A friend of mine recently made the comment to me that people shouldn’t get married anymore. While, at first, I found fault in that statement, it didn’t take me long to jump on board and agree with that sentiment, especially when you take the staggering divorce rate into consideration. Before I begin my rant, I’d like to take the time to congratulate my parents, who will celebrate their 32nd wedding anniversary this November. Having been there through the majority of their union, I know that it wasn’t always easy.
Marriage is work, meaning you have to actually make an effort if you want it to last. That seems to be a fatal error in most marriages. One or both parties doesn’t put forth the extra effort to work out their differences. Instead, they take so-called “easy” way out by filing for divorce. While, over time, people may grow apart and find that their lives just don’t mesh well anymore, oftentimes people just jump into the commitment too quickly or without thinking through the seriousness of the vows they’re taking. Like I said, I’m not a big fan of marriage; however, I wholly believe that everyone who wants to try their hand at monogamy, in the form of marriage or civil union, should be allowed the right to do so ... no matter what their sexual orientation.
That said, I think it’s quite obvious by now that I am in complete disagreement with last week’s Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that upheld the ban on gay marriages and civil unions. For some reason, I just don’t see what right the government has in determining who people should marry. I know that I wouldn’t want some matchmaker or – gasp! – my parents, choosing my spouse. So, why then, should the government be able to dictate who each individual can marry?
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I have several close friends who just happen to be homosexual. Or maybe it’s simply because I wholeheartedly believe in the old saying that “all men are created equal.” And, as such, we should be treated equally, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. After all, this is the 21st Century. How are we going to continue to evolve as a species if we don’t allow for things like growth, change and open-mindedness? The vast majority of us no longer use a horse and buggy as a primary mode of transportation, so why is it that people insist upon living in the past when it comes to defining what a marriage should and should not be?
While I’ve heard many people take a religious approach to the subject, arguing that the Bible and dictionary both define marriage to be the sacred union of one man and one woman, there are many faults in those arguments.
First, I find difficulty in calling wedding vows sacred. Divorce has become far too common in this country for me to deem marriage a sacred union. Apparently, in this day and age, marriage just doesn’t hold the same bearing it once did. Just ask Elizabeth Taylor.
Next, there are those who believe that allowing homosexuals to legally marry will only devalue and weaken the institution of marriage ... as if the skyrocketing divorce rate is strengthening it.
Last, but certainly not least, is the definition of what constitutes a marriage. I apologize for not having my Bible handy, but if you look up “marriage” in Merriam Webster’s Online Dictionary, you will find this definition: “(1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law; (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage.” How about that? Definitions can be redefined. Hopefully, one day, so will the laws of our great nation, which prides itself on its citizens’ freedoms.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment