The Republican majority in the state legislature have passed a bill putting on the state ballot in May, 2012 the question of a new amendment to our state constitution. They have called the amendment the Defense of Marriage amendment. Yet the amendment has very little to do with defending and strengthening marriage. It is aimed primarily at preventing same sex unions and partnerships.
The referendum will add nothing to the definition of marriage which the state of North Carolina has already defined by law as the union of one man and one woman. So by law already, whatever same sex couples do it will not be a marriage. The referendum will move to prevent same sex unions or legal partnerships.
It is a shame that the referendum that will be voted on is called Defense of Marriage Bill and yet has nothing in it to defend or strengthen marriages. Because, heaven knows, marriage as an institution does need all the help it can get. We do need to do something to make marriages more stable and more respected. The figures suggest that more than half of the marriages that take place end in divorce. That is a tragic statistic. We need to do something to help strengthen and assist marriages to last.
Marriage as an institution is being attacked. We have lots of young couples who live together without the legal protection and security of marriage. We have more and more older adults who are now being reported as living as if they were married, but not actually getting married because of the legal complications of estates, income, pension benefits, and health care obligations. We have lots of unwed mothers in our country. Marriage needs help. Pat Robertson has just recently attacked marriage by suggesting that a spouse might divorce a partner if the partner has Alzheimer’s.
Why did not the legislature actually pass a referendum that did Defended Marriage? Certainly seems to me that they could have put in the referendum a limit to the number of divorces a person could have. Nothing weakens the image of marriage more than somebody having six or seven marriages as if they were short-term rentals. Would not it strengthen marriages if you limited everybody to just one divorce? There are a number of sociologists who would say that you could strengthen marriages if you did not let anybody under twenty five get married. Let them live together or date or do whatever, but do not let them marry until they have grown up a little and matured in their choices. I am sure that they could have thought up some other better ways to strengthen marriages.
Banning same sex unions will have absolutely no affect on what happens in heterosexual marriages.
2 comments:
I think the notion of limiting the number of divorces one might obtain, might strengthen a marriage. If you believe you are "in love" and want to marry someone, you might think very seriously on that fact because if that joining ends in divorce, you have used your one "do-over". Unfortunately, younger age marriages are often a case of necessity, as in legalizing the off-spring that is already on the way. Certainly, a 25 yr old "might" be more grown up and wiser; unless he knocked up his girlfriend when she was 17 and now Papa has a shotgun pointed at him.
It's me, Beverly. I didn't remember my google acct, so I used Angie's...
Post a Comment