Wednesday, May 3, 2006

apparently this seems very close to what i had read in collection of
swami vivekananda's speeches/commentaries. even otherwise this seems
logical enough. there is too much confusion @ gender relations and
family as an institution due to the higher age of marriage. even
otherwise the sexual promiscuity is on the increase even in the sub-15
years now, we might as well legalise child marriage and save the
society rather than becoming a herd of animals moving by the sway of
the carnal pleasures.

--- In, "viji123" wrote:
> Child marriage ensures protection for the girl and the chilren as
> well. Sex is cofined (largely) within the institution of marriage.
> The wife has inlaws, parents husband etc to support her and children
> grow up with good bonds and network of relatives and will grow up as
> healthy citizens with good values.
> Premarital sex will eventually lead to unwanted children, who will
> nnot grow up with much love, many a times no father around and you
> can imagine what kind of values this child will have when it grows up
> Verily we will end up with a Rakshasa race.
> This phenomenon is already very common in the West.
> To digress.
> There is something else of interest here. A concept such as marriage
> is essentially a religious marriage. So once people become modern and
> consider themselves not religious and do not instill such values in
> their children -- what happens is chilren might still cling to
> traditional concepts of marriage and sex -- but will not be able to
> pass those to their own children (since they themselves do not know
> much about religion) So the future generation will lose the meaning
> of marriage.
> So values without the anchor of religion do not have a long life and
> essentially have no legs, so to speak.
> Viji
> --- In, GB wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > Do you not believe child marriage is better than pre-marital sex
> as is becoming increasingly prevalent in increasing sexual
> promiscuousity brought about by a value-less scientific educational
> structure?
> > regards,
> > GB
> >


No comments: