Move afoot to outlaw divorce

One News Now ^ | 11/12/2009 | Charlie Butts

[fwdude]

Maybe this would make people think instead of just going into a marriage without knowing the spouse.

You mean, like co-habitation for a couple of years. Yeah, that ought to fix it! /sarc

Actually, the generation of WW II often met and married their spouses within a month or less at a very young age. No fornication needed for obvious reasons - no "test driving" the potential spouse. And these marriages overwhelmingly lasted for a lifetime - happily.

This is largely because we once had a common culture underpinned by a deep moral superstructure without an abundance of laws. Both of these are completely gone. Combined this with the radical feminism which has been forces into society, effeminatizing men and making homosexuals out of both men and women, the roles and differences between men and women have been obliterated.

[fwdude]

Here's a thought for both sides in this contentious debate.

How about moving the Churches into a more biblical, traditional stance regarding divorce. And by "divorce" I also mean the Catholic version called "annulment." We would not be nearly in the embarrassingly worldly position we are in with the divorce rate the same as unbelievers if WE CHRISTIANS didn't allow it!

Let the government do what they want regarding recognizing marriage and divorce - when pastors and congregation will not allow a once-married person in their congregation to get married, at the cost of severe discipline and possible expulsion (yes, it's biblical,) that will be a powerful incentive to find reconciliation with a spouse. When even the Church winks at and enables divorce, who wouldn't consider this as an easy out?

I've known of a very few congregations where the pastors took a firm biblical stance on the permanency of marriage, refusing to recognize divorce among those in his flock or re-marry a divorced person (unless under the few extreme, biblical exceptions), and the congregations flourished, knowing the ground rules - Scripture itself.

[dforest]

I worry about a person who says they are a conservative who wants to use the government to TAX behavior that they do not agree with. These same people probably have no problem with the government only taxing cigarette smokers to pay for kids healthcare. How freakin’ damn conservative is that? Someone may not like smokin’, but why are they are okay with that?

WTF? What the heck are we doing here? Maybe I an more of a liberatian.

Geesh, this stuff is unreal.

[BluesDuke]

I worry about a person who says they are a conservative who wants to use the government to TAX behavior that they do not agree with.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

These same people probably have no problem with the government only taxing cigarette smokers to pay for kids healthcare. How freakin’ damn conservative is that? Someone may not like smokin’, but why are they are okay with that?

And it isn't just the smoking issue where you'll find a fair enough number of self-professed conservatives suddenly having orgasms over the prospect of taxing something they despise.

WTF? What the heck are we doing here? Maybe I am more of a liberatian.

Maybe you am. Lower-case "l," of course. And if you am, I for one would welcome you with open arms.

I'm a libertarian conservative. Let thinking people decide for themselves.---William Safire.

[Melas]

Actually, the generation of WW II often met and married their spouses within a month or less at a very young age

Often? Prove it. It happened without a doubt, but I think you're exagerating the frequency.

[Melas]

That sounds reasonable. However, I think you’d be disapointed at the sheer number of Americans who really couldn’t care less about what any given church thinks.

[fwdude]

Prove it. It happened without a doubt, but I think you're exagerating the frequency.

Alriiiight, let me gather names... sheesh!

My former landlord was one I'm personally familiar with. He was in the Army and married his sweetheart he'd met in England right after the war. He tells me stories (boy, he tells me stories!) of similar short courtships that resulted in life-long marriages ended only by death.

[fwdude]

I think you’d be disapointed at the sheer number of Americans who really couldn’t care less about what any given church thinks.

Then those Americans, in my opinion, show themselves to be false "Christians" who have no regard for the Biblical teaching that should embody the lifestyle of any true Christian community. They don't belong there in any other capacity than to be evangelized as sinners and to be restored to true biblical wholeness.

This relatively recent business of welcoming "everyone" into the church, regardless of belief, intention of obedience, or lifestyle, has no basis in the scriptures. The early Church was very selective in who they considered allowable into their "family," which it was in a very true sense. You met the terms of repentance and obedience to Christ's commands, or you stayed outside in darkness. The holiness of the Spirit-filled Church actually repelled many earnest inquirers who hadn't fully considered the implications of the call: "And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things. And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch. And of the rest durst no man join himself to them: but the people magnified them.)" Acts 5:11-13

[SIDENET]

The vows I took said that it was for life.

My vows were the same.

However, I didn't have much of a choice in the matter when my adulterous ex ran off.

[Melas]

Then those Americans, in my opinion, show themselves to be false "Christians" who have no regard for the Biblical teaching

Who says they're claiming to be Christians at all? A staggering number of Americans hold no deeply held religious belief at all. That was my point in the first place. Religion is easy to ignore in our largely secular society, so religious discipline isn't likely to yeild profound results.

[fwdude]

Who says they're claiming to be Christians at all? A staggering number of Americans hold no deeply held religious belief at all. That was my point in the first place. Religion is easy to ignore in our largely secular society, so religious discipline isn't likely to yeild profound results.

I directed my concerned to the Church itself, to those within who ARE serious about living out the precepts taught in Scripture. This number is not as insignificant as you think. The fact that divorce is accepted and counseled in many supposedly biblical churches in the same numbers as the unbelieving world is appalling.

I think you're wrong about the number, percentage-wise, of Americans who hold no deeply held religious belief. Many are just deceived and lulled into complacency by a Laodicean Church. If the Church truly lead the way in proclaiming the truth, instead of bolstering and enabling a secular belief system, I believe you would be surprised to see how many would respond in obedience. But the Church is dreadfully sick, it's leaders lead double-minded, sinful lives and teach those under them to do the same.

A true stand for biblical morality and reform in the Church would no doubt result in a culling out of many, maybe most, of the herd, but the result would be refreshingly healthy spiritually and would ultimately attract those with a true hunger for the new life. "Quality, not quantity" should be the nature of the call.