Justifying Divorce
I had a thought on my way home the other day. The Bible says that divorce is justified in cases of infidelity, and pretty much leaves it at that. And I quote:
Now, I can absolutely buy this, partly because it was Jesus who said it, and partly because it makes sense to me; of course, one can make the argument that it makes sense to me because my entire culture and worldview is built around the teachings of Jesus, to which I would respond: "Anachronism, you really need a woman."
I can also buy into the claims that divorce is justified in cases of abuse. However, where does that stop? For example, I think that a woman is absolutely justified in leaving her husband if he becomes physically abusive. If your husband is hitting you, drop him like a sack of spoiled fish.
I wonder, though, what you, the valued reader, thinks about the other justifications that are sometimes given. For example, I've heard statements like "He was very manipulative", or "he didn't hit me, but he was emotionally abusive". I have to admit that I have a very hard time buying into that. My reaction to these sort of statements is as follows, and I quote:
I'm as intent on finding a docile woman as the next guy, but let's face it: a truly docile woman is very rare. Don't believe me? Think that women were docile up until the '60's? Nonsense. Cleopatra, Ishtar, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Joan of Arc, Florence Nightingale, Sacajawea. The prosecution rests.
So basically, I have a hard time accepting the justification of divorce based on "emotional abuse" or "manipulation". What do you think?
"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery."
Now, I can absolutely buy this, partly because it was Jesus who said it, and partly because it makes sense to me; of course, one can make the argument that it makes sense to me because my entire culture and worldview is built around the teachings of Jesus, to which I would respond: "Anachronism, you really need a woman."
I can also buy into the claims that divorce is justified in cases of abuse. However, where does that stop? For example, I think that a woman is absolutely justified in leaving her husband if he becomes physically abusive. If your husband is hitting you, drop him like a sack of spoiled fish.
I wonder, though, what you, the valued reader, thinks about the other justifications that are sometimes given. For example, I've heard statements like "He was very manipulative", or "he didn't hit me, but he was emotionally abusive". I have to admit that I have a very hard time buying into that. My reaction to these sort of statements is as follows, and I quote:
Grow a damned backbone and stand up for yourself.
I'm as intent on finding a docile woman as the next guy, but let's face it: a truly docile woman is very rare. Don't believe me? Think that women were docile up until the '60's? Nonsense. Cleopatra, Ishtar, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Joan of Arc, Florence Nightingale, Sacajawea. The prosecution rests.
So basically, I have a hard time accepting the justification of divorce based on "emotional abuse" or "manipulation". What do you think?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home