On marriage

[pecunium]

John Scalzi had this to say about "Covenant Marriage" in Ark.

...just over two thirds of one percent of Arkansas marriages have been covenant marriages since the new variation of marriage was enacted into law in 2001.

Simple reason for that: As a concept, it's pretty damn insulting. "Covenant Marriage" implicitly suggests that people won't stay married unless they subject themselves to onerous governmental restrictions on their personal freedoms; basically, it's the state telling you that it expects you to get a divorce at some point, unless it makes it too annoying for you to get a divorce to make it worth your while. The State of Arkansas is banking on sloth, apathy and state bureaucracy to keep a bunch of bad marriages together, as if bad marriages are really better than divorce."

Comments

[sunfell.livejournal.com]

I was invited to carry a protest sign outside the AR event, but I passed, because I'm not into public protest. I did put bugs in the ears of some of the more progresseve legislators. They agreed that 'covenant' does not make one super human.

And of course the evolution-rejecting ones would not accept that serial monogamy is mother natures way of spreading genes. And we won't even mention what Paul said about marriage (since they listen to Paul more than they listen to Christ): that people should not marry, unless they couldn't hold it in- for it was better to marry than to burn with desire. (not burn in hell)

Sad.

[kibbles.livejournal.com]

The whole thing is ridiculous and I would say, who cares, let them have it, but it's a waste of government money. And we have enough of that already.

Contracts

[lilithharp17.livejournal.com]

You are right. Every woman should get a prenup before they marry and now doctors are advising her even during marriage, wear a condom. Never trust a man to keep clean. I heard it this weekend on the Mens Health network.

Get tested together every six months
HIV incubation period fifteen years
Married women aways use a condom
HIV cocktail, makes HIV test no good. HIV infected person is dormant up to fifteen years before test is relative.

[tongodeon.livejournal.com]

Damn, I assumed a Covenant (http://www.covenant.dk/) Marriage was one where you've got a Swedish electro-pop theme at the reception.

But seriously, I really don't care. Straights getting married in covenants, gays getting married in covenants, bisexuals getting married in suicide blood-pacts - as long as it's all consensual I couldn't care less.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

*applauds Scalzi* Well said.

Did you happen to see The Daily Show's take on this? They had a film clip of Gov. Huckabee and his wife being the first couple to buy into the covenant marriage thing. The Huckabees just sort of smiled wanly and clasped hands, prompting the remark, "You and Mrs. Huckabee may now shake hands in a businesslike fashion." *snerk* And to tell the truth, even though I have no idea whether they consider themselves happily married, they did both look kind of bored and resigned.

Fuck that noise. That's not what I want out of marriage. I've been married and divorced, and I got divorced for a very good reason, thankyouverymuch. If I'd had to stay in that marriage the way it had deteriorated, I'd be but an empty shell of myself. I can't imagine any compelling reason why I should let any religion or government compel me to accept that as a possibility for myself.

Urk.

[ad-kay.livejournal.com]

The whole "covenant" thing comes from the fundy belief that if your marriage isn't fundy Christian, it really isn't a marriage. Or not a real one anyway. I had to attend a fundy wedding a couple years ago, and the minister intoned that only marriages "in Christ" or some such garbage would make it. I turned to my husband and whispered, "Well, hon, I guess we're screwed." And like Scalzi says, Red states have higher divorce rates than blue states (probably the economy has something to do with it, as well as clueless people getting married too young).

Re: Urk.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Well, there are a host of things. It isn't so much the belief that a non-fundy marriage isn't real (there is a lot of that sort of parochial thinking... take a look at the RC) so much as a belief that people are weak willed and need a strong paternal force, in this case the church/state, to keep them on the strait and narrow.

Because a Unitarian, a Roman Catholic, [gasp] even an atheist, can get one of these.

But the idea is that no-fault divorce is why so many marriages break up.

A soupcon of ignorance (about relative divorce rates) and arrogance (that what we think works for us, will work for everyone) and you get this sort of thing. Thankfully it has not caught on (and we'll see in five years or so how well those who used it do... one wonders, can one flee the state, then file; after establishing residence in some other state, short of the limit? What would the conflicting aspects of full faith and credit do?).

TK