[skissane]

> It's really disgusting what they're doing here. They don't talk about whether you love the other person, or whether you complement each other...

> The tone of this article: it reads like it was written by a sociopath

The mediaeval Catholic philosopher/theologian Thomas Aquinas argued [0] that the primary purpose of marriage is for the good of children, by giving them certainty about their own paternity. A long way from modern ideas about “marriage for love” or “compatibility”-but I don’t think it it is sociopathic

[0] https://www.newadvent.org/summa/5041.htm#article1 - that is the Supplement to the Summa so not written by Aquinas himself, rather written by his students after his death - although it is believed to be based on their notes and recollections of his lectures

[mvncleaninst]

Oh wow, Aquinas opining about something he himself had never experienced. I'm sure this has some merit. Let's spend a couple hundred years trying to figure out what he meant, I'm sure we'll get somewhere

[skissane]

I used to think marriage was pointless. Aquinas helped me change my mind about that. And now I am married with two children. But one of those children is older than the marriage is. (Actually both if we count from conception as opposed to from marriage.)

[skissane]

> Actually both if we count from conception as opposed to from marriage.)

I meant to say “from birth” (think one word type another; a “thinko”?)