At the New Year, a Nietzsche-esque pronouncement on marriage

Marriage is Dead

Marriage died in 2013, declares Keith Ablow.

While I would assert that marriage has been dead, in the sense Ablow means, for some decades now, I cannot argue with the way he phrases the following:

It was always at least a little funny that a huge percentage of people swore to stay together until death, then divorced and remarried.

But, now, it is, officially, judicially, a joke.

I like his statement that government should have nothing to do with marriage, and that the church or synagogue or temple or whatever should be able to declare what is and what is not marriage, leaving tax breaks and other legal pontifications to the state, for the individual.

Churches should be allowed to define marriage as they wish and offer marriage certificates only to those who comply with their definitions.

We can be sure that the evangelical church would offer no such certificate to any but one man and one women….right? Imagine then, lacking the state to use as an excuse, how would the church handle the people coming for their second, third, forth marriage certificate?

It would be fun to watch. Its fun to just thought test.

Here’s why…

I can think of no better anecdote to illustrate the defining attitude the church has towards marriage than to offer an example of the attitude the churches and their cultural cuzzins, the conservatives, have towards women.

Kim Braine-Tillem is a woman of incredible strength, courage — and faith.

“It was 2005, I was in Los Angeles with my three kids, my husband and I had separated — it was NOT part of the plan — and I got permission from the court to move back to Richmond, Va.,” she recalls, managing a smile. [emphasis mine]

She makes zero claim as to why she “ended up separating”. She fell down, and landed with her kids and her belongings in a car headed cross country?

She finally met a man that shared her unique and peculiar interest. Despite how uncommon the urge is, and how strangely society would view such a novel idea, the man joined in her odd mission of ……helping women. Can you believe anyone would come up with such an idea? No wonder its news worthy. Its out there.

They share an example. The example is so shocking it is little wonder it made the front page of Fox News website. Its a scoop!

“We were homeless,” Tiffany explained, “and I just walked into the church this past September, looking for help… and they referred me to Kim.

“I’m in an abusive marriage — he left me financially destitute, suffering emotional and mental abuse. I was mentally lost — how did an educated woman like myself get into this position?

How indeed? An educated woman, emotionally and mentally abused? Homeless? She must have also fallen down. Instead of landing in a car headed cross country she landed , well, nowhere…homeless, and asking “what happened?”.

I could go on, but please read the article. It is the raw material from which the stake through the heart of marriage was fashioned.


15 thoughts on “At the New Year, a Nietzsche-esque pronouncement on marriage

  1. Empath:
    That Fox News link was a totally depressing article. It almost makes Nietschze sound rational.

    “I’m poor and in recovery.” Mike told her. But Kim didn’t flinch…

    Surprise! Surprise!

    “Normally I would have run from someone like him.” Kim said…

    Oh, bullshit. Her whole ‘mission’ is premised on ‘helping’ women who, I’m sure ‘would have run from someone like that’ too—or so they ALL say! Case in point, Tiffany:

    “I’m in abusive marriage &c…how did an educated woman like myself get into this position?”

    You got into that position by turning your back on decent, educated men and chasing thugs, you stupid bitch. But never fear, there’s always a ‘fallback position’ whether government or private charity, and you can recover and go back to the Carousel again; where the bad boys are waiting.

  2. I had said in an earlier entry that the notion presented by feminists that when Christians are talking about Christian marriage there is nothing in Western civilization abusing them or demanding that they agree to it—that it is a matter of integrity and character. The idea that you cannot challenge someone’s integrity and character, particularly if they are female, is ridiculous, and exposes the hypocrisy within feminism that it is resisted so vehemently.

    Ironically, Bill Mahr pointed out that if you don’t actually follow what the Bible says, you’re not a Christian, plain and simple. Obviously what exactly the Bible says is open to dispute, but what is actually written there is only in dispute to a small extent.

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that you believe in sola scriptura, and that you accept the translation of the King James Bible and so on. If you do accept this, you cannot deny that in 1 Corinthians and in Ephesians you will find teachings on marriage. If you reject these out of hand, you certainly have the right to as say a Canadian or an American, but you oughtn’t to pretend that you are placing Christ first in your life as the Gospel of Luke advises we must.

    But oh the outrage when you suggest this!

    The guy is right—for Christians I hope that this sticks, because we ought to do things not because our society makes them easy to do but rather because we believe that Jesus is the way, the truth and the light and that we follow his teachings and those of the Apostles.

  3. Empath, you are on fire! What’s the deal? Isn’t there some kind of blogging rule about posting more than one post a day? I may be violating a rule of the blogosphere too, but my comment covers all three posts, which I see all, to be very disgustingly true. My reaction may be caused just from the first post, but what it all boils down to, for me, is the wreckless and unaccountable use of emotions and feelings that females allow to guide them, rather than God. I personally believe that Satans spirit of false emotions and false feelings have a much bigger role in his well devised spirit of feminism, than most people realize.

  4. Greg C, Ive contended similarly since I started my empathy obsession, that the proclivities of men are predominantly physical/sexual while those of women are predominantly emotional. I’m breaking no new ground here, just stating the obvious succinctly.
    What happens when a society coddles one and admonishes and administers correctives to the other?

    We gave the world
    what it saw fit
    and what’d we get?…Sam Beam

    (you know how I love quoting the ancient texts)

  5. It just amazes me that no one seems to bat an eyelash when women “end up” or “suddenly find” themselves separated/divorced, like it just happens to them through no volitional act of their own.

    Another fine post, Empath.

  6. Empath:
    ‘This year fall down and find yourself homeless.’

    I actually saw a PUA video recently where a guy disguised as a homeless street loser and was picking up cute college and office girls without any difficulty at all. The same guy also posed as a successful executive and got threatened with a false rape accusation.

    Does that REALLY surprise anybody? LOL

  7. In regards to SSM’s comment, it reminds me of the numerous times when I have mentioned the statistic that states approximately 80% of all divorces filed are by women, to Churchians, Pastors, and even non believers, and it’s as if they didn’t even hear what I just said. No response whatsoever. I seriously have not had anyone even reply to it. Not even a “Wow!, you sure that’s right?”

  8. Happy New Year to you Sir. I hate to be pedantic, but “pronoucement” in your OP’s title should be *pronouncement*… unless you’re making a subtle point that I’m missing (which has happened before).

  9. Notice how quickly this church funded ministry went downhill. Woman separates and moves kids 3,000 miles across country. Now the kids can’t see their dad weekly. Woman marries new church guy. (Was she divorced first? Was the divorce valid because of Adultery by her ex? Maybe, hopefully, but not enough details for me to know.)

    Church funded ministry helps (enables) a woman fleeing from “mental and emotional abuse”, not physical abuse. Many times “mental and emotional abuse” is caused by rebellious wives refusing to receive correction (reproof) from their husbands. The husband can’t spank his wife, so verbal reproof is his only option. Grievous punishment is for him who forsakes the way; He who hates reproof will die. (Pro 15:10 NAU)

  10. Take a woman who is separated, divorced, and not remarried. A woman who moved her 3 kids 3,000 miles away from their father. Put her in charge of a church ministry which helps (enables) women to separate and many to divorce. What could go wrong?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s