Talk Tuesday

Welcome to M3’s first interactive post! I am glad you came to join in the discussion.

Tonight, we are going to discuss in further detail the marriage vows and our ideas of what love really is between Mates.

Marriage Day

I take thee...

Just to catch you up, here are the basics for this discussion:

  • Marriage is a contract.
  • Except for Buddhist vows, all traditional vows use love as a verb.
  • Only religious ceremonies refer directly to fidelity in the vows.
  • English does not do justice to the word love as a verb or a noun as it relates to marriage.

Questions at hand:

  1. What does love between spouses really mean? 
  2. Is it adequately represented in the wedding vows discussed?
  3. Would your Mate agree to your definition?
  4. Have you ever asked?
  5. If so, what answer did you get?
  6. How does the lack of specificity bear on those who feel marriages fail?

How This Works

English: Comment icon

You talk. I talk.

There will be a number of comments go live within moments of this post. There will be a comment for each of the above questions, with some commentary added. When you get to the end of this, likely the comments will have all had time to post. Please reply directly to the comment itself. You will find a “reply” button in the lower right hand corner of the comment. Each comment will be its own discussion.

My responses will be directly to your comments, as they normally are.

If you have a question which is not covered by the comments already, comment directly to the post with the Tell Me More box. Please be sure to leave five stars if you are a participant in (or gain any insight from) tonight’s discussion.

If you need to read…

…the posts and comments which brought us here:

I Take Thee, Mate,

In the Interest of Brevity

Know someone who should be tuned into this discussion? Use the +1 and Twitter buttons below with the hashtag #TalkTuesday. Grab them on any of your social media. The more the merrier.

(c) Ann Marie Dwyer 2012
Reblogging of this or any other post on Momma’s Money Matters is expressly forbidden.
Copyright and Privacy Policy available in The Office. 
Leave a comment


  1. Hey Red, wanted to chime in late. Couldn’t discuss last night, I was at Bible Study. I think in most cases, the vows that are used are Generic because we are still in the Lust/ In Love stage as you and Val have described it. At this point, whether you classify as Love at first sight, in a drunken stupor or rushed because of pregnancy or military deployment, it is irrelevant! You have not had time to HONESTLY get to know the person that you are dedicating your life to. If the TWO( and only the one’s saying I do) would take the time to get to KNOW the person that they are marrying, WITHOUT the help of family and friends putting their nose where it doesn’t belong, it would give the marriage a better chance of surviving. But family and friends aren’t the biggest problem! Prior relationships, inferiority complexes, finances and the lack of 100% trust and honesty, are the biggest reasons marriages fail. The next is that people don’t love themselves How can you love someone enough to enter into a marriage, if you don’t love yourself? And NO, I didn’t say lust. According to Webster, love means” a deep and tender feeling of fondness and devotion”. Sounds easy enough, RIGHT? Now break down the key words again. It equals to” far reaching, hard to understand, serious, soft and delicate, sensitive, warm and gentle, held dear, liking, being devoted to, loyal. Wow! Love is all these things. This takes time! I don’t know why people think marriages are any different from farming. First, you have to clear the trees. Then dig up the stumps. Man I’m tired! Now , on to the easy stuff, plowing, planting, fertilizing, watering, weeding and letting it grow. Then, eventually, when your children get married, you harvest and receive the fruits of your labor; Grandchildren! Isn’t that simple? Not when your living it! That is the reason that we constantly have to fertilize, water and weed. If not, the marriage,and essentially the LOVE, will wither and die. At the risk of jumping into the fire, I would like to try to help Angela out. In the first book of the Bible, Genesis, the Christian,and Jewish, explanation of marriage is described. ” Therefore, a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become ONE flesh.” Genesis 2:24 NKJV. In the book of Ephesians, it tells us that wives are to submit to their husband. Yes, I went there. But, that doesn’t mean that she’s a slave, a servant, a maid, a dish washer, a laundromat, a baby making machine or anything else that people may make them out to be. It just means that she is to submit ( love, cherish, adore, respect, etc.) as we ( Christians and Jews ) submit to the Laws of God. In contrast, the husband is commanded to love their wives as Christ loved the church, to sanctify and cleanse her, to love her as himself. Unfortunately, too many men from all cultures have forgotten or misunderstood this. This is also part of the reason that Christians have a problem with homosexuality, because of verse 24. But, plain and simple, if both parties do not spend quality time (not sex) with each other, leave the past behind, express and try to control their inferiority’s and are willing to be 100% open and honest, the marriage, relationship and LOVE will suffer. Sorry to be so long, but I needed to speak. God Bless You, Grant

    • I will get back to you in a few comments.

    • As is usually the case when Judeo-Christians quote the Bible, they pick and choose the portions which apply to them and leave the remainder to be ignored. In fact, if all you want is the definition, Genesis is fine. The one verse in Ephesians is a strong arm flexed by men to define a wife. There are many other verses in Ephesians which apply to both the husband and the wife. Likewise, Ecclesiastes (Chapter 4) defines the strength of marriage. I alluded to the content of that chapter in my last post on marriage.

      The entire book of the Song of Solomon is the Biblical outline of love as it should apply to marriage, both as literally (between humans) and metaphorically (Christ and the church).

      By the way, this post is about love in marriage and the ambiguity of wedding vows. And Val has not commented in this thread.

      • I only used certain verses in the interest of time. I feel that what I used was pertinent to the conversation. I also believe that I stated the facts as I see them. As for Val, is that a threat that your tag-team partner is on the way? LOL! Still love you, Grant

        • My point was the verses you used were not relevant to the post. As you came to Angie’s defense for not being able to point out the relevant scripture, and my having already stated I knew where it was, I commented with the appropriate Biblical reference, if one is interested in the Judeo-Christian viewpoint.

          And no, it is not a threat. My friend has not been to this post, to my knowledge. If she chooses to engage, it will be of her own accord. I fight my own battles here, of which there are many.

      • Touche! I know that you fight your own battles. Didn’t you notice the LOL? As far as the verses, this is the reason for division in Christianity today. What I understand or think to be relevant, may not be what you think to be relevant. So, we just agree to disagree and move on. Sorry, if I touched a raw nerve. God Bless You, Grant

        • The nerve you touched was reading the post and failing to engage the questions I asked. My blog is not about Christianity or the rift you see in the force. I say again: This post is about love in a marriage and the ambiguity of wedding vows. Red.

  1. Look Out…I’m Jumping On The Bandwagon! « grantahelms

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

CommentLuv badge

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.