![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Divorce, that unquenchable evil
Josh Rosenau|Thoughts from Kansas writes about religious conservatives and their apparent belief that heterosexual relationships are fundamentally unstable and need protection.
I am not exaggerating or being euphemistic or speculating. He quotes from material by James Dobson and Al Janssen of Focus on the Family which indicate a belief that love itself is insufficient to sustain a relationship, that it requires firm vows and legal obstacles to keep a couple together. Very big on the idea of marriage being an unbreakable contract, binding until death.
This valuing of the marriage as an end in itself rather puzzles me. Marriage as I understand it (which reminds me I want to write some exploration of what I actually think of the thing) seems rather for the benefit of the people involved; if they no longer wish to be married I do not see any point requiring they continue.
I suppose I can see that permanency may be important in a religious context, but that seems a matter for whatever people and / or deities may be involved. Hrm. Rather the same as I see it for secular contexts then.
It might be touching in the moment that a person pledge eir life with me, but after that moment it would mean rather significantly more to me to know that whoever I am with is choosing freely to be there and not out of some sense of obligation, and certainly not because ey is legally required. Similarly I would not pledge myself to someone for life because I cannot guarantee my future feelings and desires - the most I can in good faith say is that today I love em and today my desire is for a future together.
This does not mean I would not marry anyone, but I would feel vastly happier, safer, more comfortable knowing we could choose to part ways any time we chose.
I am not exaggerating or being euphemistic or speculating. He quotes from material by James Dobson and Al Janssen of Focus on the Family which indicate a belief that love itself is insufficient to sustain a relationship, that it requires firm vows and legal obstacles to keep a couple together. Very big on the idea of marriage being an unbreakable contract, binding until death.
This valuing of the marriage as an end in itself rather puzzles me. Marriage as I understand it (which reminds me I want to write some exploration of what I actually think of the thing) seems rather for the benefit of the people involved; if they no longer wish to be married I do not see any point requiring they continue.
I suppose I can see that permanency may be important in a religious context, but that seems a matter for whatever people and / or deities may be involved. Hrm. Rather the same as I see it for secular contexts then.
It might be touching in the moment that a person pledge eir life with me, but after that moment it would mean rather significantly more to me to know that whoever I am with is choosing freely to be there and not out of some sense of obligation, and certainly not because ey is legally required. Similarly I would not pledge myself to someone for life because I cannot guarantee my future feelings and desires - the most I can in good faith say is that today I love em and today my desire is for a future together.
This does not mean I would not marry anyone, but I would feel vastly happier, safer, more comfortable knowing we could choose to part ways any time we chose.
no subject
Myself, would like longterm commitment, but would not like to be trapped...risk of resentment, opportunity for further change and growth, inability to face difficulties because of risk of it all blowing up and having to live with that...
no subject
It's only when God is included in the picture that things start to become tricky, because the marriage is no longer just a contract between two people; it's a contract made in vows between the couple and God. This turns the marriage into something universal and permanent, which I think is contrary to human nature.
Just my 10 cents worth. :)
no subject
This is an attitude in our society that is slowly going away but is still around enuf that it bugs me. The "when you start something you have to finish it" thing, as if "sticking to it" is more important than the reason why it should be done in the first place. It's also related to why some ppl fear change so much, the "well this is the way things are, we shouldn't ABANDON it, b/c that would be giving up!" as if... somehow... doing stuff is an end to itself, instead of a means to a great end. :\
And I know that a lot of ppl like to romanticize marriage and make it all touching and stuff, but OTHER PPL'S LIVES and marriages are not there to entertain you or make you cry. So if you think it's touching great, but you should have no say or any consideration at all, if they decide to end it or nething! >:| And I hate when some ppl act like "oh but marriage is so romantic and wonderful, and wouldn't it be so much nicer and better if ppl stayed together for life and pledged themselves to each other instead of all this divorce and ugliness?"
like so WHAT? As if other ppl's lives are a tv show for you or something?
*Rawrs with you*
no subject
no subject
no subject
It sort of boggles me that lifetime marriage became the standard. I suppose there are evolutionary reasons for it, but we seem to be witnessing a slow collapse of that mindset. I am wondering if we will eventually see a new mindset replacing it. I have my suspicions that polyamory and non-lifetime commitments are very compatible, and might end up intermingled....
Conversely, I am not thinking of the children. The young, helpless, innocent children! They will starve and wander the streets naked, without us to protect them from divorce!! :( A tragedy so EASILY prevented :(