We owe all the wonderful aspects of modern marriage to 1 thing: divorce. You will hear just the contrary, of course. Spiritual fundamentalists and politicians will tell you that divorce is crumbling our contemporary society, ruining children's lives, and weakening the moral personality of the country. Don't pay attention to them. They know properly well why divorce is an excellent thing, they just don't want someone to ever before find out.
Divorce means choice. Divorce means that two different people don't need to remain bound to the other person until the grave, as contemporary society dictated before 20th century. Divorce means that human beings can determine the road their life will take. And at its very root, divorce provides for that most vital, most effective of human encounters: happiness.
Divorce is also the fantastic equalizer, and the hallmark of a advanced contemporary society in terms of women's protection under the law. No female can ever state to feel "like property" or "subjugated by men" where are there are equitable divorce laws and regulations in place. When we look back at traditional civilizations, those that stand out are the ones like traditional Egypt which provided equitable treatment for girls and the availability of divorce as a way to end a legal matrimony. Even in today's world, the best countries for ladies are the ones that permit them to divorce freely and without cultural stigma.
But the independence to live life how you please, without impacting how others live theirs, is something a great number of folks don't want anyone to have. Religions specifically seem specialized in making sure that you dont live the way you please, that your every action is analyzed and criticized and ultimately judged. Whether it's a stern and moralistic God or a tough and judgmental world you state as your higher electric power, be aware that both of them have one central belief at their core: personal pleasure is bad, and personal choice is worse.
The Catholic Cathedral, for example, maintains that if you marry someone while your first spouse continues to be alive, you are committing adultery and can go to Hell. You are not allowed to put aside one spouse and find another, whatever the reason. They don't really like the idea of your having sex with more than one person in your daily life, even though you want to marry each individual that you have it with.
Or do they?
If your partner dies they have got put no such hex you. Widows and widowers receive the entire blessing of the cathedral to marry again. The limit seems to be three marriages, although I'm uncertain how stringently this guideline is applied. It may be that the widowed are allowed marrying normally as they wish. But even if the church absolutely forbids a widowed person from re-marrying more than twice, it still means that the chapel would prefer to sanction youre having erotic relationships with three people in your life, rather than enable you to be married to two if the first one is only divorced from you.
It's adultery and fornication if you divorce one partner and remarry even once, but respectable carnal relationships if you marry three times because the other two passed on. This can't possibly point out a prefer to limit the amount of sexual lovers you have, or to stamp out the "sin" of sex.
I couldn't understand why breach in logic. In so far as i disagree with the premise, if you're heading to claim that all sex outside the bonds of your first marriage is sinful, then surely you have to call the widowed "fornicators" too, as much as the divorced are. But the chapel doesn't. And for a long time, neither did the general public at large. Widowed people were pitied but reputed. Divorced people induced scandal, were seemed down upon by "respectable people", were shunned and considered morally bankrupt.
Now I know why.
It's a question of preference, of volition, a unique individual quality.
The church, and world, simply wouldn't allow you to exercise your volition beyond that first selection of partner you made. . . a decision, incidentally, that was often made for you from your parents and possessed nothing to do with what you desired. Little or nothing would justify attempting to make another choice later in life. Only God could do this, it appears. If God had taken your partner away from you, you'd no choice in that, and for that reason, you were permitted to choose again. If God decided to take that partner from you too, that wasn't your choice either. As long as you yourself weren't thinking and choosing and making your own decisions about your life, the chapel would be lenient on you. The minute you decided to affect change within your own life, to undo something you regretted doing or something that no longer served an objective in your daily life, you were brand name a "sinner".
So for years and years, miserably married people could only find independence in the grave. Many people wiped out their mates to be free from them. It was not uncommon for aristocrats, attempting to climb the public ladder, to arrange because of their no-longer-advantageous spouses to fall down stairs or eat poisoned beef so that they, the aristocrats, could marry someone higher up in the echelon of the nobility. For those without the belly for murder, there was no option. There might have been unofficial separations as there are today, but the medieval mind was so familiar with accepting irritation and sacrifice that a lot of unhappily married people stayed alongside one another because they noticed it was their great deal in life to suffer. From the sentiment that taken through to our grandparents, and even our parents somewhat, many of whom lived out lives of unhappiness and dissatisfaction, destined forever to someone that contributed to the misery with their life, all under the guise of respecting the "sanctity" of wedlock.
It was only when people started believing that their delight was more important when compared to a vow to God, that they had choice in life and were absolve to make options responsibly, that matrimony was a voluntary, mutually arranged upon relationship of respect and love that could dissolve if that love and admiration vanished. . . it was only then that individuals started seeing matrimony as a manifestation of joy and began enjoying the relationships that they had.
There is nothing sacred in regards to a loveless marriage. What's sacred is getting the freedom to take pleasure from the best kind of marriage possible, the type freely inserted into by two different people who recognize that it might end if indeed they neglect or misuse their spouse, or that it could last an eternity if they both want it to. What's sacred is knowing that a satisfying, happy marriage is usually possible, no subject who you find yourself with at this time or how many times you've tried to make it work and failed. What's sacred is saying to yourself, and your children, that enjoyment in love is an essential component of a healthy life, that compromising that happiness for some fuzzy morality is an insult to the human mind.
People who divorce and remarry value the institution of matrimony, and value themselves. As difficult as divorce may be, as agonizing and unpleasant as it might be, it's important to preserve the essential beauty of relationship. People are more likely to value and honor one another, in which to stay love, when they know that if they don't earn their associates' love and admiration, constantly, their relationship could end. Individuals who are destined, inextricably, to each other for life haven't any motivation to be good to one another.
Children and Divorce
But what about the kids?
It's a cry we notice constantly, in protest against from adult sites on the internet to garbage dumps to federal government cutbacks. Future years, it appears, are far, a lot more important than that one. But I digress. I will discuss the problem of children and their romance to marriage in a later site.
Yes, children tend to be hurt by divorce. Yes, it can be painful for a kid to see his parents split up. But I really believe it is far more damaging for a grown-up to have become up in children where love has vanished from his parents' matrimony, and therefore the only experience he has with it is that it is a doomed establishment, a miserable relationship, something he never expects gives him delight.
One of the biggest flaws parents make in child rearing is within putting their matrimony last. It really is very important that you put your matrimony first, not limited to yourselves, also for your children. Show your children what a matrimony is, what they can expect and look forwards to when they expand up. Show them a couple of who are deeply in love and committed to each other, suggest to them a guy and girl enjoying being in love, respecting one another, living with each other, loving each other. If they see this, they will want and expect this for themselves. They'll know very well what a good romantic relationship is, and won't get attracted into bad ones.
So what goes on if you are not that blissful couple? What happens unless you love each other, if your matrimony isn't good? Then is the fact that something you want your kids to emulate? Whether or not your partner is a good parent on earth, it will do your child a great disservice if the two of you fight and hurt the other person and then change and react sweetly to your child. It'll make your son or daughter feel uneasy, like these are somehow usurping love from one with their parents. Children plainly understand that their parents are supposed to be in love. It's what assures them that whenever they develop up they'll be in love as well. If you don't have a caring model to show your children, you are doing them no favors by staying committed. Divorce. Independent yourselves from one another, and continue being good, if individual, parents. Marry again, choosing carefully, so that your children can easily see that it' s alright to want joy for yourself and to go after it. Show them it's alright to leave one marriage whether it's bad and start a different one that's better. Give them some idea of what things to expect because of their own happiness in the foreseeable future.
Divorce isn't easy. And normally a happy matrimony is preferable to divorce any day. I don't blame anyone for being reluctant of divorce or for not hoping their marriage to get rid of. But if we really want to understand what makes free, unfettered, romantic marriage possible, we must embrace that which makes it possible, and give it the calm respect it deserves.