|
by Tom Prichard, President
Minnesota Family Council This legislative session our top priority is, not surprisingly, passage of a state constitutional amendment that would define marriage as only between a man and a woman. This Defense of Marriage Amendment (DOMA) is key to protecting the institution of marriage from the actions of unaccountable judges who would like to re-define it to include same-sex partnerships. But DOMA isn’t the only marriage issue in the State Legislature this term. We’re also working on important legislation that would reform Minnesota’s present no-fault divorce system which allows a spouse to unilaterally walk away from a marriage — no questions asked. In reality, the same-sex marriage issue is very much related to no fault divorce. The acceptance of gay marriage in our culture is really a symptom of the decline in respect for traditional marriage, something directly attributable to our liberal no-fault divorce laws. There are three qualities unique to marriage which the law has traditionally recognized and protected. First, marriage implies a lifelong commitment. Second, that lifelong commitment implies sexual exclusivity between the husband and wife. Third, that lifelong partnership is between one man and one woman. The notion of a lifelong commitment was jettisoned with the advent of no fault divorce. The no fault system replaced the lifelong system which allowed one to leave a marriage only when certain specific conditions were present — like infidelity, physical abuse, abandonment, and so forth. The implementation of no-fault divorce in 1974 allowed one spouse to terminate a marriage for any reason and at any time. The results have been devastating to marriage and families. Marriage has become in many cases a relationship built on little more than emotions. If one’s feelings or emotions towards a spouse change, that becomes sufficient justification for terminating the marriage. Thus, if the basis for marriage becomes an emotional attachment that can be broken at will, it’s a small step to justifying other types of marriage —in this case a marriage between two men or two women. It’s not difficult to see where such fluid thinking will lead our culture: How about the marriage of three or four people in a polygamous relationship? Beyond that one’s imagination can create just about any variation and call it “marriage.” Before no-fault divorce, sexual exclusivity within marriage was protected by criminal adultery laws and private actions under alienation of affection laws. Alienation of affection represented a legal right afforded to an individual whose marriage was threatened by a third person involved in an affair with the other spouse. The injured spouse could sue the interloper for damages resulting from harm to the marriage. But adultery laws are no longer enforced and alienation of affection was abolished as a cause for action in 1978 for (in my view) ideological reasons: The courts have no business being involved in domestic disputes, the argument went. But nothing could be farther from the truth. By eliminating the ability of individuals to protect their marriage from third-party interlopers, the government has taken the wrong side. Without a doubt, there are very real damages resulting from marital affairs — damage to spouses and children which ultimately means social costs to society in the form of more programs to address family breakup. With the present aggressive campaign for same-sex marriage, the final meaningful element of marriage —one man, one woman —is under attack. If that is lost, the traditional institution of marriage will have been redefined out of existence in our culture. Thankfully, there is hope. Nearly two thirds of the people of Minnesota don’t support same sex marriage. And the passage last year of Defense of Marriage Amendments in 13 states — by an average vote of 70 percent — shows that there is strong support for protecting marriage. I think people increasingly see the devastation wrought by easy divorce and a wholesale redefinition of this essential societal foundation. We must fight to defend marriage now because the well-being of society rests on the well-being of marriage and families. If marriage is lost, it is just a matter of time before the rest of society crumbles. |
|
Minnesota Family Council / Minnesota Family Institute 2855 Anthony Lane South, Minneapolis MN, 55418-3265 Phone 612.789.8811, FAX 612.789.8858, www.mfc.org |