• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Jun 18, 2011
3,149
696
San Francisco Bay Area
✟80,649.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
The United States Constitution states that one of the requirements for being the President of the United States is one has to be 35 years of age or older. But, the Constitution says nothing about that a President has to be married. Yet, out of 45 Presidents, only one President was single. Is it legal to discriminate against singles? Or if a person is 35 or over, and is single, does society thinks there is something wrong with him or her?
 

public hermit

social troglodyte
Site Supporter
Aug 20, 2019
12,502
13,323
East Coast
✟1,047,329.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I think for a long time marriage represented stability. It's basically a hangover from a long gone era where certain standards mattered. At this point, it has become perfunctory. I wouldn't take it too hard.
 
Upvote 0

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Site Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
45,360
6,896
✟1,020,586.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The United States Constitution states that one of the requirements for being the President of the United States is one has to be 35 years of age or older. But, the Constitution says nothing about that a President has to be married. Yet, out of 45 Presidents, only one President was single. Is it legal to discriminate against singles?

I don't think people want to see a President going out on dates.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: bèlla
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,897
14,168
✟458,328.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
I don't know if I'd call this discrimination, exactly.

I would imagine that it's more like the case of married priests. In the tradition that has developed in the Egyptian Church, it is completely allowed for a married man to become a priest, and many will tell you that this is in some ways a benefit (in counseling married couples from a place of empathy, for instance), although it's not necessary that our priests be married. Any man who becomes a priest, however, must be married before his ordination. The reason for this is more practical than theological, as it would be highly inappropriate for an 'available' man to be looked up to by the single women of the congregation (or their meddling relatives...), as would almost certainly naturally happen. This could place temptation before her that could lead to the appearance or reality of impropriety, or before him in that he might be tempted to use his role as a shepherd of the community as leverage in attempting to court a woman.

These natural urges for companionship would likewise be present in any president in a secular environment, and the potential pitfalls, too, as I can't think of a bigger 'flex' on a man's part than to be able to truthfully approach a woman with the Titanic-sized icebreaker of "Hello; I'm the president of the United States", nor do I know any woman who would necessarily be immune to such a thing (not that they'd lose their faculties or whatever, but that's a display of status and attendant social capital that few people could even pretend to match).

Or to be more blunt about it: if you are of a certain age, you no doubt remember the (literal) trials of President Clinton and his eventual impeachment for just such an abuse of the office, as his own dalliances were framed. And those are what he would eventually have to admit to having done as a married man. Can you imagine how much crazier things would've been if he hadn't had even had that most light of social constraints (marriage)?!

Call me old fashioned if you want to, but I think there is a certain wisdom in rejecting a playboy president. It's the Oval Office, not the Presidential Lounge After Dark! :swoon:
 
Upvote 0
Jun 18, 2011
3,149
696
San Francisco Bay Area
✟80,649.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
I don't know if I'd call this discrimination, exactly.

I would imagine that it's more like the case of married priests. In the tradition that has developed in the Egyptian Church, it is completely allowed for a married man to become a priest, and many will tell you that this is in some ways a benefit (in counseling married couples from a place of empathy, for instance), although it's not necessary that our priests be married. Any man who becomes a priest, however, must be married before his ordination. The reason for this is more practical than theological, as it would be highly inappropriate for an 'available' man to be looked up to by the single women of the congregation (or their meddling relatives...), as would almost certainly naturally happen. This could place temptation before her that could lead to the appearance or reality of impropriety, or before him in that he might be tempted to use his role as a shepherd of the community as leverage in attempting to court a woman.

These natural urges for companionship would likewise be present in any president in a secular environment, and the potential pitfalls, too, as I can't think of a bigger 'flex' on a man's part than to be able to truthfully approach a woman with the Titanic-sized icebreaker of "Hello; I'm the president of the United States", nor do I know any woman who would necessarily be immune to such a thing (not that they'd lose their faculties or whatever, but that's a display of status and attendant social capital that few people could even pretend to match).

Or to be more blunt about it: if you are of a certain age, you no doubt remember the (literal) trials of President Clinton and his eventual impeachment for just such an abuse of the office, as his own dalliances were framed. And those are what he would eventually have to admit to having done as a married man. Can you imagine how much crazier things would've been if he hadn't had even had that most light of social constraints (marriage)?!

Call me old fashioned if you want to, but I think there is a certain wisdom in rejecting a playboy president. It's the Oval Office, not the Presidential Lounge After Dark! :swoon:

Well, if a single man is shy, and if he was the President Of The United States, he would have no problem coming up with something to say to her.:)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: dzheremi
Upvote 0