WHAT’S THE POINT?
Marriage is that great social institution to which so many of us aspire. It is the subject of hot debate these days, since it is allegedly under attack by the homosexual agenda, at least according to the experts on gay life and political goals: Pat Robertson, Sen. Bill Frist and of course, President Bush.
I believe that marriage is under attack, but because it is too easy to get into and too hard to get out of. As a society, we have chosen to make marriage a convenience and divorce a burden. That is a backwards way of handling the complexity of human relationships.
We require more from a 16-year-old in order to get their driver’s license than a couple of 18-year-olds who are in the throws of hormonal “I’ll love you forevers.” As a society we have clearly placed our priorities on the process of getting married, and ignored the realities of married life and human emotions and desires.
There are foundational reasons why we put so much emphasis on getting married. Traditionally the purpose of marriage was for land preservation, sharing of life expenses, and protection of the young through a stable division of labor between husband and wife. Dad brought home the food, whether it was killing a boar or selling a new and innovative toilet bowl cleaner. Mom was to cook the boar, or clean the toilet bowl, bake the cookies, kiss the boo-boos away and do the laundry.
It was a logical division at the time. Men are physically stronger and have an easier time killing wild beasts. Women are required to be present when an infant breast feeds so those two should be kept together and in a safe environment, presumably the home.
But times change. The work of modern society requires less actual killing and more linguistic skills. People tend to have lifestyles where domestic safety is less of an issue, at least from wild animals.
Women are no longer required to stay at home and do the cooking in a society where fast food and pre-packaged dinners are commonplace and cost effective.
One might think that with the added conveniences of modern life, and with the now common two-income homes, life would be easier and happy marriages would increase.
That is slightly true. The overall divorce rate has been improving — slightly. There are many reasons for this: The aging boomer generation has become more stable, rates of marriage are down, thus there are fewer people who are eligible to get divorced, and times are good economically.
Then there’s the Bible Belt theory. They think that their tactics of fighting the homosexual agenda are working and they are defeating the Godless, hedonistic gays in their pursuit of the destruction of married life for all.
They’d be right of course, except, statistically it is the Bible Belt states of Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, Arizona, Kansas, Utah, etc., that have the highest divorce rates. That’s “Bush Country” for those who don’t know it.
In the Democratic Northeast — Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York and Rhode Island — the divorce rate is approximately half that of the Bible Belt.
So why the difference? The reasons seem to be that one’s chance of divorcing are decreased when one has an annual income more than $50,000; marries past the age of 25; has college experience or an advanced degree; and has children after the first seven months of marriage. This, by the way, is pretty much the definition of a gay or lesbian couple.
The reasons are obvious. What do most couples fight about? Money and kids. Money troubles are the primary wedge between most couples in my experience. Children, of course, put a huge financial drain on any couple, thus causing additional stress.
In the Bible Belt, people are encouraged to marry young, be fruitful and multiply. This is the exact opposite of what leads to a successful marriage. By marrying young, the participants are more likely to forego a college career, which means they are less likely to have professional success, which directly translates into take-home pay.
Poor people have kids, rich people have real estate. Young married couples who have no money are going to entertain themselves the only way they know how — with each other’s bodies. That leads to children. Which causes financial stress, thus the cycle of marital stressors feeds itself.
What’s the answer? We should not allow couples to marry until they are past 25 years old. We should make marriage an arduous process of counseling, classes and qualifications prior to taking vows.
If as a society we truly wanted to make the divorce rate plummet, we should make the front end of the process more educational and less emotional.
Divorce should be a quick and easy process of division of property and child-rearing responsibilities. Marriage should be a gauntlet of tests.
It is said that fools rush in where angels fear to tread. If we want to protect marriage, we need to stop the fools from rushing it. (David Pisarra is a business development lawyer in the Santa Monica firm of Pisarra & Grist. He welcomes your questions and comments. He)
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 26, 2005. Read the original PDF.