Divorce:  The Intentional (But Justified?) Destruction of Your Own Family

 

 

     

   

       Ultimately, the way to avoid divorce is to not do things that might lead to a divorce, and to agree to never ever, ever even briefly discuss getting a divorce, not even once, not ever.  Discuss fixing problems in your marriage, but not through divorce.  It is that simple.  It may make some people angry to hear someone say the it is simple, but it is honestly that simple.  You can still deal with issues in your marriage when they come up.  But you just don't take the tack that divorce is one of the possible outcomes.  Does that sound naive or foolish?  Well, just review the classic Christian wedding vows.  It's the very thing you are basically vowing to do.  You can talk about divorce for hours, reasons for divorce, justifications for divorce, or about how your case is a special case or a severe case (and some cases are)...you can talk about all of that noise and generate dozens of excuse about how hard you tried, etc.  But avoiding a divorce genuinely is that simple:  never discuss it, never file for it.  Avoid actions and words and attitudes that could lead to divorce, and don't ever even begin to discuss getting a divorce.  You agreed (you even took holy vows!) to be in the marriage until death ends it.  If both man and woman do those basic things and honor their vows there is no divorce.  So why do we fail so often?   Because, we break that vow that we take!  On one level it is that simple.  

 

      Where do children get their views on divorce?  Where did we arrive at our adult views of divorce?  You almost have to guess that children largely get their views on it from their own parents, from their teachers, from their friends that are their own age who may have parents that are divorcing, and from TV and movies, and hopefully from church as well.  No church teaches that divorce is desirable, so churches can help lower divorce rates in this and many other ways.  

     

      Some statistics say that about 89% of Grade School teachers are women (and grade school teachers have college degrees, a college education.)  Luckily teachers have a lower divorce rate than many college educated professionals.  I found statistics that said it was around 17% or 18%.  Some statistics also say that college educated women are the ones that file for the divorce 9 out of every 10 times within their marriage.  That was a shocker to learn.  But I almost immediately ran into that statistic, and in several places.  This is apparently not a very contested statistic!  So, when there is a marriage in which there is a college educated woman, if there is a divorce filed for in their marriage it is this college educated woman that files for it 9 times out of 10. 

     Our children spend a lot of time with their parents and a lot of time with their teachers.  Could this time spent with their teachers effect our children's view of marriage and divorce in an out of proportion manner?  The parents come from many occupations, and of course they effect their children's view of marriage.  That can't be avoided and shouldn't be avoided.  But because so very much time is spent around their teachers those often loved and respected, quite influential teachers probably have an over-sized effect on children's views on marriage.  Did your 3rd grade teacher change her last name?  If she did, it pretty much calls for giving the children some sort of explanation.  Can any female teacher who has changed her name avoid speaking a few words about it to her class of children?  And can she avoid shading their views...at least a little...by the particular way she chooses to explain it.  And teachers are a college educated group.  Do these teachers...the men teachers also...have views that, on the average, are in keeping with those of the average parent or rather out of step with the views of the average parents who send their children to our public schools?  What is there that is leading to our high USA divorce rate?  It's not the world's highest divorce rate, but it is far higher than it once was.  But to end this paragraph I think it is reasonable to have training that teachers attend where discussion is had on what are the best words to speak to the children in your class if you, the teacher, get a divorce.  There ought to be words that provide children with the best (but briefest necessary) understanding of their teacher's divorce, such that the children's estimation of both their teacher and more importantly the institution of marriage is reduced to the smallest possible degree.  But, I think it should be portrayed by the teacher as a failure in most cases, though only briefly and not in detail.  Do teachers already have that training?  

     I think it would help our society if the teacher, man or woman, would present divorce, even their own divorce, as a failure of sorts...not as some quite normal and understandable thing!  I think that the teachers should avoid justifying themselves and 'take one for the team' in a sense, with 'the team' meaning the continued sanctity of marriage in the children's minds.  That's triggering talk I know, but American marriage is a slaughterhouse of divorces and I think it just about has to be addressed because we Americans want to live in a just, fair, kind and sane sort of society where the basic underpinning fundamentals that keep life rich and wholesome and enjoyable are cherished and nurtured by adults for all of the generations coming up beneath them.  That means having to talk about some triggering and rawly emotional subjects.  Look, teachers already model certain behaviors for their classroom children to help them graduate and be good people and go through life with higher standards, right?  They do!  Teachers dress professionally, they don't use profane language, they don't drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes or marijuana or take drugs in the classroom.  They don't act frivolously...they bring a certain seriousness to their work.  They keep order and structure in the learning environment.  They don't allow bullying and they speak in a negative way about bullying.  They work at building the confidence and abilities of all of the children in their charge.  So I am just saying that anytime that marriage or divorce comes up as a topic in the classroom, that teachers could cheer-lead for the importance of marriage and family, and make sure that divorce is discussed, when it need be discussed, as a thing to be strongly avoided, a thing to be strenuously and scrupulously avoided.  Parents and other family have the main responsibility.  Churches can do wonders.  But a huge amount of time is spent around teachers.  A HUGE amount.  They could advocate for the importance of marriage and family whenever it needs to be discussed, and they could help make sure that divorce is never portrayed as a casual acceptable option if you become married person.  I know that there is a growing view that our teachers are quite a bit more liberal than the average citizen, but I can't see any benefit in indoctrinating children in liberal viewpoints while their minds are being educated.  Give them a foundation of respect for God and family and country and their fellow citizens.  They can leave school and adjust their views as per their unique individual personalities after that.                         

      Marriage may have a deep Christian symbolism.  Adam was the first human, and the first human to have a bride...our venerated ancestral mother Eve.  He received Eve, the Bible says, because he needed a suitable help-mate.  So God put him into a deep sleep and made an opening in Adam and brought out something from his torso...from Adam's side, traditionally said to have been a rib...and formed Eve with it.  And then she was presented to Adam, who named her Eve because she was the mother of all living humans.  In possible reflection of this, Jesus had no spouse at first, even during His earthly ministry.  So God the Father allowed He be Crucified on the cross...seemingly until dead but really 'asleep for a while', like Adam was put to sleep, in a way.  Then a Roman soldier, sent to make sure he was  dead, thrust a spear into His side and when the soldier did this startling amounts of blood and water came out, surprising the soldier.  (In Christianity, Jesus' shed blood can atone for human sins, and water is the symbol of the Holy Spirit.  It was great amounts of blood and water which poured out of Jesus, scripture says.  Not a normal amount.)  Christians are baptized in water after asking Jesus to let His precious shed blood atone for our sins and after asking also that He become the Lord of our life.  And the Christian church members are called the 'Bride of Christ' in the Bible.  And the Church produces new children for Jesus (evangelizes for Jesus) just like Eve made new children for God through Adam her husband, and you could also say she made new children for Adam.  And so, Jesus' bride, the Christian Church, came from the things that came from His side while He was 'asleep' on the cross...the water and the blood are those things, in this case. 

 

      And Eve, the first Bride, was made from whatever was removed from Adam's side while He was asleep.  And all of subsequent humanity came from the 'lower abdomen' (liked Adam's side in a way?) of Eve and her female descendants.  And when each human was born there was water and there was blood that accompanied the birth.  So marriage and reproducing and husbands and wives are all part of something that has a 'holiness' and a 'symbolism' to it, along with whatever more practical aspects and characteristics.  But at its root...there is something holy there.   And so when we get married, even today, our vows speak of being involved in, pledging to be entwined for the rest of our lives in, Holy Matrimony.  And the woman is called 'the weaker vessel' in the Bible.  And we know that the Christian Church is the weaker vessel' when comparing Jesus to His bride, the Christian Church.  The Church and its individual members are unfaithful to Jesus at times...disobedient to Jesus at times, selfishly uncaring of our loving and devoted Lord at times.  The Christian Church needs to acknowledge their need for Jesus' leadership and authority in order to do well.  And the Bible says that wives should submit to their husbands because that is the right way for things to be.  And it tells men to be loving to their brides, because that is the right way to be.  But shouldn't the men be considering that Jesus is that way to His church?  So...it's reality but it's also spiritual allegory.   Why should husbands be kind and loving and understanding with their wives?  Because Jesus has been kind and loving and understanding to His church.  Why should wives be submissive and obedient to their husbands?  Because the church is instructed to be submissive and obedient to our Lord.  We are His 'suitable help-mate' just as scripture says the woman is the man.  Christians collectively comprise the 'Bride of Christ'.  So for those who are believing Christians, these are things we can consider concerning marriage.       

 

      Divorce in the USA is reportedly declining a bit lately, and that is good.  But that is not to say that the USA does not have a divorce problem.  The USA has a tremendous divorce problem.  It is a problem of society-crippling proportions.  It plants the impression in children's minds that family is not so important, that marital vows are for show, and that marriage may not be such a good idea, among other negative effects.  And it loads both adults and children full of pain.  Certainly there are a handful of times out of every hundred where something drastic and/or harmful and/or dangerous really is taking place in the marriage and so divorce might even be called for.  But my takeaway from watching marriages break up for decades is that shallow selfishness, me-me-me-ism, and boredom are extremely common root causes of American divorce...and the children pay the price in pain and disillusionment.  The involved adults calculate that the relief they experience from vindicating their hurt feelers outweighs all of the harm they will do to their children.  They simply don't care much if at all about their children when compared to their hot burning desire to help themselves to a brighter more glamorous life without their spouse, whom they have grown tired of or angry at or have issues with.  Most American divorces, the majority, stem from wicked selfishness so far as I have observed.    

 

     It is terribly unpopular and triggering to say it, but women are far and away the greatest seekers of divorce.  As mentioned, it is often stated as a statistic that among college educated women it is they who file for divorce 9 times for every 10 times that the husband does.  That's worth a repeat:  among college educated women who divorce, the statistics you find say that it is the woman...the college educated wife...who files for the divorce 90% of the time.  For divorce as a whole, the statistic I've recently seen for the USA was that about 69% to 70% of all divorces are filed for by the wife.  Women seek the divorce more than twice as often as men, then.  Women are permanently destroying the integrity of their own families at a terrifying rate.  Men, filing for divorce the other 1/3 of the time, are causing just as much harm in each of those involved divorces, and so are by no means off the hook.  But the females accounting for more than twice as many divorces is very notable.  So, given this as true, and it seems to be, here is a question:  should anything be done about it?  Can anything be done about it?  Are men twice as objectionable as women?  Or are women twice as prone to quitting as men?

 

     Here is a fact, I think.  You build a different sort of fence for chickens than for cows.  Chickens won't be stopped for long, if at all, by a cow fence.   They will go right under or right over.  As human beings, possessed of common sense, we will readily acknowledge that if you are trying to keep your chickens in you do not want to rely on three strands of tightly stretched barbed wire.  You want chicken wire, probably.  Because a chicken is a different creature than a cow...duh!  So why would you pretend that the same fence will suffice for both?  And women are not offended by hearing this fairly obvious fact about fencing in your chickens.  Neither are men.  But trying to say that women will not stay in a marriage as often as men if it's easy to get out of marriage...women simply don't wish to hear about this.  If you add to it the sin of suggesting that something ought to be done to reduce the number of divorces, now women begin to get a little bit tribal.  And if you were to say that perhaps it should be more difficult for a woman to obtain a divorce than a man, you put yourself at risk of being in a firestorm of angry accusations.  Yet if you said something like, "I think we need to get a chicken wire fence for the chickens because, though the cows are mostly staying in, the chickens are getting out like crazy!", neither sensible men nor sensible women would find it objectionable that it was brought up as a problem that probably stood in need of a solution.  You simply have to acknowledge that the chickens are not the same as the cows.  And if your goal is to get them in and keep them in, then you might have to change the fence.  

 

     But, if you say that the speaking of sacred marital vows in which you pledge life long fidelity and love to your spouse will restrain a woman from seeking a divorce as readily as a man, you are simply incorrect.  It is no more realistic than asking a chicken to stay inside of a barbed wire fence because a cow does.  You are looking at two different creatures.  Holy marital vows are far less restraining to a woman.  While she may mean those vows very deeply on the day of her wedding, the divorce statistics show that she is not likely to feel very restrained by such sacred pledges once the luster of the wedding day has faded.  Once the realities of marriage happen, the struggles, the money shortages, the spouse turning out to be more flawed than you had hoped, and your initial dreams perhaps receding steadily from probable attainability, then marriage may seem like less fun...more work, or more of a prison, really.  So in such cases as this, if the woman lives in a society that has made going back on your vows and seeking a divorce fairly easy, fairly guilt free and somewhat lucrative in a certain percentage of instances, then a girl can feel like she has many reasons to leave her marriage and very few reasons to stay.  Sticking with a life long marriage vow is not a great strength of females.  They do have various great strengths, alright.  But divorce statistics say that when it comes to marriage...they quit way more easily.  And the unfortunate part of that is that of all the weaknesses that you might have, being prone to divorce is one of the very most damaging weaknesses that there is.  Tough on kids, tough on adults, tough on finances, tough on your society.          

 

     We in the USA have a form of government usually referred to as Representative Democracy.  We vote our leaders in.  And we vote our leaders out.  And women have full and equal voting rights compared to men.  Also, women are slightly more of the voting age population.  There in lies one of the difficulties to solving any divorce epidemic.  Women as a 'creature', as one of the two great gender variables of the human species, are not likely to change in nature.  Their characteristics as women are probably not going to undergo any deep fundamental change.   And it is the same with men.  Men are what they are.  They too are likely to remain very much the same.  And politically speaking, you dare not propose changes to laws, additions or subtractions or modifications to laws, that are likely to tick women off.  They are an extremely powerful voting block.  And they will vote you out in a heart beat if the case can be made that you are out to harm women, reduce their rights or their power, or disrespect them in some manner.  A large fraction of women will rally quickly to such cries.  So politicians will seldom allow themselves to be caught on the wrong side of that line.  If you are a politician you try to please women, and you try not to displease women.  As a result, there is little chance of legally making it more difficult for a woman, just women, to obtain a divorce.  It would immediately be portrayed as chauvinism or some such brand of gross and reprehensible unfairness towards women.  It would likely be framed in that manner not just by women, but by the political opponents of any politician that proposed to create such a law.  And it is similarly hard to propose a law increasing the difficulty of obtaining a divorce no matter which gender wants it.  That is now a restriction of freedoms, and any government can be called into question for wanting to restrict freedoms.  Elections could be lost over that one also. 

 

     We Americans could toughen up a bit and start dealing with our marriage problems somewhere short of a divorce court.  Maybe we could push towards a culture shift where divorce is left just as available, but we just don't avail ourselves of it...where we just don't go there as easily.  That is probably the best solution.  It wouldn't limit our freedoms or take away our rights.  But, could all 330,000,000 of us Americans really begin to think in a different way?  Could we all as a group start treating marriage with more respect?  It sounds like a tough ask, I think.  It's exactly what we ought to do, but I'm not sure we could voluntarily do it.  And ratifying new laws that restrict our rights and freedoms to divorce would excite so much resistance that I don't think our legislature would want to tackle that alone.  Also, I think that there is a genuine coordinated attack on the family unit by the New World Order baddies. 

 

     So, legislatively tamping down on divorce rates seems almost unattainable, though it is probably advisable in America given the rate at which we are shattering our own families. Yet there seems to be only about three or four possible solutions to the tragically high rate of divorces filed for by women, or women and men combined.  Here are some solutions, along with a couple of obstacles or drawbacks to each:

     

     1.)  Women and men could be induced through some educational means to decide, of their own volition, to treat their marriages as more of a permanent state of being, to treat marriage as an almost irreversible union between themselves and their spouse.  That was the old traditional viewpoint:  marriage is for life.  And one thing that I personally feel that women are pretty great at is coping with an unchangeable reality, even when it is one that they do not like.  Women can come to grips with some extremely tough realities and just try to make the best of the situation.  But if divorce is an easy option, then marriage difficulties can be "solved" as simply as just undoing the marriage, and women are keenly aware of this option being out there.  Ask yourself this:  what percentage of women think long and hard about saying yes to a marriage proposal they have received and, sometime during their considerations, do not remind themselves that if it turns out horrible they can always get a divorce?  Divorce has been made highly available and very easy in the United States, and how can any woman not take that into consideration?  We could begin emphasizing the sanctity of marriage, or the permanence of marriage, perhaps teaching this in our schools.  But...there would be a lot of resistance unless it was done tactfully.  Can the importance of marriage be taught to our children by a group that files for 9 out of every 10 divorces?  Would women stand in front of children and profess the sanctity of marriage if they themselves are part of a group that embraces divorce at a horrific rate?  Our schools are overwhelmingly staffed by mildly to wildly insane progressives and liberals, and they in turn sort of hate conservative traditional values, and God and Jesus, and the old unfair America that they had the horrible luck to be born into.  American schools honestly are predominantly staffed by college educated women, and college educated women reportedly ask for 9 out of every 10 divorces within their group.  The schools our children are educated in are largely staffed by college educated women with their various teaching degrees.  About 89% of grade school teachers are women.  About 60% of high school teachers are women.  Our kids, while at school, are largely being trained by and most greatly exposed to a classification of women (college educated women) who turn to divorce in horrifying numbers whenever their own marriages seem difficult to them.  How can their thinking about the superficiality and temporary nature of marriage not rub off on the children they stand in front of and teach day after day after day?  Our children are mostly being taught by the very group that embraces divorce with the most statistical enthusiasm.  When you are a little girl and you find out that the female school teacher that you look up to and admire has gotten a divorce, or maybe two divorces, how can that not suggest to you that divorce is OK and that it's alright to get a divorce?       

     

     2.)  Men could begin behaving in ways that are more accommodating to women's sensibilities, hopefully causing fewer women to be displeased with their marriage.  Men, meaning husbands, could begin to work harder to not exhibit behaviors that lead to marital frictions and dissatisfaction in the minds of their wives.  But...men would have to retrain their thinking quite a lot.  Could they?  Should they?

 

     3.)  Laws could be passed and enacted, despite the previously mentioned difficulties, to make it more difficult for the man or the woman to obtain a divorce.  I think this is a practical goal.  There would need to be sensible exceptions.  And once you allow exceptions then a lot of spouses will try to falsely portray themselves as fitting into the group that the exception was created for, even if they have to lie or fake it.  But that is the nature of exceptions.  You almost have to have them.  Slightly evil people or people who feel their desperation justifies their lies will definitely do whatever is needed to exploit them...no question about it.   

 

     4.)  Divorce settlements could perhaps be made less financially rewarding for the marriage partner that files for divorce in cases where they are the only one in the marriage that wants the divorce.  This would require changes in the law, however, and is legislation that might prove difficult to pass.  Again, it would be a system that people would try to game.  I think it is an idea with some possible merits, though.

 

     Here is what marriage is up against, though, and unfortunately it's going to infuriate so many women for me to say it, but I honestly don't know how you can talk about this huge American societal problem without angering a great number of women.  Women are the ones choosing to force a divorce upon their families in hugely greater numbers.  I personally have come to feel that women will generally take more drastic action to rid themselves of a burden that makes them unhappy than men will.  I think that is just baked into the cake for women, that it is just part of the psychological makeup of most human females.  Abortion may be another indicator of this.  (If you are going to say unpopular things you might as well say them all at once!)  Female Empowerment movements seem to never end, and somehow discarding your marriage and your husband with relative ease has come to be an important pillar of the Women's Empowerment movement.  Someone somewhere has successfully sold the notion that it is an oppression of the female kind to try to limit their right to divorce or to decrease the ease of getting a divorce.  Also, there are 'garden industries' totally dependent or greatly dependent upon divorce.  Divorce attorneys are a big one.  Wedding industries are a less noticed one.  If every person averages two or even three marriages, that is more lucrative for wedding related industries.  And there are others.  How about the housing industry?  Think about how many times there are a man and woman living in two houses, separately, who used to be married and living in just one house.  So there are two mortgages, two cable accounts, two electric bills, two gas bills, etc.  In total, this is huge economic force for parts of the economy...but is that a good thing?  

 

     Also, divorced mothers and grandmothers are a huge problem.  A gigantic problem!  Once upon a time divorce was rare; fairly or not it was true that being a divorced woman was somewhat scandalous, and a bit of a shame.  Back in those times you could be an unhappily married woman, go to your mother and or your grandmother, and they were likely to counsel you to look for solutions, to work it out, or just to deal with it for the sake of the marriage and the children. They might have talked about how they kept their marriage together through similar difficulties.  Those days are pretty much gone.  How many of those mothers and grandmothers are divorcees themselves in this day and age, and by their own choice?  Maybe multiple divorcees.  It would simply make them look bad to speak of the sanctity of marriage or the pain you unleash upon your children.  So even if they have come to secretly feel that way, come to inwardly realize the true emotional cost of divorce, they are unlikely to admit it.  It puts them in a more defensible position to console their daughter and say something like."I know you've tried, Sweet Heart, everyone knows you've tried, but sometimes you are left with no choice.  You just have to get a divorce.  I had to.  I fought to save my marriage to your father, but sometimes you just can't!"  And again how many unhappily married women these days have both a mother and a grandmother and sisters and close friends that are divorced?  All of them are likely to say that they understand.  All of them can breathe a little easier if other women choose the same generally destructive choice that they did - to get that divorce they are thinking of getting.  It is simply true.  I think divorced women don't want to be socially condemned for choosing divorce, they would prefer it to be common and therefore understandable.  In a sense, when their daughters and grand daughters divorce, it could be a relief to them on some level.  Misery loves company?  Nobody wants to be pointed out as a notable failure at the family reunion?  Nobody is going to say,"You might want to stay away from that woman, she's a divorcee!" if about half of the unmarried women above 30 years old are divorcees.  So, frequent divorce is a self propagating problem in so many insidious and even nefarious ways.  And again, you simply can't speak about it openly and honestly without ticking off a great number of women, some of whom might get vindictive towards you if they get a chance.  A woman is a more emotion driven creature it has often been said.  So presenting ladies with facts or statistics which condemn divorce simply will not matter if they don't like your facts or your figures.  At the end of the day a lot of women just want what they want...end of story.  Even if they are a Christian that knows God hates divorce they would rather mock God's teachings in that area, and get that divorce.  And men can be like that also and say they are Christian but then mock some of God's teachings in the same ways.  And if you point out to them that this is what they are doing, they hate you for it because they already know!  Like Proverbs Chapter 9 says:

"Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you."

     And again, ladies seem to me to be more willing to take drastic and even demonstrably harmful action to get their way.  I feel like their strong emotions cause it, but maybe it's something else.  I know of many male characteristics that are bad also, but I feel that women are more likely to take rash action to get their way or escape situations they aren't liking, etc.  And when you are speaking about American divorce, these qualities certainly do come into play. 

 

     What is surprising is how strongly the Bible speaks against divorce.  Christians are not to divorce!  You would think it would list a bunch of dire circumstances that would count as exceptions, but it doesn't.  It all but forbids divorce, except for when your spouse commits adultery or sexual infidelity.  And due to the historical times that the Bible speaks from, divorce seems to pretty much be only for a man to choose so far as the Bible is concerned.  This also will seem unfair to many women, of course.  But the Bible is God's word.  He is wise in all things, right?  His word speaks of divorce as an undesirable thing.  Men were said to be turning their wife into an adulteress when they made her their ex-wife, when they divorced her.  That is a pretty extreme thought!  Oddly, many of the same Christian men and women who will tell you that they take the Bible "literally" will also make an exception for themselves when it comes to divorce.  The Bible says " Don't do it!" they say "Oh, but I will.  My situation is somewhat unique, God will understand, He will know I tried, my reasons for divorce are more compelling to me than obeying God or Jesus' teachings about divorce.  I simply can't take anymore.  Blah, blah, blah, blah."  Where the rubber hits the road, as they say, they violate God's rules in order to please themselves, to rid themselves of their perceived burden.  And it is a great universal truth that many people pretend to not believe in God just so they aren't bound by His rules.  But even odder, we Christians divorce in similar numbers and proportions to others who are not Christian.  Are we really Christians then?  Can we say that God's rules can be ignored when and where we arbitrarily declare that it serves our vanity or our offended feelings to ignore them?  It seems doubtful that we will be viewed, on the day of our judgement, as having been a faithful believer if we only obey faithfully when it doesn't trouble us too much.  And what happens to such souls as that on that terrible day?

 

     I think that intact families where the parents reach old age together, still married, still modeling the value of marriage to their descendants...that is a beautiful thing.  They are wise grand mothers and grand fathers, able to provide advice and perspective.  They can enjoy the little ones without being the primary disciplinarian.  It can all be very good for everyone.  But all of this is lost when divorce rears its ugly head. 

 

     What if America went a little bit draconian against divorce?  Would it be so bad?  What if the laws were made stricter for obtaining divorces.  Is that unreasonable, really?  What if 10 marriage counseling sessions were lawfully required prior to allowing a divorce.  (There could be exceptions for divorces inspired by dire events). 

 

     What if the most you could get in the divorce settlement was 20% of the assets if you were the only marital partner pushing for the divorce, if the divorce was not mutually desired?  Is that unreasonable?

 

     What if you could not remarry for 24 months, or 12 months?  What if you were only allowed two divorces per lifetime?  What if you could not vote for five years following a unilateral divorce with no extenuating circumstances?  That would make it interesting.  The people most in love with divorce at any cost to anyone in their family would not be able to oppose laws making divorce more difficult for instance, for five years. 

     

     What if schools had curriculum which taught time proven wisdom and habits and techniques for maintaining a happy marriage?  Such classes might even improve behavior among those who are only dating.  Maybe senior citizens with long successful marriages could come to schools and give talks.   But our schools are sort of liberal hotbeds.  And can we ask a multiple divorcees teacher to teach the harms of divorce...the merits of avoiding divorce?

 

     Right now I think we are taking almost no actions as a nation to stem divorce.  Yet it is something that has a tremendously powerful impact on our national character and the strength and health of our American families.  Shouldn't we talk about whether something ought to be tried?

 

     What if women all across America used their wisdom and discernment to actually vote themselves out of a little bit of their latitude to choose divorce with no obstacles or restrictions?  What if American women collectively discussed things and decided that things aren't working too well right now concerning American marriage, and some rules and limitations really ought to be adopted to improve the situation?  It's one of those politically sensitive situations where no one really has the power to force such things upon women, but no one really has the ability to say no to American women if they should jointly push for more legal protections of marriage.  It would be a wonderful miraculous and beautiful thing if American women fought to make it harder - a small and reasonable bit harder at least - to get a divorce in the United States.  And they could!  If our women told their legislators - en mass - that they would look favorably on it being made a bit more difficult to divorce in their state, then it could happen.  It truly would be a beautiful thing if women used their power to give up a bit of their power...in this destructive arena of "divorce".  1 Corinthians 15 talks about how Jesus will one day bring everything under His authority, only so He can turn around and hand all things to His Holy Father, so that the Father can be all in all.  It is an example of giving up your own power in order to bless and show love to another.  Maybe men and women could join forces to either make marriages a little more difficult to obtain, or divorces a little more difficult to obtain.  It would be a beautiful thing to see Americans voluntarily confess their need to be restrained to some degree from reaching too easily for divorce.  Because...guess what...we are reaching too easily for divorce.