[rcoreyus]

I think that there are explicit and implicit vows in marriage. Unless otherwise discussed, I think they include an agreement to live together, to have children, and to the point here, to have an intimate sexual relationship. I think that a couple can freely agree to change, remove or add to this list, but that if nothing is said, these and others are included.

Then the question is if one party does not live up to their vows, what are the moral constraints on the other? Marriage vows are supposed to be life-long, but many people believe that divorce is acceptable in some situations.

For me, I do not think marriage vows are very important - in a happy marriage the vows aren't needed, and if they are needed, then maybe divorce is better. I would certainly never want my wife to do something for me because of a sworn vow - I only want her to do things for me because she loves me.

[Stillness]

I do not think marriage vows are very important

If a person's word is not important, then what's the point in giving it? What does that say about them? I think I mentioned elsewhere that I, like many, have thought about quitting, but the answers to these questions remove the option for me. My situation is not as extreme, but I've dealt with my fair share of frustration.

[Lady Syrinx]

We both used the "think about the kid" argument. It's difficult when the argument can bolster both sides, divorce or staying and being celibate or semi-celibate (occasional sex , "wifely duty').

We're Catholic, so the vows are quite important for us as well. I couldn't remember the exact wording so I broke out our DVD. Our vows were referred to as "modified traditional" in the planning guide for the Mass. The only thing missing is "Love , honor and obey." "I promise to be true to you in good times and bad, in sickness and health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life." I suppose that what we're discussing falls under sickness and health. The deep depression I was in was only letting me see my guilt for "causing" or "being" the problem that i was willing to let him do whatever it took to be happy regardless of what it meant in terms of our vows.

[Lady Syrinx]

We both used the "think about the kid" argument. It's difficult when the argument can bolster both sides, divorce or staying and being celibate or semi-celibate (occasional sex , "wifely duty').

We're Catholic, so the vows are quite important for us as well. I couldn't remember the exact wording so I broke out our DVD. Our vows were referred to as "modified traditional" in the planning guide for the Mass. The only thing missing is "Love , honor and obey." "I promise to be true to you in good times and bad, in sickness and health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life." I suppose that what we're discussing falls under sickness and health. The deep depression I was in was only letting me see my guilt for "causing" or "being" the problem that i was willing to let him do whatever it took to be happy regardless of what it meant in terms of our vows.

[rcoreyus]

I think vows are very important. The question is if one person forsakes their vows, is the other still morally obligated to theirs? Should marriage be treated like a vow or like a contract? Consider the wife who's husband beats her - is she still bound by her vows to him even though he has forsaken his? (I'd say clearly not). Then it is just a continuum from that to minor transgressions that I would not in any way say invalidate the marriage vows. Where is the line?

[Stillness]

Those are good questions, Corey. I don't know what the difference is between vows and a contract, but for us all of the answers are there. (I don't even know if "vow" came up in the ceremony. It was more a public, legal acknowledgement of what we had already agreed to). I realize that not everyone has the same ease with determining how to act.

Another thing I was wondering, since Lady Syrinx brought up mental illness, is whether or not people make a distinction between different illnesses. Like if the OP's husband was paralyzed, is the answer on what she should do different or more or less clear?

[atskitty2]

Have I missed it, or has the OP not re-entered the discussion? That is why my question to her was basically, what's going on that they "can't"? (I believe her choice of word was can't, not don't or won't) Your questions above, Stillness, are what came to my mind initially...is there a genuine health issue at play here, whether physical or mental that developed?

[Stillness]

If your husband or wife could no longer have sex

This sounds like some sort of physical issue to me. She wasn't explicit though.

[Claret]

Those are good questions, Corey. I don't know what the difference is between vows and a contract, but for us all of the answers are there. (I don't even know if "vow" came up in the ceremony. It was more a public, legal acknowledgement of what we had already agreed to). I realize that not everyone has the same ease with determining how to act.

Another thing I was wondering, since Lady Syrinx brought up mental illness, is whether or not people make a distinction between different illnesses. Like if the OP's husband was paralyzed, is the answer on what she should do different or more or less clear?

The usage of the term vow is archaic and was first spoken in wedding ceremonies eons ago. The term as an archaic term simply means to "dedicate ones self to another". A contract is what one would do upon an engagement, one would contract to another. It's simply an agreement that some specific things would be in the future. In this case a marriage or a covenant.

[DreamP346]

To me, marriage vows seem religiously motivated or at least influenced by western standards of traditional weddings. Two people make vows to each other. When I got married, there were no such vows. We got married because we loved each other, believed we would make good life partners, financial partners, good spouses and good parents. There was an assumption on how the other party would behave. Marriage is a legally binding contract and there are legal obligations. However, morally influenced vows really don't mean anything to me who was not raised in western traditions and neither is religious. The value of the marriage vow only affects a segment of the population (I would guess a fairly small one).

Obligations are more appropriate for me. We have obligations as children, parents, friends, co-workers, etc. They may be morally and/or legally dictated, but they are not always requirements. As a spouse, we have certain obligations to our partner. If one partner does not fulfill their obligations, there may be consequences to one or both parties. I think putting a blank statement of "cheating is never right" or "open marriages and/or polyamory are the same as cheating" is placing a very Christian puritanical perspective on a human nature that is observed all over the world, among different cultures and societies. Open marriages and relationships DO work for some people. Calling that cheating is not a proper representation of people who chose those lifestyles. I think that is stereotyping and judging other people's lifestyles.

Bringing it back to the focus on kids, I would be interesting in hearing the opinion of people who do have kids and have experienced a relationship where there was a significant difference in sex drives. It's easy for people to judge when they have not been in that situation. Being a parent and also trying to fulfill your own sexual desires is not always easy.