Marriage is an institution that is unnecessary in modern society

[leszkoss]

Please correct and give an opinion on this piece of writing. Thank you in advance.

For centuries the institution of marriage has been a cornerstone of a traditional society, an undeniable establishment providing the best environment for family. However, in the recent times many have questioned the indispensability of marriage. Some have even gone that far as to say it is a unnecessary relict of the past, something society can do without in today’s liberal world. I disagree with such conviction.
First of all, I believe that marriage and the obvious commitment that it entails, is very valuable and beneficial in general. In some way it does, or at least it should, help preserve the relationship between a man and a woman. Marriage brings along a sense of responsibility that can help create a stronger bond between partners. Secondly, I am convinced that married couples are more likely to create a good environment for their offspring. Certainly it is very beneficial for children’s development that they know they have a mum and dad.
Above all, there are also moral and civilisational arguments which speak for the marriage. For centuries, it has been an institution that provided stabilisation and cohesion in the society. It introduces some kind of order that is so important for us human beings and our civilisation to thrive. The marriage therefore can be regarded as progress. I do not see a point why we should abandon this fundamental institution , as it would in fact constitute rather a regress than a progress.
I am aware that in our contemporary world, when traditional values are shunned and new boundaries crossed, people will be more and more inclined to reject the idea of being with one partner for life. Little do they realize that such attitudes may lead to a total decline of our civilisation.

[Barb_D]

Overall your grammar is good.

You have one case in which you separated your subject from the verb with a comma. Delete the comma.
I would question the use of "civilisational."
The "I do not see a point..." sentence requires some attention.
I have never heard of "a regress" or "a progress."

From a "sound argument" perspective, a child had a mother and father (assuming a heterosexual union) regardless of whether the parents are married. Do you think the children of Brad and Angelina wonder who their paretns are? Additionally, partners can be partners for life without being married, and getting married does not mean they are partners for life. These "supporting points" don't support your case. (I will ignore the point about marriage being between a man and a woman.)

[leszkoss]

Thank you for your remarks. I wrote this piece very quickly and I admit there is some inconsistency in my arguments.
I should have written "people will be more and more inclined to reject the idea of marriage"
and "Generally it is better for children’s development when their parents are married"

"it would in fact constitute regress rather than progress" - is this correct?

[emsr2d2]

I do think that in any modern discussion of marriage, you should at least bring in same-sex unions (even if they are not referred to as "marriage" in a lot of countries). I think limiting it to "the union between a man and a woman" is to deny what is actually happening in the world these days. Of course, your personal view of that situation would come out in your piece, but I think the subject should appear.

[leszkoss]

Same-sex unions? Well it didn't cross my mind when I was writing this piece.
How would you rate my essay in terms like: organisation, cohesion, range, effect on target reader?