(no subject)
Covenant Marriages
After reading several different articles and seeing local news stories about the so called “covenant marriage” bill being proposed in Tennessee, I’m beginning to formulate my opinions about this bill. According to the Sidelines Opinion Poll, I am one of the 22% of MTSU folks who think this will be “OK as an option for some people.” As with any bill, I know that much of it has to do with the politics of making the bill’s sponsors and writers more popular, rather than actually solving some social issue that needs to be addressed legally. Republican Senator Jim Bryson is probably trying to make himself look like a real ‘Family Values’ type of leader; and “protecting the sanctity of marriage” is a real hot way to get noticed right now.
However, despite my mistrust in any bill proposal designed to legally “protect the sanctity of marriage,” I find that I think this covenant marriage idea is actually a step in the right direction when it comes to lowering the escalating divorce rate. I guess I’d give any ‘marriage-saving’ legislation a chance if it’s not actually designed to protect the privileges of the heterosexuals or oppress the homosexuals, or shame the single mothers. So much of the “protections” for the “sanctity of marriage” are actually evil, manipulative laws that are supposed to shut minorities out for religious reasons. And although this covenant thing is probably based on some religious opposition to the divorce rate, it really does have a lot of good ideas. Some may not understand why I think this might be a good idea because the entire institution of marriage privileges heterosexuals and promotes sexism. But I don’t dislike marriage. I’m all for marriage. I don’t think marriage has to be about a men owning women…rather ONE man owning ONE woman. I think that’s the way it is NOW, but that can change. It can change and it will change; within my lifetime. I’m sure of it. But anyways, back to covenant marriages. I’ve picked out a few things from the proposal that I like.
- First of all, despite it’s horribly Judeo-Christian moniker, the fulfillment of this bill can happen secularly with non-religious pre-marital counseling. I was glad to realize that; I’m really squeamish about legal matters that are heavily rooted in religion-and rightly so!
- In addition to being easily very civically obtained, participation in a covenant marriage is purely voluntary on the part of the couple. Sure a couple is bound by the marriage agreement once they sign the paper, but choosing to seek a covenant marriage is totally the choice of the two people involved. No one will penalize the non-cov couples for by-passing this opportunity. It’s not like anyone will be financially benefited from obtaining one of these marriages. It will cost the same as, or sometimes more than a regular marriage (depending on pre-marital counseling fees).
- I think these counseling sessions and lengthier/more difficult divorces will hopefully lead to more open and honest communication between couples seeking to wed or wanting divorce. I think discussion, talk therapy and counseling will help couples better know each other before a marriage happens so they can decide if it’s really a good idea to wed. That is how I think the divorce rate will drop. And pre-divorce counseling might even keep a couple from needing a divorce at all. Even if talking can’t fix huge problems in a marriage, it sure as hell can help people reach an amicable understanding so the kids don’t suffer.