originally posted by: chiefsmom
Hey, as long as both people go into it, knowing the truth about why one is marrying the other, and still agreeing to it.
NONE OF MY BUSINESS.
As it should be with everything.
I agree. What happens when a beautiful woman marries an ugly old man who happens to be rich? A few women gossip, a few men are jealous, and no one
really thinks about it after a while. In the vast majority of cultures in the world, it seems to me that behavior is so engrained into humanity that
that is just accepted as "human nature" and "normal."
Now, if a handsome man marries an ugly old woman who happens to rich, there's probably going to be a lot more gossip and hubbub than the previous
example. I think that judgmental behavior is wrong myself.
I'll be waiting for someone to explain how marrying for citizenship is different than marrying for money. Now that I think about it, I should have
made that the central issue of this thread because it illustrates the point I was really trying to make here.
I can understand why a country would make marrying for citizenship illegal mainly for the following reason:
originally posted by: imod02
Love is what gets people together, respect is what keeps people together. Marriage for a passport is just sick, and the main reason for it is to bleed
the country's social systems, so I see it as a very serious crime .
imod02, if you had the power to determine what the law should be on this issue, how would you decide the following:
I wonder if under UK law if it would be illegal if 51% of the rationale for a particular marriage was marrying for citizenship? How about 80%? How
I have no idea but my understanding is that in order for it be illegal (I only have a very vague understanding of this so please correct me if I'm
wrong), 100% of the rationale for the marriage had to be marrying for citizenship. Do you know anything about that?
The exact significance of the importance of any single factor when it comes to marriage may be impossible to determine even by the person who's
You're probably aware of the "halo effect" in psychology:
A person could convince themselves that citizenship had no effect on their decision. They could believe it to the core of their being. And yet, they
could be wrong even about their own mental and psychological state.
Where do you think the line should be drawn in terms of when it would become illegal to marry based on citizenship in your native country?
Should it be illegal if 51% (60%, 70%, 80%, 90% or more) of the rationale for a particular marriage was marrying for citizenship? How would that be
determined beyond a reasonable doubt?
edit on 6-7-2015 by Profusion because: (no reason given)