Could naivete have that much to do with it?

My wife is an endless source of inspiration for me.

Just this morning she had read an article, "Defending marriage" I wrote many Terran months ago about divorce and how the Religious Right should allow marriage for all but should insist on the "binding for life" nature of the joining of two people.

So I put it to my friends here, what would happen to marriage if by law you were bound to your spouse for life and there was no divorce?

Cavalor Epthith
The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
34 Colnu 1 AS
4 March 2007 Anno Domini


Blogger Drnjbmd said...

The issue of marriage always brings to mind that this institution is far to easy to enter into. Qualities like committment and items like vows in today's world, take a back-seat to "media-event" "wedding party" and other celebratory matters. There is more advisement and scrutiny given to obtaining one's driver's license than obtaining a marriage license and entering into a life-long committment.

The bottom line is that marriage is a commitment where vows are taken. The state has established laws that regulate marriage committments in the guise of property and provisions for family.

The conservative Right has continued to look in the direction of "how the ceremony looks" instead of how the committment is established, maintained and nurtured. A life-long committment with another adult, regardless of sex, should be recognized by the state in terms of mutual property rights and benefits. A life-long partner should be able to enjoy insurance benefits, inheritance benefits because these things come out of a committment to another person.

By continuing to make it more profitable for a single mother to be apart from the father of her children or a same-sex couple to not be able to share mutual property rights and benefits, conservatives pat themselves on the back for "maintaining family values" while pulling families far apart.

My family may not look or act like your family but recognize the committment legally and provide every means necessary for communities to support these committments regardless of how they "look" in the ceremony.

March 5, 2007 at 3:17 PM  
Anonymous Lola said...

The suicide/homicide rate would certainly rise. Given the life or death prospect involved in making the commitment I'm sure it would be taken more seriously. But, at what cost? I'm serious!

March 8, 2007 at 2:45 PM  
Blogger Media Lizzy said...

My life would be no different. When I married, I believed it was for life. I was correct. My husband died in the line of duty serving in our naiton's military.

Like most Gold Star Wives, this question answers itself before we ever have s second thought about the vows we took, or the choices we made.

Must be nice to have the luxury to debate the issue.

March 23, 2007 at 8:42 PM  
Blogger Cavalor Epthith said...

Thank you for reminding us all, Lizzy, what the purest definition of sacrifice is. And yes our ability to debate this is quite a luxury that many take for granted.

March 24, 2007 at 11:40 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home