The gist of your post was that if someone finds out that a girl's parents weren't married that somehow would the reason enough for people to reject the value due the fear that the girl's ''values'' might not be right.
I hold more faith in people but however instead of thinking ''does this girl like me, do we stuff in common, is she working or does she want to stay at home, what are her likes dislikes'' etc a person thinks ''darn, forget the woman, I want to know if her parents had her when they were unmarried or married'' if a person does really think like that then its better for the girl if she didn't marry him.
I agree with this … I was merely responding to the scenario of two alike rishtay … Which one? As you can see it was the last of the elements … But it was a valid factor. If you had the choice you would not purposely go to marry that person unless you were doing out of some sense of charity … I don’t understand how you think that my thought process is offensive.
There is no fault in the person for their parents lack of marriage ... But how will that person view premarital sex being raised by such parents ... If they willingly did the act, knowingly had the baby and brought it up in a society where he or she would be known as being illegitimate? What sort of upbringing would it make a person who may not know that girl very well think? And that is all they have to go by when deciding for marriage ...
My better judgement tells me that people will not seek them out ... Unless you are going to prove me wrong ...
I was raised by parents who were married, and would never support premarital sex, yet I am not against premarital sex at all. you cannot judge someones views and morals based on how their parents were.
as far as the topic, yes I wouldn't reject someone just because their parents weren't married at the time of conception. To me, everyone is born innocent, doesn't matter if their parents were married or not. no one is 'illegitimate'.
All people I know who’re born out of wedlock are themselves quite chill about casual sex. It’s become so normalized in the west.
I’m thinking in that context it would be ridiculous for them to pull a 180 and let me thopafy my morals on them or visa versa. One in two sexually active persons will contact an STD/STI by age 25 so if someone is willing to pursue a relationship with a sexually active person then these are risks one must take.
Maybe I should try and imagine ptv dhukhyari aurat instead of the hbo gora people I’m imagining as born out of wedlock.
The gist of your post was that if someone finds out that a girl's parents weren't married that somehow would the reason enough for people to reject the value due the fear that the girl's ''values'' might not be right.
I hold more faith in people but however if a person does really think like that then its better for the girl if she didn't marry him.
In all fairness, the OP did say "someone" and didn't specify the gender, so I suppose all of this could equally apply to a guy born out of wedlock. Quite rare that a post is not overwhelmingly biased in favour of one gender. One must give the devil his due. :D
Then again, the cynic in me says that if a guy was born out of wedlock but was wealthy and had a prestigious career, people would easily overlook the circumstances of his birth.
I was raised by parents who were married, and would never support premarital sex, yet I am not against premarital sex at all. you cannot judge someones views and morals based on how their parents were.
as far as the topic, yes I wouldn't reject someone just because their parents weren't married at the time of conception. To me, everyone is born innocent, doesn't matter if their parents were married or not. no one is 'illegitimate'.
Just to add to that, there are plenty of good people born out of bad parents, and there are plenty of bad people born out of good parents.
The gist of your post was that if someone finds out that a girl's parents weren't married that somehow would the reason enough for people to reject the value due the fear that the girl's ''values'' might not be right.
I hold more faith in people but however instead of thinking ''does this girl like me, do we stuff in common, is she working or does she want to stay at home, what are her likes dislikes'' etc a person thinks ''darn, forget the woman, I want to know if her parents had her when they were unmarried or married'' if a person does really think like that then its better for the girl if she didn't marry him.
That I agree with too ... Perhaps I am a bit cynical about how the society thinks and may be it is too preemptive to judge anyone on lineage ... But it is done and it is all over our own history.
As Mezhgan pointed out my mistake, I didn't read the OP I just read pysah's post and responded. And my point stands for both genders. A person should be judged for who they are and not their parents or their sisters or brothers. And yes society doesn't work like that on perfection but I hope common sense increases when people choose rishtas.
I was raised by parents who were married, and would never support premarital sex, yet I am not against premarital sex at all. you cannot judge someones views and morals based on how their parents were.
as far as the topic, yes I wouldn't reject someone just because their parents weren't married at the time of conception. To me, everyone is born innocent, doesn't matter if their parents were married or not. no one is 'illegitimate'.
Peace bella88
To you everyone is born innocent ... And you are not against premarital sex ... Are you saying that you are not innocent or are you saying that premarital sex does not remove you of your innocence? Either way ... That is something people need to learn from you ... If they get to know you closely enough.
Psyah how do you define lineage? Because according to the English that I’ve learned, lineage means who the parents ancestors are. Not what the circumstances of the birth were. So why are you going on and on about “lineage”? What makes one person’s lineage then better than the others? According to you words, then the high lineage is either someone from royalty or someone from the line of the Prophet. That means the rest of us who are the 99% are dirt of the earth, lower than scum and we should be rejected based upon that. Really psyah
No parent in this world would want his/her kid to make the same mistakes they made. Parents of an illegitimate child would not teach their kid to follow in their footsteps They will not want their child to face the same problems they did. That's keeping in mind we are talking about Desi society. Nobody really cares that much about it outside of it.
Not quite … Family name earns itself a reputation through time … There are always black sheep and there are always white doves … And that is not a racist comment … But yeah … High lineage is the prophetic lines. A person conceived and born out of wedlock does not have any lineage … Their fathers are not recognised.
If you look in past threads regarding children born out of wedlock … I heavily defended them … I still do … So please try not misunderstanding the subtly of what I am saying.
What duniya do you live in Kkf bro? Duniya of idealism? Haqeeqat is that such offspring is illegetimate or najaaiz. In the west, such births no longer carry the stigma they once used to in the days of yore because they are a common thing now. But if you think that the Desi world will view this with the same nonchalance, you’re kidding yourself. The younger generation may be open-minded, but they still have their parents’ approval or at least their input to contend with, should they choose to go without the former.
I am not saying that such an individual should be deprived of rights such as marriage, employment and something far more fundamental: respect, which they should not be deprived pf as it was the sin of their parents.
But if you think that the title or classification of “illegitimate” does not exist at all, you are once again, being very idealistic.
No parent in this world want his/her kid to make the same mistakes they made. Parents of an illegitimate child would not teach their kid to follow in their footsteps They will not want their child to face the same problems they did. That's keeping in mind we are talking about Desi society. Nobody really cares that much about it outside of it.
I guess we have may be two generations to catch up with the rest of the world in terms of "cultural progress" ... Thanks to globalisation monoculturalism.
Not quite ... Family name earns itself a reputation through time ... There are always black sheep and there are always white doves ... And that is not a racist comment ... But yeah ... High lineage is the prophetic lines. *A person conceived and born out of wedlock does not have any lineage ... Their fathers are not recognised. *
If you look in past threads regarding children born out of wedlock ... I heavily defended them ... I still do ... So please try not misunderstanding the subtly of what I am saying.
What? In the days gone by, even the bas-tard children of the king were a good catch. Better than the duke. They might not have the names of their father but they sure as hell were the blood of the king.
I guess we have may be two generations to catch up with the rest of the world in terms of "cultural progress" ... Thanks to globalisation monoculturalism.
What? In the days gone by, even the bas-tard children of the king were a good catch. Better than the duke. They might not have the names of their father but they sure as hell were the blood of the king.
What? In the days gone by, even the bas-tard children of the king were a good catch. Better than the duke. They might not have the names of their father but they sure as hell were the blood of the king.
Being legitimately or illegitimately born into a family of prominence and wealth, especially the royal family will obviously make you a good catch and a better catch than many. But the title of bas-tard....even falsely given....was a thing of shame. The famous Bloody Mary was declared a ******* child and did not take it too well. I doubt Elizabeth did either.
I will emphasize again that I don't support the notion that such individuals should be treated with contempt. But there was a time when the title was more feared and people tried their best to avoid getting into such situations. Nowadays there is no stigma esp in the West... But the gunnah that leads to the title is also dismissed and therefore a rampant ill. More than one way to look at an issue.
