all those expectations have long since been abandoned, supporting any type of relationship over any other is now uncivil, or unfair, or whatever


so I am starting to see the point of Government no longer being involved, since government marriage serves no real purpose of encouraging stability for the family or the community anymore

I don't think it matters.
Based on the article it seems the people getting into "forced child marriage" have pretty crappy lives and problems, bad parents they will still be in the care of, other than the marriage.

I don't think ending "child marriage" is really going to improve their lives.

Kind of like owners kicking a dog and then someone coming in and saying "hey! We're changing the laws so you can't be sold to another owner until we say you're old enough to consent being sold!"


I agree!

Nice response!

I suggest you have a look at the statistics of marriages around the world. Look at the family unity in those cultures that are different from our own. Consider that we are all human beings on one planet and that marriage at any age is a society-driven, morally-specific endeavor.

Age is less of a factor in deciding marriage than many other things.
Societies arrange marriages to promote bloodlines, solidify agreements or contracts and to produce specific genders. Sometimes the betrothed are unified at birth. Other times unification occurs at first puberty. Here in the States, maturity is a major factor in determining marriage eligibility.

I think the main thing to try to remember is that in most societies around the world marriage is a government/society controlled establishment of entity. It doesn't matter if it is socialist, communist, kingdom or democratic. The government and society influence the constituents of marriage. A government regulation of personal desires.

As a member of a free nation of people, I believe there is a point at which the government should step away from personal decisions. Unless it is MY FAMILY, I have no business dictating someone else's desire to marry. No matter how I feel about it personally.

oh, I totally agree

but I believe it is not so much about government dictating but government promoting, encouraging, and agreeing in small parts to assist in the maintenance of the family unit


because we believe children have the best shot being brought into the world and brought up in the world by a mother and father who are committed to the family unit,, the government will endorse and encourage people(who may bring children into the world) to do so by making a legally binding mutual responsibility for the unit,,,

but now, children are irrelevant to the whole point, and people are pushing more towards it(marriage) being merely self fulfillment,, which means the government has no more reasons to endorse it, promote it, or assist in it,,

This is only partially true. An optimistic but inaccurate understanding of the governments involvement in marriage laws.

There are many examples of government intrusion in peoples personal desires evident in the prison systems. An 18 year old boy can be "labeled" a sex offender for courting and attempting to marry a 16 year old girl. It is the root of the term "Jail Bait"

I'm not saying there is not a moral issue in age differences between two people. I'm saying it is really none of my business and since I am part of society it is not my governments business either.

What IS my business is me and my family. Regardless of the intentions of my government to manipulate what I teach my family, I should be able to teach them my morals. I agree with some of the age restrictions not because they are required but because they align with my morality. To me it is immoral and unjust for a government entity to determine the qualification of love. That is for those in love to decide.

I agree

but I don't believe they do determine what qualifies as love

just what arrangements they are willing to promote and assist with,,,,

we are still all free to 'love' whomever we want
(love is different than sex)

we are still free to sleep with practically whomever we want to as long as they are of age and not related (for now anyhow)

we just cant all get government to step in to simplify and support our choice ,,,,

To be specific marriage is religion obligation been in many religions and separation of church and state (no where stated in declaration of independence or constitution) the govt should not be involved in marriages of any kind ....... if the govt want to be involved you could register your relationship as a civil partnership ........ not a business (commercial ) partnership ...... an atheist that gets married is participating in a religious ceremony even if it is performed by a govt official ...... marriage is a product of the supreme being

marriage can mean whatever the culture uses it to mean

as a word


legally binding marriage , involves a type of contract, to be legally binding,, which is where the government(laws) steps in


there can also be purely religious marriage, involving a contract with your religious institution or your God, which does not need the government to step in , but also does not require the government to recognize,,,

I don't agree with getting married or staying in an unhappy marriage for the children. I believe that a marriage licence is for the government but I know many, common law, that want to play house until they separate. Then the law has to step in and divide things. There is good and bad with marriage

The govt infringement of religion is what a (legally binding) marriage is

The govt moved in on marriage to make money .... they took away a religious right and then began selling you a license to practice that right

Kinda like hunting and fishing and I hear some place say you need a permit to collect rain water ... pretty soon you will need a permit of some kind to breath (oooppps already here it's called mandatory health. care if you have breath you have to have it or suffer the penalty

I strongly disagree

you don't need a license to have a relationship or a commitment, which is what a marriage is

you only NEED the license if you wish to make certain legal processes easier to manage and to make your assets and responsibilities into one legally binding unit