Tag Archives: Marriage

What is marriage? 2

Politics, Religion • Tags: ,

By Tom Quiner

Marriage is …

“a covenant or partnership of life between a man and woman, which is ordered to the well-being of the spouses and to the procreation and upbringing of children. When validly contracted between two baptized people, marriage is a sacrament.”

The above citation is how the second edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage.

“Well, the state should never have gotten involved with licensing marriage in the first place. It should be left up to churches for those people who feel they need marriage.”

This was the argument I heard from a twenty-something law student in a friendly debate we had over a beer during a Monday Night Football game.

As I’ve pointed out in previous posts, our governments very much have a vested interest in marriage: to protect our children. Our communities are healthier and more vibrant when children are raised in an intact family bound together by the security of the marriage covenant.

As we have seen the marriage covenant frayed by no-fault divorce legislation and social experimentation on the very definition of marriage, our society has weakened whether you measure using economic or social pathology yardsticks.

A Quiner’s Diner reader in Illinois recently argued that …

” … gay partners are capable of love and of raising happy children. I don’t see what is remotely inhumane about that, and increasing the number of loving couples — couples to adopt unwanted children — seems like a pretty humane thing.”

Can gay partners love? Of course. Wouldn’t it be healthier for children to be raised by a mother and father in a traditional family?  Common sense says yes.

But that’s not even the point.  The point is all about definition.  Society defined marriage accordingly to protect women and their children from commitment-wary men.  It was in the best interests of society.  Marriage was not defined on the basis of the “relationship” between the partners.

Why would we launch a radical social experiment at a time when we have married heterosexual couples standing in line to adopt?

Catholics along with other Christians, Muslims, and Jews believe the environment of traditional marriage is the best way raise children. The current social experiment underway imposes the  will of the state on faith-based adoption agencies, such as Catholic Charities, and impels them to either disregard their religious beliefs and adopt to gay couples, or get out of the adoption business. This just happened again in Illinois (as it did in Massachusetts and San Francisco) where Catholic Charities had to do just that: get out of the adoption business, despite the availability of non-Catholic adoption agencies that will adopt to same-sex couples.

To Catholics, marriage is a sacrament:

” … an efficacious sign of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us through the work of the Holy Spirit.”

New definitions of marriage which carry the imprimatur of the state are setting up clashes with our religious liberties, as demonstrated by the one example above.

Some resort to characterizing believers in traditional marriage as being gay-bashers and homophobes. This is a tactic commonly used to halt the debate. It is nonsense, of course.

The Catholic Church, for example, believes that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” because they are contrary to the natural law. But they go on to say people with same-sex attractions must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.”

This respect, compassion, and sensitivity does not extend to redefining marriage.

 

 

Jesus explains his views on marriage Reply

Religion • Tags:

By Tom Quiner

If you read yesterday’s post, a faithful Quiner’s Diner reader posed the question:

“What exactly did Jesus say about defining marriage as being between a man and a woman?”

This is a test question.

Most people know that Jesus didn’t specifically address the subject of same-sex marriage. But he revealed his thoughts about marriage when he received this test question from the pharisees, as recounted in the Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 19:1-6:

“Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?”

Jesus responded,

“Have you you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?”

And just so He left know doubt about what a marriage means, Jesus reiterated his point by saying:

“So they are no longer two, but one flesh.”

The elements Jesus identified as constituting a marriage are “male” and a “female.”

There’s another element: They are joined together as “one flesh” in the conjugal act only possible between a male and a female. Jesus refers to the Genesis verse (1:27) that:

“God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them … be fertile and multiply.”

In other words, the essence of marriage as explained by Jesus is the union of a man and a woman, not a woman and woman; not a man and a man.

In fact, Jesus indicated not everyone is cut out for marriage for various reasons in Matthew 19:12:

“Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.”

Pope Paul VI expressed it so beautifully:

“By its very nature the institution of marriage and married love is ordered to the procreation and education of the offspring and it is in  them that it finds its crowning glory.”

The late pontiff eloquently builds on his thesis:

Children are the supreme gift of marriage and contribute greatly to the good of the parents themselves. God himself said: “It is not good that man should be alone,” and “from the beginning [he] made them male and female”; wishing to associate them in a special way in his own creative work, God blessed man and woman with the words: “Be fruitful and multiply.” Hence, true married love and the whole structure of family life which results from it, without diminishment of the other ends of marriage, are directed to disposing the spouses to cooperate valiantly with the love of the Creator and Savior, who through them will increase and enrich his family from day to day.

So what is the definition of marriage according to Jesus? A union between a man and a woman.

Should we penalize marriage? Reply

Politics • Tags:

By Tom Quiner

[I am reprinting a Quiner's Diner post from last year to to wrap up this week's series on marriage.]

Society has a vested interest in marriage.

The institution was established thousands of years ago as society’s way to protect wives and their children.  To this very day, we see measurable benefits to traditional marriage:

Marriage reduces poverty.  The poverty rated for single mothers with children is five times higher than married women.

The poverty rate for single fathers is two-and-a-half times higher than married men.

Two-thirds of all poor children live in single parent households.

Marriage is the engine for a healthy society.  Government policy should reward marriage, not punish it. Unfortunately, a new study on President Obama’s economic policies reveal that marriage will be penalized more than ever. The name of the report is “Obamanomics: A Summary of the Analyses and Commentary Related to the Financial Impact of ObamaCare on Women and Families.”

According to the report, President Obama’s policies will expand the “marriage penalty.”  Here are the highlights:

  • Married couples could be paying as much as $10,000 more for being married.
  • It will encourage cohabitation and divorce because of increased insurance premiums and fees for being married.
  • It will discourage married women from working because of higher tax rates.
  • Young married couples and empty nesters will be hit especially hard.
  • Financial effects are perpetual and, thus, cumulative.
  • ObamaCare increases the magnitude of the disincentives for marriage.
  • By encouraging single parenting, the bill will increase poverty.
  • It rewards the 70 percent of unmarried women who voted for President Obama in 2008.
  • The majority of taxpayer-stimulus jobs went to women, even though men suffered the majority of job losses during the current recession — costing taxpayers trillions of dollars per year.
  • Current welfare programs cost almost $1 trillion per year (twice as much as national defense, and nearly the size of the federal deficit).
  • ObamaCare is projected to add another $2.5 trillion to the cost of welfare programs.

How do we reduce poverty?  Through traditional marriage.  How can we expand poverty?  By penalizing traditional marriage.  President Obama’s policies pursue the second path according to Concerned Women for America.

“I have some serious commitment issues …” Reply

Politics • Tags: ,

By Tom Quiner

A young man wants to live together with his girl friend. But he doesn’t want to get married because he has some “serious commitment issues.”

Read yesterday’s post for the set up for today’s post (The Mysterious Benefits of Marriage.)

The young man’s commitment phobia gets to the heart of the marriage debate.

Why do people get married?

Why does society want people to get married?

As Quiner’s Diner has suggested before, it’s all about the children.

The young man who wants to live together, and presumably enjoy the conjugal benefits of marriage, does not want to be responsible for the consequences of those benefits.

Marriage was designed to protect the kids.

Here’s what I’d recommend that young lady say to her would-be lover:

“Let me get this straight: you want to live with me so you can have sex with me whenever you want? Right?

But you don’t want to make any sort of long term commitment. Right? What if I get pregnant?”

By this time, the young man may be squirming and muttering something like “… don’t worry, we’re using birth control.”

And our young lady should respond thusly:

“There is only one form of birth control that is one-hundred percent effective, and that is called abstinence. Other methods are only partially effective. Did you know that:

• 8 out of 100 couples using the patch get pregnant in a year. Same for the Pill and the Ring.

• 15 out of a 100 couples using condoms get pregnant in a year.

• 3 out of a 100 using the birth control shot get pregnant in a year.

The list goes on. What if we … what if I … am one of the women whose birth control method fails? What if I get pregnant? You’re telling me you’re not willing to make a long term commitment. How do I know you’re not going to leave and stick me with raising OUR child all by myself?”

By this time, the young man is hopefully very uncomfortable. I can hear him sputtering “… but, but I love you.”

And our young lady should respond:

“If you truly love me, then you will honor and respect me by deferring the ultimate expression of our love until we’re married. I very much hope we’re blessed with children, and I want my … OUR children … raised together in a loving household with a mom and a dad.

Marriage is all about love. And love is all about sharing, and commitment, and even self-sacrifice. Are you willing to share, to commit, and to sacrifice on my behalf? I’m willing to do so for you.”

***

This leads me back to my earlier question: why does society want people to get married? The introduction of no-fault divorce legislation changed the focus of marriage away from children and toward the relationship itself. The impact was profound.

The divorce rate in the U.S. doubled from 1960 to 1980 as thirty-five states adopted no-fault divorce legislation. No-fault divorce has since spread to the rest of the states in some form or another.

The impact on children has been nothing short of tragic. With children relegated to second-class status, couples with marriages under stress found divorce an easy-way out. Interestingly, more than eight out of ten no-fault divorces are unilateral, which means that one party objects to ending the marriage.

In other words, if someone is upset with their spouse, divorce may seem like an easy out, because it is easier to get, thanks to no-fault divorce. The impact on our society is measurable, as this blog pointed out two days ago (How to condemn a child to poverty.)

On average, children raised in a married household with a mom and a dad become more productive members of society than those who aren’t.

I am not casting aspersions on single parents anywhere, so many of whom do a wonderful job raising their children under difficult situations. But the data is compelling.

Marriage makes our communities better.

Marriage protects and nurtures our posterity.

In the name of our children, we should revisit no-fault divorce laws at once. Let’s return marriage to its rightful place as a critical institution for safeguarding civilization.

No-fault divorce hurts our kids, and that hurts America.

The mysterious benefits of marriage 3

Politics • Tags:

By Tom Quiner

I read advice columnists.

How I would have loved to respond today to the young lady who wrote in to advice columnist, Carolyn Hax, in her column which is called “Tell Me About It.”

The woman begins:

“I’ve been dating my boyfriend for two years (he’s 29, I’m 30). I’m the first person he’s imagined living with or marrying, and we’ve been talking about moving in together, as well as marriage. I’m a little reluctant to go all-in for living together without a firm commitment to each other, but he views it as a necessary first step to make sure we’re compatible.”

Young lady, may I translate what your young man is saying? He is saying that he wants you available for regular sex and other benefits of marriage, but that he is unwilling to hang around if things get too “uncomfortable.” He is saying that you really shouldn’t count on him should you become pregnant.

Stop and think: do you want to raise a child alone?

She continues:

“He also recently revealed that he is terrified of divorce, which I had some suspicion about because his parents split when he was 12, his brother just announced his divorce after seven years, and several of his good friends have gotten divorced.”

I appreciate his concerns. Ask him this question: “is your love for me contingent on your feelings for me? In other words, honey, is love an emotion?”

Now go silent.

Let him talk.

Give him lots of time … and don’t interrupt.

Is he saying the right things?

What are the right things? I think it is this: love is more than a feeling. Yes … it IS a feeling, a wonderful feeling. But it is also a choice.

It HAS to be a choice, because feelings wax and wane.

Your lover is going to lose those warm and fuzzy feelings toward you at times in your relationship. And so are you.

When you publicly acknowledge that love is a choice, which you do during your marriage ceremony, you have made a commitment that makes it tougher to “break-up” when the going gets tough.

What do I mean by a choice? Have you ever heard the phrase “through good times and in bad?”

That’s the memorable phrase you hear in most marriage vows.

Marriages have good times and bad. Without the commitment of marriage, uncommitted parters bale when things get tough, and you’re left holding the bag.

The young lady continues:

“He told me he has serious commitment issues, which he is just beginning to realize, and that in his mind, “marriage” means “divorce.” He usually has a “look-at-the-positive” mind-set, except for this, which he acknowledges. My exposure to marriage has been very, very different, but I can understand his fears.”

I’m not unsympathetic to your boyfriend’s worries based on his experience.  Perhaps you should look him in the eyes and simply say: ” … but don’t you think I’m worth the leap of faith?”

Again, go silent. Let him talk.

Does he affirm you’re worth it?

Or not?

Our young lady concludes with these worries:

“I do want to live with him, but I don’t think of living together as a trial run, I see it as something two people do when they are completely ready to commit to each other. I don’t know what to do.”

Young lady, let’s be honest. Your young man DOES view living together as a trial run. You’re putting your future happiness at stake if you let him talk you into doing this, because he is not willing to commit his love, his devotion, his loyalty to you for the rest of his life.

He is not ready to make the CHOICE of love.

If he only knew that the upside of marriage is so wonderful. Although this isn’t a very romantic way to prove it, marriage is measurably wonderful as revealed in “The Case for Marriage” by Maggie Gallagher and Linda J. Waite.

Economically, women and men both are better off married than their unmarried counterparts.

It’s interesting … married men get promoted more often than unmarried men. They get better job evaluations. They arrive at work on time more than unmarried men.

Marriage brings out the best in men at the workplace.

Interestingly, black women who are married earn ten percent more than their unmarried black counterparts. And white married women earn 4 percent more than unmarried white women.

Marriage benefits women economically on the job whether they’re white or black.

Did you know that single people are less healthy than married ones?

Unmarried men have mortality rates that are 250% higher than married men. Yes, you read that correctly. Two-hundred and fifty percent!

And even single women have mortality rates that are fifty percent higher than married women.

Married people have less risk of dying of cancer than unmarried ones.

Married women rate their health as being better, a lot better, than unmarried ones.

And married men and women live longer than unmarried ones.

In other words, marriage is good for your physical health!

It keeps getting better: marriage is good for a man’s mental health. Married men are half as likely to commit suicide as unmarried men. Married men and women suffer from less depression than their unmarried counterparts, and are quantifiably happier.

Married men drink half as much as unmarried ones, so marriage helps to check tendencies toward excess.

Married women are five times LESS likely to be victims of crime and married men are four times LESS likely to be victims of crime.

So married men and women are safer than their unmarried counterparts.

When it comes to sex, married men and women are more physically and emotionally content than couples who live together without the commitment of marriage.

Marriage provides mysterious benefits because of the power of commitment.

So, to the young woman writing in to the advice columnist this morning, I simply ask: do you want to give all this up?

Seriously … isn’t the power of commitment a fundamental building block to living a happier, more fulfilled life?

Your boyfriend will say, “yeah, but look at my parents.”

And you should say right back, “yeah, but look at mine.”

Then tell him this:

“I’m willing to commit to you through the good times and bad.

I will raise our children with the knowledge that I love their father. They won’t be able to miss that even if they’re blind.

Whether you lose your hair and grow a big gut, I’m there for you.

If you get sick, I’m there for you.

If we don’t have a lot of money, I’m there for you.

And despite all the ups and downs, we’re going to have a wonderful life together, because I commit my love to you.

Will you do the same for me? Will you make that choice?”

If your young man says, no, he can’t make that choice, do not move in with him. The relationship needs more time to grow. Or perhaps it’s time to move on.

If your young man says, yes, he is willing to make that choice, do not move in with him. He knows you’re worth waiting for.

And so will you.