Is marriage an outdated institution?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is marriage an outdated institution?". Your opponent's style: Devil's advocate

No, not yet. Marriage is the only institution that provides the best outcomes compared with any other. Monogamy solves the issues that arise from hypergamy, harems, and degeneracy. Marriage principles provide the proven better conditions for the raising of children. Lastly, the likelihood of reproduction and the creation of stable family units offer the backbone for any successful civilization.

You're confusing correlation with causation. Marriage didn't create stable societies, stable societies created marriage. Look at the data: kids raised by unmarried but committed partners show identical outcomes to married ones. What actually matters is economic security and parental involvement, not a legal contract. You're arguing the institution itself is magic when it's really just a framework. So here's my question: if marriage principles are what work, why do 50% of marriages fail while many unmarried families thrive?

I didn't claim marriage created stable societies, even though it obviously contributed to them; I said they "offer the backbone for any successful civilization". "Stable societies" didn't create marriage; Christianity did. I've looked at the data in Western countries and in Catholic countries; without a doubt, kids from married heterosexual couples, on average, outperform every other kid in not becoming criminals, in becoming productive members of society, in lack of substance use, in health, etc. In fact, I've also noticed from the data that kids from married heterosexual couples but where the parents fight, with DV incidents, they still have better outcomes than kids from single mother hoseholds. Incorrect again; what actually matters is religion. These couples have the longest marriages, the most kids, and the fewest instances of DV and divorce. The most successful couples, on these metrics, are heterosexual, religious, and both married virgins. I'm not arguing for a contract. Marriage isn't a "framework"; it's a Christian concept and tradition that was hijacked for many reasons. Regardless, it's a religious institution. It's the only way it makes sense. It's beyond a shadow of a doubt that marriage works. There are many reasons why "50% of marriages fail". Lack of religion, a crazy housing market, interest rates, inflation, etc. But the main reason is due to feminism. Lastly, unmarried families don't thrive, they manage. In fact, the vast majority of atheists aren't even having 2.1 kids. Not reproducing and being divorced is the opposite of thriving.

You're cherry-picking data while ignoring the elephant in the room: religious communities also have higher rates of domestic abuse that go *unreported*. You claim DV families still beat single mothers, but that's only true if abuse stays hidden. And your "feminism caused divorce" argument is backwards, men left too when women gained options to leave abusive situations. Here's the real question: if religion is what matters, why do secular countries like Denmark and Sweden have lower childhood poverty, better health outcomes, and stronger social stability than deeply religious nations?