This coming November... the State of California voters are going to be asked to "define" what a marriage is. The idea behind it is that a marriage must be between a man and a woman, and not between two persons of the same sex. Many conservatives claim that to do otherwise... "dilutes" or somehow "lessens" or "erodes" the value of the heretofore heterosexual-only marriage.
Does it really ? Hmmm. What could be some of the "other" possibilities that dilute, lessen or erode the institution of the traditional marriage ? And... what could be done to "combat" those things ?
How about a ban on Adultery ? Now... Adultery has been "forbidden" by the bible for centuries and centuries. But... it happens every day. Affairs are often seen as a good "cure" for boredom in a marriage. So... why not indulge ? It's only an affair ? It doesn't mean anything ! At least, that is the typical answer someone caught in an affair by their husband or wife often comes up with.
How about having anyone who is guilty of adultery be "displayed" in the old-timey "stocks" in the local public square from 9:00am until 5:00pm for one solid Monday thru Friday time period ? I wonder if that would help stop the "eroding" of the value of marriages ?
What would happen if all of the energy that is currently being put into the "definition of marriage" movement was channeled into prohibiting adultery ? How much of an effect would that have... on "shoring up" the value of a traditional marriage ?
How about doing away with divorce ? Divorce has also been "forbidden" by various religions over the centuries. Over fifty percent of all marriages end in divorce. So... why don't we do away with divorces ? Or... make it a part of marriage law that once a divorce is applied for... two solid years of marriage counseling is required. Or... perhaps mandate a five-year waiting period before the divorce can be granted. The only exception would be for spousal or child abuse... or both.
What would happen if all of the energy that is currently being put into the "definition of marriage" movement was channeled into prohibiting divorce ? How much of an effect would that have... on "shoring up" the value of a traditional marriage ?
Perhaps if those entering marriage took their vows more seriously... and concentrated on their own families... and centered their energies on their own "family values"... instead of getting "all in a wad" over someone else's marriage... this entity called "marriage" would no longer need to be defended or defined.