Is Marriage Necessary?

I have a couple of friends on the verge of getting a divorce. Mutual friends are horrified. They say, shouldn't marriage be forever? If you find that you aren't suitable for each other, why get married in the first place? Isn't marriage a commitment to each other? To stay by each other's side, through thick and thin, the bad and the good, and love each other, till death do they part?

My reply to those friends have always been: yes and no.

Blame it on the sociological training I've had. But I firmly stand by the opinion that marriage is an institution. It is a social construct. In other words, it was invented by mankind and is now so intrinsically embedded in almost every society in the world, it becomes a necessity to many people. Sort of like the concept of money.

When I say this, people who are listening look at me in pure horror as if I were a square egg or The Rock wearing a tutu. I tell them they have mixed up the concept of marriage with the concept of love. They tell me the two ought to go hand in hand. I tell them two things which go hand in hand means they are inter-dependent. However, for love and marriage, they are NOT inter-dependent, no matter how much we idealists wish it to be.

Let me explain.

Love between two people is a wonderful thing. You care for each other, show concern for each other, look out for one another, think about the future with each other... Basically both lives are intertwined. In the immortal words from Moulin Rouge, love is a many-splendoured thing, love lifts us up where we belong, all we need is love. Romantic that I am, I agree! Marriage on the other hand... People have many reasons for getting married: to get permanent residency, to get money, to get a flat, and of course sometimes, because they are actually in love.

When two people stand at the altar and recite their vows of marriage, it can sometimes be difficult to tell if they are meaning what they say. For society, marriage as a social construct serves many functions, not the least of which pertains to individual social responsibility. Should you marry, and then divorce, (both of which coincidentally has to do with signing reams and reams of paper), the richer party is legally held responsible for the upkeep of the poor ex-partner. When two people get married and have offspring, the parents are legally held responsible for the upkeep and upbringing of their scions. In Singapore, you cannot buy a flat for yourself before the age of 35 unless you're married (one of my favourite grouses).

But look at all the above: do any of those social and legal restrictions have got to do with two individual's heartfelt commitment to spend the rest of their lives together? I think not. Some of my friends view marriage as the commitment to spending their lives together. I say that the true commitment is in the heart, and there is no need for marriage to be the affirmation of that commitment. Some of my friends say that two people cannot be seen as truly together unless they are married. I say this only shows too much faith in the symbolism of a piece of paper. My friends who are thinking of getting a divorce say that the marriage has broken down. I say it is the love between the couple which has broken down.

I am willing to fall in love and be with a woman who can do the same to me. If she is marriage-phobic, then so be it; as long as there is the heartfelt and sincere commitment to make a relationship work, marriage is superfluous.

Then again... It'll be nice to have a flat...