The Marriage Encounter retreat
posted at 9:00 am on April 25, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
I’ll be away for the weekend, helping to run a Marriage Encounter retreat, in which the First Mate and I help other couples strengthen their relationships. We’ve been doing this for ten years with Twin Cities Marriage Encounter, a tremendous organization, and we’re privileged to serve on their board as the president couple. It gives us an opportunity to build our community, as strong marriages mean strong families, and strong families create strong communities.
This past week, I’ve talked about the upcoming weekend during my daily shows in order to get people interested in it. I thought for today I’d share part of one of the talks I’ll give over the next two days as both a taste of the weekend, and to underscore why the First Mate and I chose this together as our hobby. It’s called “Crisis and Statistics,” and the numbers are stunning.
We don’t include this to scare you, but we want to give you an accurate picture of the state of marriage in today’s world. The National Marriage Project at Rutgers University report in 2001 describes a social institution under siege, and its updated statistics in 2008 clearly showed that things are getting worse. Not only did the marriage rate drop by almost half from 1960 to 2007, but also the percentage of divorced adults has skyrocketed. The percentage of divorced adult women in the US went from 2.6% in 1960 to 11% in 2007, and for men, it went from 1.8% to 8.6%. Both numbers are all-time highs.
In 2006, 64% of high-school boys and 58% of high school girls believed that living together is good practice for marriage. Cohabitation has increased in this period from 439,000 people to well over 6 million, despite evidence that couples who cohabitate are more likely to divorce. Fifty-two percent say that they see so few successful marriages that it causes them to question marriage as “a way of life.”
Marriages are less happy today than in past decades, and the damage that divorce does to children has created a vicious cycle of pessimistic expectations. From 1976 to 2004, the percentage of high-school girls who said that childbirth out of wedlock is worthwhile rose from 33 to 56 percent. Is this surprising? It shouldn’t be; an amazing 26% of American children live with a single parent. The percentage of births to unwed mothers has increased from 5.3% in 1960 to 38.5% in 2006, more than a seven hundred percent increase.
What has caused this seismic shift in our culture? For many Americans, the pursuit of individual fulfillment and individual happiness has become an obsession, almost a religion in itself. Values, once deeply held, that stressed family and community now seem hopelessly outdated. “Until death do us part” has been replaced by “as long as I’m happy”. Couples seem to be marrying for better, richer, and in health … and conveniently forgetting the other half of the vows. In fact, a few years ago, Fox reported that people have begun actually changing the vows to reflect that. A friend of ours speaks of a magazine article about a London jeweler who makes wedding bands that don’t go all the way around the finger. The message is that there is always a way out – if you’re not happy.
The First Mate has a great suggestion: try taking a walk through a local cemetery. Read the inscriptions on the markers or headstones. You won’t find any that say: “Drove a really cool car.” “She visited the French Riviera.” “His suits were all tailor-made.” “Got broadband Internet connections before everyone else on his block.” You’re going to see what people will really remember you for: “Beloved husband.” “Devoted wife.” “Loving father and mother.”
It’s all about building families, and that starts with the marriage.
That’s why we put our time and our money into Marriage Encounter. If you’d like to support this non-profit organization with a tax-deductible donation, please use the PayPal button provided. If you’d like to attend a Twin Cities Marriage Encounter, visit our website to schedule a weekend. It’s a great investment in the most important relationship in your life.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Thank you Mr and Mrs Captain. Not only for caring about other marriages but also for caring about America and her future.
Limerick on April 25, 2009 at 9:06 AM
This is a great thing, Ed. My husband and I met when I was 31, he was 38. We married (first and only marriage for both of us) and I have since counseled every young person I can to a)wait until you’re mature to marry, b)understand that your commitment is not only to your spouse, but more importantly, to the marriage. c)it’s not easy, but the rewards are tremendous.
zeebeach on April 25, 2009 at 9:07 AM
Indeed.
The Biblical Proverbs says that it’s better to go to a funeral than to a wedding. Perspective.
jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 9:10 AM
Ugh better hide this site. My wife’s likely to make me go to this, lol.
NorthernCross on April 25, 2009 at 9:11 AM
Ditto.
jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 9:12 AM
I’ve never understood why wives tend to be so much more willing to work on their marriages than husbands. I’ve heard about a hundred marriage sermons & seminars, & I’m looking forward to the next one.
jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 9:14 AM
Good post and so very true. These statistics are scary and I fear for the future.
Marriages are hard work and too many today are too selfish/ self-absorbed to even try to work out any issues that arise. To many women, its all about the large diamond, the big wedding, having a fabulous house with a 3 car garage and children who they push to achieve all that they couldnt in their lives. Marriage should be about love, family and commitment, as you have stated.
Have a great weekend!
becki51758 on April 25, 2009 at 9:14 AM
Gee, maybe no fault divorce has contributed to this?
Though that, of course, was just a symptom of the instant gratification disease.
amkun on April 25, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Thank you Ed, for you and the First Mate’s service. As someone who has been unevenly yoked before, I know how valuable counseling can be. Good luck this weekend. God Bless.
kingsjester on April 25, 2009 at 9:17 AM
You scheduled a marriage encounter on NFL Draft weekend?
toliver on April 25, 2009 at 9:19 AM
Bride-zillas, man!
blatantblue on April 25, 2009 at 9:19 AM
BINGO!
This is also why gay relationships are now acceptable in open society. It is all about self-gratification. Responsibility and commitment are passe.
Hawthorne on April 25, 2009 at 9:22 AM
Ed – I applaud you and the First Mate for your work with Marriage Encounter … and I echo all the discussion of how important a strong and lasting marriage can be for couples – and society overall.
But, I must say something that I imagine I will get tons of heat for stating. We should extend these rights of commitment and fidelity to same sex couples. Many couples who are devoted and in love and wish to commit legally and spiritually to one another are unable to do so. Extending the right that all heterosexual couples now enjoy would help to send the message that marriage is indeed for all.
I believe that sending “Marriage Encounter” beliefs to all couples – irrespective of their sexual orientation – would be good for all of us.
pbundy on April 25, 2009 at 9:24 AM
Priorities.
jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 9:25 AM
50% of marriages end up in divorce
nice343 on April 25, 2009 at 9:26 AM
After I posted that I worried it may seem like women-bashing. oops.. ;)
becki51758 on April 25, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Yes, & ditto for polygamous, incestuous, & inter-species marriages.
jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Meghan McCain says it’s OK to live together first and/or to have kids out of wedlock. You boring, old school republicans you……..
: )
JeffinOrlando on April 25, 2009 at 9:27 AM
anytime you quote data like that Ed you should probably throw down the population numbers as well.
no offense, but things like this always give me the creeps…
be careful not to get sued for not providing the service to gay couples… or do you?
Kaptain Amerika on April 25, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Gay Marriage (an oxymoron if there ever was one) isn’t recognized in Minnesota. But, I’m sure the ACLU will start filing lawsuits in the very near future anyway.
Tommy_G on April 25, 2009 at 9:31 AM
So it’s just AP and his cats on HA this weekend?
blatantblue on April 25, 2009 at 9:34 AM
Everything but the cohab numbers are percentages, but yes, it’s always good to have the statistical context.
Ed Morrissey on April 25, 2009 at 9:35 AM
I’ve been on one of those retreats. I can highly recommend it.
Now that we are past 21 years it might be time to do it again
petertheslow on April 25, 2009 at 9:41 AM
If anyone is on the TV, theres a story on marriage on fox.
It has something about a “7 year contract”
blatantblue on April 25, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Im hearing it. I dont think it would work.
becki51758 on April 25, 2009 at 9:48 AM
Hat’s off to Mr. and Mrs. Ed.
Midas on April 25, 2009 at 9:49 AM
And the other half end in…. death! Yay! :)
Old joke, I know. Looking forward to my marriage ending in death, many many decades from now (21 years this year, woot!).
Midas on April 25, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Your work and witness are appreciated.
May all the couples attending be strengthened and renewed.
cs89 on April 25, 2009 at 9:51 AM
me and my wife are about to Celebrate our 1 year! sometime late June…. luckily she doesn’t read this or she will know i do not know the date :P
We are just now buying a house so that is pretty stressful… oddly enough… always heard, but never understood how getting a house is stressful… but it sure is.
Anyways, yes marriage is all but dead now in our society. Me and my wife dated for 6 years (high school sweethearts) before we ties the knot…. but we never lived together and never once spent the night. We weren’t perfect, and we had our bumps in the road, but god willing it will last forever… i think not having children really makes it less stressful and not having children/or pregnant before your married makes it easier too.
Donut on April 25, 2009 at 9:54 AM
I teach at a public middle school and I see the sad results of single parent homes. My first wife flew the coop so I know what it’s like to be a single parent. It’s something to be avoided at all costs.
I just passed my 5 year performance review (anniversary) with wife 2.0 so all is well. ;-) We’ve gone to a couple of marriage seminars and they’re always good. Ed, you’re doin’ the Lord’s work.
Mojave Mark on April 25, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Indeed. Sounds a little sketchy!
blatantblue on April 25, 2009 at 9:57 AM
I think there’s a perfectly good reason for this. The philosophy of many marriage-improvement activities is that:
1) It’s his fault!
2) It’s his fault!
3) Stop being so defensive, we never said that he’s totally to blame!
The cultural assumption by both liberals and conservatives is that male behaviors are the problem in any troubled marriage. Men know this, and so they logically have no desire to get beaten up for a weekend.
Abelard on April 25, 2009 at 9:59 AM
I had a starter wife when I was younger; I learned the hard way (basically by her getting all my stuff after the divorce) that you should know the person better before hitching up.
I would go to one of these encounter sessions, but I’m worried that my wife will come home afterward and demand that I evict my mistress who lives in the basement bedroom.
Bishop on April 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM
I’ll be sure to donate. It is a very worthy cause. Men who start a second family do a disservice to their wives and both sets of kids.
Fix marriage and poverty would be effectively eliminated. If someone wants to stay out of poverty, just do the following:
1.) Finish high school
2.) Don’t do drugs
3.) Don’t have a child out of wedlock
4.) Don’t get divorced
dedalus on April 25, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Hey, I do not want to marry my dog (who’s also a male). I’d much rather find a good woman to settle down with. Until then, I’ll play the field. Dog is on his own.
rbj on April 25, 2009 at 10:03 AM
omg that is sooo how it is…
im my personal marriage and past relationships (only 1 marriage :P im also 24 fyi) is that “you dont take my seriously” or “i know its not a big deal to you, but ITS A BIG DEAL TO ME ” type of arguements.
I perfer to save my outrage for somthing that matters, not stupid little things. Women tend to try and make mountains out of moles… which make us men numb to their constant bitching about stupid things , that when somthing BIG does come up we honestly… no longer care
but this is broad generalizations based on a young married man of less than 1 year… maybe its the immaturity of all my friends or women i know
Donut on April 25, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Do you let her outside once a week?
blatantblue on April 25, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Do you let her outside once a week?
blatantblue on April 25, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Of course, to mow the lawn in a bikini and stiletto heels.
Bishop on April 25, 2009 at 10:09 AM
Because “work on their marriages” is femspeak for “grind the last tattered vestiges of his God-given masculinity into the dirt with endless nagging and estrogenic fleaspittle.”
TMK on April 25, 2009 at 10:13 AM
God Bless you Capt. and the First Mate. You are performing an invaluable service in that ministry.
burnitup on April 25, 2009 at 10:13 AM
The logical conclusion of this can clearly be seen in Europe. The native Europeans embraced this “religion” to the extent that their birth rates have dropped past the lowest-low fertility rate, from which no society has ever survived.
We are actually witnessing the start of a huge historical event, the extinction of European Caucasians and the victory of the jihad over all of Europe. All because Europeans voted in their nanny-state “multicultural” governments, which is just another way of saying “mass cultural suicide”.
Will we learn that lesson? Looking at who we have as president and what he’s doing, the answer is uncertain.
Rebar on April 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Well, I was going to write up this thing, make the case that marriage is (species-speaking) a relatively NEW convention, and that communities are perfectly capable of raising children, seeing as that’s how it was likely done for millions of years, but the people to which I’d be making the point only believe the human race is about 4000 years old anyway, so nevermind.
Liberty Girl on April 25, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Of course, there are pockets of resistance.
My in-laws were married 51 years until my father in law died. My brother-in-laws marriage ended with his death after 20 years.
My parent celebrate their 50th this year and their five children will be celebrating their 28th, 25th, 25th, 22nd, and 17th anniversaries this year.
Keep up the good, and desperatly need work Ed.
SouthernRoots on April 25, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Because “work on their marriages” is femspeak for “grind the last tattered vestiges of his God-given masculinity into the dirt with endless nagging and estrogenic fleaspittle.”
TMK
Well said. Still, I’ve heard good things about marriage encounter. Could be worthwhile. After (almost) 36 years of marriage maybe we should consider it. Or I could continue to wait for the sweet release that only death can bring.
SKYFOX on April 25, 2009 at 10:28 AM
In other words,
“I’m perfect. She’s the only one who needs work.”
jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 10:33 AM
IMO divorce is up because its approval is up. When people grow up in families where divorce is common they have fewer role models of people actually considering their marriages as permenent. If 30-40% of your relatives are divorced – there must be nothing wrong with cutting and running when things get hard.
katiejane on April 25, 2009 at 10:43 AM
jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 9:10 AM
That does not ring a bell.
reference check
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Ask Allahpundit’s take.
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 10:51 AM
If by “perfect” you mean “secretly tired of being married to a ball-busting brat who must have everything her own way, but I’ll never tell that to her evil face, and man do I miss my old friends she chased away,” and if by “work” you mean “to get a hobby and take her big, venomous mouth with her,” then yep, you nailed it.
TMK on April 25, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Captain and First Mate, best wishes.
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 10:55 AM
And don’t forget the picture of Meg McCain.
BuckeyeSam on April 25, 2009 at 10:58 AM
funny
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 10:59 AM
So, what’s your point? Free love and plenty of gay sex for all?
BuckeyeSam on April 25, 2009 at 10:59 AM
For a number of years I lived that care-free anything goes liberal life. Guess what it brought me? Unhappiness, divorce, and anger on all sides. Then I found a woman that believed that love/marriage is a 100% two-way street.
When I comitted 100% of myself to my marriage absolutely everything in my life changed! I have been the happiest man on the planet for 21 years. I found out what the term “equally yoked” means, and it’s heavenly!
Tell your spouse 1,000 a day “thank you”, “I love you”, “that was great”, “You’re gorgeous!”, hold her hand, give her a kiss, hold her close. Do these things and you’ll be happy man!
Scriptures teaches marriage is between a man & a woman – period. Scriptures teach any other relationship is against God’s law. There is no ‘gray’ area or waffling in this, either you believe and follow – or you serve the ‘other master’. A true believer has no basis for picking and choosing which of God’s laws to obey or ignore.
So-called modernist, liberal, or progressive Christians feel they can bend or ignore whatever scriptures do not agree with their personal preferences. They have created ways and teachings that sound very convincing – it’s always about ‘freedom’ and ‘rights’. They forgot Who gave them their freedom in the first place. At the moment of death they are in store for a very sad surprise because God’s laws are not to be ignored or put aside for the pleasure of the flesh.
Under the Law I am commanded to love my neighbor, regardless of race, creed, gender, or persuasion. To live this law has to be the greatest challenge in this life. I’ve gone to battle yet I treated my enemy’s wounds as well as the Marines I served with. It wasn’t easy, but it was commanded that I do so. Hate is easy – love is hard.
Retired Sailor on April 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Well, to be fair, movies,books, and alot of time progressive churches (those churches who let anything go such as divorced preachers or some times gay preachers? or just more modern accepting faiths) treat men very unfairly.
1) WE will start with movies/pop culture. The man is always the idiot, and the woman is always the smart and rational one. Ex – Home improvement, King of queens . Ect.
2) Books and Lifetime channel :P – always some evil man leaving his wife of 3 children for a young college student for sex and she has to take up 5 jobs to support her children. blah blah blah. If you have to take marriage advice from a book then you fail at marriage. No 2 people are the same, nor are their marriages. Women need to respect the man, and the man needs to protect/love his wife.
3) Churches – Churches are all about feeling good now. The ones who actually preach fire and brimstone are few and far. They never mention or call out actual sins they know are going on. And when they speak of marriage, they always speak of treating each other nice, and the man listening and the MAN do this and that. How about preaching about how the MAN is suposed to be the “HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD” ? Or how the bible say the Man is supposed to love and take care of his wife, and the women is to be subordinate to her husband.
When women try to become heads of households it weakens the foundation of marriage…. is it the woman’s fault always? nope sometimes the man is just not being a MAN. and the woman has to fill the role of Man and woman.
Pretty much is a man , acts like a MAN and takes care of his business, treats his wife with respect while demanding authority. and a Woman respects her husband, gives her input but lets him be the leader, the marriage will work 100% of the time.
Why do churches not talk about these rolls? Very few times have I personally heard a preacher touch on this.
P.S. – My wife and I have the same conclusion on these things, I value her input and her thoughts, but when it comes time to make decisions I will be the one who takes care of it. Same will be when we decide how to raise our children.
Donut on April 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM
As per human relations, R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Of course the universal lesson applies to everyone. Love God, the Great Creator; and Love your neighbor as yourself.
Organize your own encounter. Believe what you will. But don’t coerce your belief system on everyone or anyone else, priding your generosity with what “would be good for all of us.”
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 11:08 AM
This is where the morality of the ’60s has brought us with all it’s talk of “sexually equality” and “sexual freedom”.
Men can go and have lots and lots of sex with several different women and not be at all ashamed of their acts or shamed by society for them and, quite often, not have to deal with any of their consequences.
Women are more and more running single-parent households and holding down a job. And as a single parent, they have a much higher chance of living in poverty.
Children of these single-parent homes have a much higher chance of being poor, getting involved in drugs, being incarcerated and generally havening a screwed up life.
Oh, and it’s even worse if you happen to be a minority.
To me it looks like the people who benefited the most from the “cultural shifts” of the ’60s were White men, everyone else kinda got screwed.
Go figure.
29Victor on April 25, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Exactly the problem. It’s the man’s fault. How about the (albeit lower percentage) of women who head to “greener pastures”
The main problem is the lack of understanding of commitment. If both sides are committed to making it work, there is nothing that cannot be worked out. If only one side is committed, nothing can be worked out because one side will want the easy way out and even if the current crisis gets solved, the next one will be a huge problem.
Corsair on April 25, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Oh and – Keep up the good work Captain and First Mate. The nuclear family is the cornerstone of any society.
Corsair on April 25, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Donut 3) Churches
As for the individual, a help mate completes a union, the most personal union being marriage, and community provides the larger contextual setting of “family” for each of us.
I’m not looking it up. But my take on the revelation that the day would come when all would have the word of God written (on the forehead) in our minds applies today. We all know the difference between good and evil. What varies is the level of corruption we embrace regarding “meaning”. Revisionism is as corrosive to the letter of the law as literal interpretation is to the spirit of the law.
Your expression is universally acknowledged within the mind’s heart. Though nothing is perfect or exactly as it ought to be, we still have a soft spot in our hearts for organized religion because it IS organized and therefore able to function on the grand (though corrupt) scale in matters that require group effort.
The ability to see unity where it exists is much more valuable to our essential spirit than the tendency to glorify any elitist distinctions that presume exclusive dominance.
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Well, with me being young, and from a divorced family; I never got to live in the time where MEN WERE MEN. god bless the good old days, many things were wrong in the 20′s-50′s’s but SO many things were right.
Love in this order = good marriage
1- God
2- Your wife
3- Your children
4- Yourself
Selflessness is a virtue
Donut on April 25, 2009 at 11:40 AM
I hate to differ with most of you but I think you are dead wrong about divorce. Yes, I will agree there are many selfish self absorbed people. They should not be getting married, except to someone equally to the task as themselves.
People get married way too quickly without spending enough time courting their potential mate and they don’t do enough logical reasoning to determine if they are a good mate or not for the long term. Used to be that parents would ask some pointed questions to ensure that the couples were suited and not just ‘in love’.
Having said that, I have seen couples where divorce is not an option live in abject misery. One of them uses it as an excuse not to have to do any work and not to put in effort because they don’t worry about consequences if they just go about living their own selfish life within the marriage. And yes, people do change over time even if you think you married the right person.
To me, marriage should be an institution allowing for the growth of you love. Love is the most important factor – to truly love your partner and raise them up. The issue is not divorce but how few people truly understand the importance of growing love, respecting, cherishing and honoring your partner.
People focuses on the ’til death do us part’ but forget the ‘love, honor and cherish’. If you fail to do those things you have a marriage in name-sake only. A marriage where you love honor and cherish will always end in ’til death do us part’. If a partner forgets about the importance of love, honor, respect and cherish and then they don’t have a marriage.
I would not condemn anyone to live in a marriage without the love, honor and cherishment. That takes effort and self sacrifice a willingness to grow with your partner and if one or both fails miserably they have broken their vows. In my mind and the marriage is already over and should end in divorce to release them of this misery. Effort should be made to repair things but it definitely starts with one and ultimately has to end with two.
Conservatives, I among them (although a bit libertarian leaning), should honor marriage but let’s not lose sight of the important things too in a marriage, namely love.
ardana1973 on April 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Yeah, let’s all act like its circa 2,000 BC. We don’t need that whole modern civilization thing anyway. /sarc
Troll, the adults are speaking. You might learn something if you listen.
CollegeGirl on April 25, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Bill O’Reilly makes these points all the time. Seems so simple yet too many don’t think beyond the moment at hand.
My husband and I have had 28 years together. We had 7 years before children and in a few years we will be alone again.
There have been many times when it seemed easier to quit, but thankfully we always worked it out.
Just want to take this opportunity to say that HE has been the one to make all the sacrifices, working these past 20 years to allow me to stay home and be there for our kids. I have also been able to volunteer with a lot of school and church organizations. So many people congratulate me on how well our kids have turned out but the truth is none of that would be the case if it hadn’t been for my husband taking care of business so that I could take care of them.
We did not buy a bigger house or new cars, or take lots of vacations and the only jewelry I own is a crucifix and a wedding band. Shared effort, shared sacrifice, shared love has worked for us.
Jvette on April 25, 2009 at 12:10 PM
At one time, “researchers” computed the “divorce rate” as the number of filings for divorce divided by the number of marriage licenses in a given year. The number hovered around 50%.
But consider how atonishingly inept such an analysis is. Is it measuring the probability of divorce? No, it’s measuring the distribution of the work load of courthouse administrators!
Using that moronic methodology, it’s inevitable that very soon, with the annual number of marriage licenses in decline, and the older marriages breaking up, the “divorce rate” will soon exceed 100% !!!
As any social scientist ought to know, the correct methodology is to analyze cohorts of married people by year, longitudinally.
When the studies are performed correctly, and not by shills for the culture-of-death, the true divorce statistic is closer to 20%.
Please help undo this myth. It has done enormous damage to us. It is an out and out injustice that it is repeated so often.
jeff_from_mpls on April 25, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Good work Ed. Marriage is the cornerstone of the family and the family is the cornerstone of society. Little by little these cornerstones are being chipped away and soon the whole thing is going to come crashing down.
jimmy2shoes on April 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM
The admiral and I will have been married 22 years come July.
rightside on April 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Great post.
brak on April 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM
2,000 BC isn’t far enough back — there were already institutions of marriage at that point. Go back to the real dawn of modern man, say 100,000 years, any you may still have some vestiges of marriage. You really have to go back to pre-tribal society to get to pre-marriage.
I presume that we probably don’t want a large scale experiment to verify that marriage type arrangements are necessary for civilization. After all, where is the control group?
Count to 10 on April 25, 2009 at 12:30 PM
People who remain married determined prior to the ceremony that they would never divorce. For love to endure, nurture reciprocation in mutual admiration.
Though the earth is beautiful, the world is cruel. I count my lucky stars to have my true love at my side as we’ve survived together the difficulties accompanying 32 years. The quality of marriage is a sacred entity to be lovingly cherished. We married “forever” and through time, that requires a lot of change, not mere adjustments. Thank God we have never wanted to offend each other to such an extent that we’d dissolve our harmony. Grant divorce no premise. Curb your tongue, avoid substance abuse, and be grateful for all good things from moments of thought.
To begin with, it all depends on finding the right mate. Speaking for myself, that took a leap of faith. WE did not make our marriage work without the help of God, believe me! /Ask my spouse who was totally ostracized as a child from a broken home before divorce was socially acceptable. Our familial experiences could not have been more contrary, nor could they have been more alike. We determined to be each others help meet. And we have our share of ridiculous memories helping each other be what we wanted.
Before anyone gets married, take family relations courses together to identify mutual ground and reveal “expectations” before making the commitment to remain intact, established as one unit. It is not fair to hide an agenda; nor is it fair to expect your loved one to read your mind.
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM
how ’bout that
maverick muse on April 25, 2009 at 12:49 PM
I’m a woman, and even I have a problem with that.
(I love my Green Bay Packers.)
capitalist piglet on April 25, 2009 at 1:01 PM
LOL. Apparently piglet and I should be asking our hubbies for some nice jewelry or flowers or something. Mr. Y-not and I, too, have been planning our NFL draft weekend encounter for months!
Y-not on April 25, 2009 at 1:12 PM
Thank you, NO-FAULT DIVORCE.
John the Libertarian on April 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Would the lessons from 1000,000 or 10,000 years ago be valuable? They’d be fascinating but we’d have to assess whether the earliest laws that first allowed people to live in large groups are compatible with the challenges of the next 1,000 years.
The marriage laws going back to the very early records (say Hammurabi’s Code or the Code of Ur-Nammu) seem to prioritize the ownership of property, fertility of the woman, virginity of the woman, sexual surrogates, and the assurance of bloodlines.
Yes, that was 4,000 years ago but it seems likely that those were priorities before then but the early written records evidence a more powerful state protecting property (including women and children) as a means of assuring enough domestic order to enable empire building.
I’d guess a little more than 10,000 years ago marriage varied greatly based on what the tribal leader decided as they lived short lives chasing woolly mammoths and fighting rival tribes for territory. With the growth of the state over the next many centuries marriage laws were formalized, but probably emphasized whatever that particular state needed for growth and survival.
dedalus on April 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM
Were I a troll HONEY I would hardly leave a link to my actual site. Debate my point or not, but leave your fscking insults elsewhere.
Liberty Girl on April 25, 2009 at 1:29 PM
Yep, it takes a team effort to raise kids. My children exhaust my wife and me. I don’t know how either of us could do it separately.
dedalus on April 25, 2009 at 1:57 PM
kingsjester reflects my feelings exactly. “Unevenly yoked”, indeed. :)
mikeyboss on April 25, 2009 at 1:58 PM
Yes, marriage is a development, it is progress.
And to do away with marriage is regressive.
We agree.
jeff_from_mpls on April 25, 2009 at 2:03 PM
.
Work on their marriage = make the man change.
Something she has been trying to do since she said, “I do.”
.
Advice I received from both old women, and old men, “Don’t marry any woman, who’s mother you don’t like.”
darktood on April 25, 2009 at 2:19 PM
What purpose would anyone have to reply to a post like that?
Instead of taking close-minded pot-shots on pbundy’s post, how about understanding the message behind the words. When people who are in love take the time to explore ways to better, strengthen, and defend a loving relationship, they are creating a better world for all of us to live in. Gay or straight, same or cross-cultured, regardless of ethnic background, people have the right to be happy with a fellow human being.
Consabo on April 25, 2009 at 2:23 PM
Sorry, but alternatives to one man/one woman regression. When anyone can make that case WITHOUT invoking their god, then we can talk.
Liberty Girl on April 25, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Stupid wordpress. That should be “Sorry, but alternatives to one man/one woman DOES NOT EQUAL regression.”
Liberty Girl on April 25, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Consabo, what is with the inter-species and polygamist-aphobic vibe? Who are you to say that I can’t have a loving relationship with my sister or mom or dad? What the heck is wrong with you? Why are you so full of hate and who are you to tell me who I can and can’t love?
Can you articulate why you won’t let me marry my dad (I’m a man) or my labrador? Or, since I’m already married to one woman, why can’t I marry another if I really love her?
Call me crazy or say this is all hyperbole, but ask yourself what most people would have said just 20 years ago if you asked for their arguments against gay marriage. I bet it would be exactly how YOU feel about incest and interspecies marriage. And, if a couple’s qualification for getting married isn’t based on gender, what should it be based on and why?
If we can’t tell people they can’t get married because of the gender then how can we tell them they can’t based on their marital status or any other qualification? Canada is asking themselves that question right now.
29Victor on April 25, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Make you a deal, Lib Grrl, why don’t you exercise your choice to redefine the meaning of marriage, and then I’ll exercise my choice to redefine the word “gay” to mean happy, and then we’ll agree that marriage is a happy union between a man and a woman!
Post modernism is so fun, the best part is, you just get to keep making stuff up till you get the outcome you demand!
It’s like capitalism, everybody wins!
jeff_from_mpls on April 25, 2009 at 2:56 PM
The culture will define language. If gay people form households and raise children, I’d guess that people will use the word marriage regardless of the prevailing legal term.
dedalus on April 25, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Exclusive romantic commitment. Usually a desire to have kids or at least form a household.
dedalus on April 25, 2009 at 3:14 PM
No one else noticed the photo on the front page is reversed? Their rings are on their ‘right’ hands.
Anyway, good work Ed, have a great weekend.
Dwilkers on April 25, 2009 at 4:01 PM
That’s awesome Ed. I’ll be happily married 25 years this July. (We were both 19 when we married) I believe the main principal to a strong marriage is 2 fold. Have God at the center of your life and be selfless. Look at any divorce and view the core reason for the divorce and most often it will break down to one or both members being selfish. Be it money, kids or whatever. Your mate makes a great point with the cemetery.
Keep God centered in your life and you will find it difficult to be selfish.
Major Nuisance on April 25, 2009 at 4:45 PM
Society is an improvement on anarchy because, by imposing limits on behavior on life, certain dysfunctional aspects of human nature are restricted and everyone benefits. The wisdom of experience is forced upon the immature and people are prevented from doing things that they don’t understand. This is well illustrated in “Lord of the Flies.” Marriage (as enforced monogamy) is an example of this societal construct.
Compare the behavior of animals that mate for life to those that don’t. For those that don’t, there isn’t even a concept of “breaking up” — parting is a non-event for them. Humans are clearly in the first group. Marriage is an invention that improves on “life in the wild.” It yields better lives and better kids. The evidence that this is true is overwhelming.
I’ve observed many divorces and the couple is never warned how much it will suck. The vast majority of them turn out worse that they could have even imagined. I know some exceptions but most divorces, on a 1-10 scale, rate a 1.
Now, I haven’t addressed the full range of your point about alternatives but marriage is a structure imposed on the class of sexual relationships favored by Darwinian natural selection. Those that cannot produce offspring are of limited interest.
Pythagoras on April 25, 2009 at 5:04 PM
Hey Liberty Girl; I make typos too! I don’t even know what I meant to write instead of, “on behavior on life.” “in life”??
Pythagoras on April 25, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Not to be the Racist Wet Blanket here, but how about a racial breakdown of those figures?
What are the stats for White middle class and upper-middle class people?
as dire as the other groups?
My non-racist point: As long as the core group of this society is relatively stable, those other groups can be less stable–without the situation being as Dire as it would be if the core group is as unstable as others.
Janos Hunyadi on April 25, 2009 at 5:22 PM
You’re in luck! Having acquired my psychotherapist’s degree, on the job many years ago, makes me somewhat of an expert. The simple answer is that you are learning about each other in the process of your purchase. If you ever want to see a marriage melt-down, spend some time in sales at a home furnishings retail shop – like floor covering – with a couple that is distant from one another.
When the customers come as couples, there are three types. The easiest to deal with and sell quality to is a well-established married couple – “The Parents” – if you will. This duo knows what they need and they are helplessly concerned about sturdiness and utility and have made some mistakes with previous purchases. This couple helps you select the right stuff for their needs.
The most bizarre are – “The Lovebirds” – those that haven’t even a clue about each others ideals except that they need a place to be lovebirds and something is amiss about the place that a new floor will cure. You can sell them something that may match her eyes or goes well with his hair.
The most difficult is the couple that is out-of-step with each other – “The Newlyweds” – such as yourselves. There’s a lot going on here that the act of selecting a floor becomes an awakening. The wife is the nester and the husband is still thinking about how long the TV will be out of commission for the installation.
You and the missus, by your own admission, are The Newlyweds. Your wife may be concerned about the remote as well, but (I’m gonna be s l a m m e d here) something is going on with your wife that she can’t help – her desire to make a nest is overpowering her self-control. Something is going on with you as well, you are not hearing your hormones signalling it is time to to make the transition to sturdy. It is difficult to find any one thing the Newlyweds will both agree upon.
So then, what is so stressful for you and your bride is that you (in my opinion) haven’t really discussed your plans for the rest of your lives and now that you have to make some decisions about what will become your home, you’re getting to know a little bit about what each other wants.
ericdijon on April 25, 2009 at 5:50 PM
Liberty girl = rewriting prehistory,
Dhuka on April 25, 2009 at 5:50 PM
And yet, try as you might you cannot lay the state of marriage in our society today at the feet of gays. Advocate prohibitions against same-sex marriage and make us the scapegoat all you like, but the problem among heterosexuals is one of their own making. Own up to it and quit trying to blame others for your personal failures. I mean that in the general sense of course, not personally directed towards you since I haven’t a clue about your life. This lack of personal responsibility is one reason why marriages aren’t doing so well nowadays.
Ed: I may not agree with you all the time but this effort of yours sounds noble. If you can help some couple in need its worthwhile. God’s blessings in that. My own parents have been married for close to 50 years now and it would nice to see others have a fulfilling marriage as well.
JohnAGJ on April 25, 2009 at 5:55 PM
This is the (U.S.) data from 2001. It’s expressed per individual type (ie: white male, Asian female, etc) in terms of “ever divorced” as opposed to being expressed in terms of marriage outcome.
The outcome is what I expected. Divorce is a “luxury.”
Y-not on April 25, 2009 at 6:00 PM
Ed – this is saintly work and I thank you and your wife and your associates for sharing your time with others.
By the way…
If anyone knows anyone struggling with their marriage and they are at the point of separation, suggest they get their hands on a “Petition for Annulment of Marriage” from any Catholic Archdiocese Marriage Tribunal office. You do not need to be a Catholic and you don’t need to enlist the Tribunal. All you need to do is look at the questions and then look at yourselves. I don’t know any tool so simple to examine your marriage any more thoroughly.
ericdijon on April 25, 2009 at 6:06 PM
Someone tell “Liberty Gal” that the Greek civilizations of the Classical era knew that their gods were a lame joke but still believed in and practiced monogamy. Essentially the same was true for the Germannic tribes, including the Vikings and the several Rude & Destructive groups who sacked Rome–in that they had many gods, none of whom was taken all that seriously, with no priestly class
The Celts, who inhabited all of Europe before the Angry Germans swarmed in, had a priestly class which seemed to be self-absorbed and not able to control the live of the people.
Attacking marriage is usually noting more than a lame justification for being homo ( not that there’s anything Wrong with that ) or having failed at marriage.
Janos Hunyadi on April 25, 2009 at 6:08 PM
You make a good point: divorce, already low at the time, went down even more during the Great Depression. It stayed relatively low until the late 1960s, after two decades of steadily-rising living standards that cut the poverty rate from almost 30 % to less than 15.
There’s a ‘chicken & egg’ thing going on here: If the ‘luxury’ aspect were the only one, the divorce rate would have started climbing by the mid 1950s. It took another decade to actually do so.
Something else is Out There………
Janos Hunyadi on April 25, 2009 at 6:14 PM
I think someone else mentioned up thread the biggest factor: social acceptability. In my immediate family there were 7 first cousins, all girls within about 12 years age spread of each other. Only 1 divorce out of those 7 marriages — and that marriage had not produced a child. Most of us have been married over two decades already. Even in the extended family there are very few divorces.
I think that may explain the low percentage of Asian-Americans who are divorced. Marriage seems to be a pretty family-centered thing in Asian cultures and Asian cultures seem very respectful of elders.
Y-not on April 25, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »