Because i take it deep. Love is between me and that other person not me her and the state. Plus the woman becomes your "property" thats why they take your last name. In this world i strive for every individual to be there own entity.
Discussion
The woman doesnβt become your property. She gets ur name cuz a man should lead the family. Not cuz sheβs property.
nostr:note1lz2tnzeuxzf083znwmm0sw4c7mxepmq68d3tqa55d79qe58xx53svzunwx
Ok
So no government marriage. But what about actual marriage: sacred vows exchanged before your community? As Chesterton so aptly put it, divorce (and government marriage) is a superstition.
No me being with her for a long time shoukd be a sign
State interference and treating women as property are perversions of marriage.
Itβs meant to be a sacred union, not a license for domination, not an erasure of identity; married men and women should become more themselves, not less, as they also become something more together.
And the state should not exist, let alone have any tentacle in marriage, least of all the delusion that it gets to approve or deny it.
To have sexual relationships in freefall without explicit lifelong commitment to one another is also a perversion of marriage. There may be deep love, but the deepest love is that of a man and woman dedicating the rest of their lives to one another and facing life together.
I will commit myself to one woman. Yes, yes, I will but to sign paperwork and involve the government and all this other stuff. No, I'm not doing that, but I will commit my love to one woman and treat her the best to my ability and give her everything I can yes, but I won't sign paperwork with the government or courts. I just won't.