posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 12:55 AM
I know i will be flamed for this thread but never mind.
For the Hindu lawmaker, marriage is above all a social institution, whose exclusive purpose is the propagation of the species and preservation of the
social order, community, even the nation itself. The Hindu makes a clear distinction between erotic enjoyment in all its forms, which is part of the
harmonious development of the individual, and marriage whose sole aim is the family and the continuation of the species. Marriage results not from
love but from careful choice, which takes account only of the heredity, stability, and happiness of the children.
Momentary pleasures do not require an institution such as marriage, which can only lose dignity if viewed in such a light. Marriages of love, chance,
or accident, which can be broken by divorce, is countenanced today by many Westerners, are from the Hindu point of view absurd and immoral, a sort of
legalized prostitution. The Western notion of marriage has no moral or social counterpart in Hindu society. Marriage is not merely the legitimizing of
sexual relations but an important institution, whose exclusive purpose is offspring – the continuation of the species under the best possible
conditions of heredity and environment.
Love with all its fantasies is an essential achievement for the individual, but marriage is quite different. The sexophobic fanaticism of the
Christian world and its extraordinary taboos were needed to give a sacred character to a marriage in which the child’s heritage is not even
considered. The institution of marriage on such a basis has no meaning, and the consequent systematic mismatching of aptitudes is producing an
ever-increasing number of ill-adapted beings in the modern Western world, lacking the basic virtues of the various groups.
So we can say that 'marriage' isn't for everyone.