Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, September 11, 2009
Kathryn Lopez :: Townhall.com Columnist
An Affair to Forget
by Kathryn Lopez
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



Reality-show star Jon Gosselin did it. Country singer Shania Twain, whose "One" has become a wedding standard, wound up a victim of it. An endless parade of politicians has done it, and those are the ones we wind up knowing about.

Adultery does happen. It always has and it always will. But I think we may have crossed a threshold.

Culture of Corruption by Michelle Malkin FREE

While watching the president of the United States declare that we can legislate away hardship, during his joint-session of Congress health-care address, I was lured away from my hyper-blogging, Tweeting, Facebooking analysis by a commercial for ashleymadison.com.

To the soundtrack of a snoring woman in bed with a man, the announcer says: "Most of us can recover from a one-night stand with the wrong woman." The narrator continues: "But not when it's every night. For the rest of our lives."

The husband gets out of bed and heads, presumably, to the computer. We see a cartoonish wedding picture. We are made aware of what this restless spouse must be craving: an online dating site for those who are married, but itching for something more, with someone else.

"Life is short. Have an affair." is the motto for this no-frills facilitator. There's no need for confession or guilt. It's all straightforward and out in the open, at least to those in the know. And that's it: enticement, information and get your credit card ready.

The ad's commercial presence during the presidential address post-game commentary on MSNBC was jarring. Have 24 hours of Viagra and Cialis and KY ads made audiences of the talking-heads shows immune to noticing? Maybe they're a crowd that enjoys politics as sport ("Hardball"!) and views sex in the same terms: a biologically gratifying release without a greater context or purpose?

And in this fallen TV world, it's not that he's just not into his wife. It's equality, baby. Another ad on the same night featured an exaggerated boorish bore of a man and his wife in a restaurant on their anniversary. He takes a phone call. She is pleased to make eye contact with a leering rake at the bar. "When divorce isn't an option," is how Ashley Madison seeks to make this sale.

In both scenarios, any sense of shame was noticeably absent.

I asked the same question while reading the weddings section of the New York Times during Labor Day weekend. That week's story on a couple's road to wedded bliss was not one you'd expect to be on display: "There was a moment of connection, but it was so intense that we couldn't be friends," the featured bride told her husband. She and the man she married met on Broadway, playing the lovers Mimi and Rodolfo in "La Boheme," who would eventually be torn apart, clearly unlike the couple showcased in the article.

And so they dated. They would spend two weeks there together in France. And then, upon her return from the continent, she left her husband for her newfound love. The "little church girl" recalls: "From the moment our eyes met through those two weeks of being in Paris and the pain of going through a divorce, I knew that I loved him."

I know nothing about this couple other than what the Times told us. I wish them well. But what about us? What does it say about us when such a prominent fixture of American life and mores would choose to feature such a story? And it's not just the old Gray Lady that's moved by adulterous connections.

Just days after the wedding feature, a story on ABCnews.com began with: "Don't let your spouse see this story." It was titled: "Shh! The Top 5 Hotels for Having an Affair," and explained, "These are hotels with thick walls, a discreet staff, a bit of romance and maybe even a heart-shaped Jacuzzi."

In her book, "The Abolition of Marriage," Maggie Gallagher, one of the most committed marriage-protection activists in the country, wrote: "Marriage, like a corporation or private property, is an institution that must be supported by law and culture if it is to exist at all... (T)o have the choice as individuals to marry we must first choose as a society to create marriage."

I attended a wedding at St. Patrick's Cathedral that same Labor Day weekend, one that didn't make any features sections. During the sermon, the rector implored those in attendance to be a support for the couple, because the newlyweds will have hardship ahead, as all couples do. (You actually can't legislate it away.) Marriage is hard. And so family and friends, who so often can help make or break a marriage, must be supportive.

But what about the culture? Will the culture make a positive contribution to the institution of marriage? Or will we forever hold our peace in the face of blatant offenses to all that we should hold dear?

There will be rude cell habits, and snoring or something equally or more annoying. There will be temptations, and sometimes a relationship won't be sustainable. But many times it will be -- with some help. Marriage, born and nurtured by true love and responsibility can be the source of joy, life and a future generation that understands and honors the institution. We need to commit to it -- and to be ashamed by blatant violations of it -- for all our sakes, till death do us part.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor of National Review Online, writes a weekly column of conservative political and social commentary for Newspaper Enterprise Association.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Okay du
You say the Bible "has been manipulated" to destroy self-governance. My point was not that a "manipulated" Bible could help us sustain our nation but that its contents contain the objective truth that informs people of the difference between right and wrong. We are witnessing growth in the number of people who have no such sense. A function of the Bible is to reinforce conscience, the sense of oughtness which God wired into us. That is the seat of self-government.

hi nonprodigal
You're leaving out some considerable history regarding religious abuse and the country being founded on religious choice and freedom. The Bible can and has been manipulated to destroy self governance for women, blacks, gays, Jews and so on.
There is no problem for the 'government' to micromanage people in those groups throughout history, leaving them to be subject to the hostile and brutal whims of the dominant group, not God.
Only the Constitution and Bill of Rights has come to protect ALL citizens, whether they are religious or not.

I agree that adultery and divorce are painful, abusive and upbraids the difficulty in finding the love necessary for a sustained and good marriage in the first place. But I don't agree the Bible is the answer to everything, as it's obvious it's not self governance for which it's utilized.

Where's it heading?
As I read through the comments it was apparent that the problem being discussed is larger than just marriage and I was reminded of John Adams quote - “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
This is the reason our nation is failing and falling into the hands of the greater government crowd.
Truly he who is self-governed is best governed but without a sense of objective right and wrong how can one be self-governed? Throw away the Bible and our liberty will follow in a generation or so.

Here's my favorite photo of Sweetie

http://www.travel-tidbits.com/tidbits/005873.shtml

It is on this page.

Lynne Location: NC
Reply # 4
Date: Sep 13, 2009 - 4:15 PM EST
CORRECTION to previous post
Jim in CA's "The Perfect Marriage" is from yesterday, September 12th, at 11:19am.
======

It is on this page.

Photo was in Athens

Turophile Location: WI
Reply # 11
Date: Sep 13, 2009 - 1:32 PM EST
Wow, you're right!
jim Location: CA
Date: Sep 13, 2009 - 12:19 PM EST
Try this one
On my Web Site http://www.travel-tidbits.com ...
=========

I see the yellow bus in the background. Is there a picture of your RV on the site? Thank you.

========

Click on Photo Tidbits, at upper right.
----------

For every one of the 54 Wedding Anniversaries, we have eaten at a restaurant we have never patronized before.

For our 38th, from our table in the Marriott Hotel in Athens we could see the Parthenon at the top of the Acropolis. It was partially covered with scaffolding, and looked as if it could be under construction, under renovation, or perhaps under demolition.

We asked our waiter when he last visited the Parthenon. He laughed and said as a school child he was bussed to the Acropolis one day, the one and only time he's been there!
------------
Anniversaries have been celebrated in Athens; Cruise Ships 3; Dallas (2); Ft. Worth; Greimerath, Germany; Las Vegas (4); Los Angeles area (18); Mauna Kea Beach Hotel in Hawaii (the best!!); Lowes Hotel Monte Carlo (the worst!!); Palm Springs area (16); Park Ridge, Ill (Wedding day); Phoenix; San Diego (2); San Francisco; Santa Barbara; Strasbourg.


In reading this article
It comes across as how perverse some men really are in recommending adultery as some sort of answer for happiness when it bring the opposite.

Adultery is the worst pain deep down inside one feels from the betrayal of a person you have committed yourself to to be one in this journey through life.

And life itself is a struggle for all of us in one way ot another.

Our troubles may differ as to category, but we all have them.

If you are alive in thsi world, you got a problem in something.

Just a fact of life

Lynne
I am a Vietnam Era Veteran and was involved in the planned Assault on Cuba in 1962, on one of the landing ships if we had invaded as was expected at theat time.

In 1973 my wife left me for another man.

Nothing before that and nothing since hurt as bad as that did.

The pain was bone marrow deep

CORRECTION to previous post
Jim in CA's "The Perfect Marriage" is from yesterday, September 12th, at 11:19am.

Kenneth
Well said! :)

For you and anyone else who is reading this thread, check out Jim in CA's 11:19am entry on "The Perfect Marriage." What a delightful testimony to what marriage SHOULD be!

The relationship of a husband and wife is the closest example we have on earth to what Christ the Bridegroom should have with His bride, the church (believers). The relationship must have faithfulness, unconditional love and respect, and consistency. It's no wonder that God is so "particular" about how marriage should be defined and how it should work.

I do not have cable TV, and I am greatly saddened (but not surprised) to read Ms Lopez' descriptions of today's TV ads. We do indeed reap what we sow.

con't
I support marriage as a supportive, grounding and needful social structure for most of the reasons as mom of 4 describes.
To assert that society won't benefit from healthier, happier, more secure and independent gay people is a FALSE one.
This is no longer a matter of theory, it is a FACT that where happier more loving and loving people are, a society WILL thrive.

Denying this isn't true is just a symptom of bigotry. And as I've said, nations can't thrive on bigotry and KEEPING a productive and socially responsible minority FROM doing the right thing by marrying,serving the country in uniform and so on, doesn't serve civilization either.
Mom of 4 can go on and on and on about what marriage IS for, but she has yet to prove how gay people getting married shows THEY disrespect it, but especially how in ANY way, it's a real or serious PROBLEM.

I believe it Lynne

Kenneth wrote:
" You do not know what pain is until you have a spouse commit adultery against you."
-------
Lynne replied:

...which is why God wrote a commandment against adultery--not just to "limit" the perpetrator, but also to protect the victim. God understands adultery--it's the human-to-human form of idolatry. Betrayal. He feels betrayed every time someone rejects the saving grace provided by His Son's work on the cross. So, yes, He knows the pain of the betrayed one.

===========================================

Yes, its why people never really find happiness through an act against their own vows.

Marriage is a Covenant with another living person who has every bit as much feelings as as all of us do, obvious but adulterers do not care for that persons emotional well being if they betray them by adultery.

God's Commandment is to protect us, not Himself.
He is not endangered or moved by any man's sin, but we down here are.

So God has placed adultery as one of the sins worthy of death for the transgressor.

That is his Judgment on Adultery and Jesus Christ has provided us a way to escape this Judgment of death through repentance.

Adultery is a sign of an immoral generation that will see pain from nothing more than reaping what they sow.

They sow pain, they will reap pain

con't
Mother of 4 posits her list AS IF:

1. Gay people aren't ALREADY engaging in those endeavors, just without the legal tethers.

2. Gay people are incapable of what she lists.

3. Gay people don't agree or don't respect the same.

When point of fact, gay people are surrounded by all these examples from their own family and social networks of how it's done. The ONLY difference is attraction.
All else IS equal, and certainly many children are raised well without their biological parents and gay people ARE raising biological children or adoptive ones, same as heteros.

Mom of 4 seems to be forgetting that biological parents aren't always available for or good for their children, but the sexual orientation of the parent isn't the deciding factor: love for and competence in raising the child is. Period.

And she constantly insults those who are not parents by asserting that the only people of worth to society are those who have children. As if non parents aren't directly or indirectly seeing to the security of ALL children, their parents and society as a whole.

mother of 4 and Dave
I DO support marriage. I support marriage as it is LEGALLY defined as:
TWO, NON MARRIED, NON RELATED, consenting adults.

Being supportive of gay couples INCLUSION in this, just as hetero couples are, is
NOT ANTI MARRIAGE.

Dave, the logic you ascribe to ME, is actually that of gay marriage opponents.
They keep pointing to assertions that gay people are dysfunctional and mostly incapable of procreation as rationale for discrimination.
If that rationale is illogical to you, than how can it be suddenly logical when applied to gay people?
And how is being pro marriage equality, ANTI marriage at all?

So quick to attack, less so to utilize thoughtfulness.

Kenneth
" You do not know what pain is until you have a spouse commit adultery against you."
-------
...which is why God wrote a commandment against adultery--not just to "limit" the perpetrator, but also to protect the victim. God understands adultery--it's the human-to-human form of idolatry. Betrayal. He feels betrayed every time someone rejects the saving grace provided by His Son's work on the cross. So, yes, He knows the pain of the betrayed one.

You do not know what pain is
Until you have a spouse commit adultery against you.

Divorce is one issue, adultery is another.

Adultery is the deepest of all treacherous acts a person can commit against another who has made and oath of faithfulness to that person.

There is no greater betrayal known to mankind than the most personal contract marriage brings to two people to share life as one.

Wow, you're right!
jim Location: CA
Date: Sep 13, 2009 - 12:19 PM EST
Try this one
On my Web Site http://www.travel-tidbits.com ...
=========

That's an excellent web site. You're right, your Sweetie is beautiful. I can see why you were so attached to her for so long. BTW, where was that picture taken? I see the yellow bus in the background. Is there a picture of your RV on the site? Thank you.

Try this one

Turophile Location: WI
Reply # 1
Date: Sep 13, 2009 - 10:27 AM EST
Jim (CA) 11:19 AM
That was the most touching description of a great marriage
=========

On my Web Site http://www.travel-tidbits.com/ there are thousands of books, photos and stories.

Try this one
http://www.travel-tidbits.com/tidbits/cat_book_writing_nugg ets.shtml

Jim (CA) 11:19 AM
That was the most touching description of a great marriage I've read in a long time! It almost perfectly describes how I feel about my beautiful Bonnie. I gave it to her to read and told her "that's how I feel about you." She said she's nobody's role model, but I know better. Thank you for sharing that, it's wonderful. I'm sorry for your loss, it sounds like you had a lot of wonderful years together. God bless you both.

Hey Valhalla.
You eloquently captured my thoughts exactly on this subject. My wife has a thing for Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, she thinks he's really, really hot and if she ever gets within two feet of him, will punannysize him whether he wants to or not and there is nothing I can do or say that will stop her from her chosen quest.
On the other hand, I have this thing for the hot waitress at Outback Steakhouse who winked at me when she bent over to serve me wings and beer the other day because the entire time I was admiring the color of her huge soft and pillowy eyes, they were 42DDD's she informed me and real.
She's from Nebraska, a farm girl, and as I sat there in my wild imaginings devouring my second helping of wings and a fourth Fosters Oil Can watching her sway with the wind as she ran to the barn to milk the cows in a pair of daisy dukes and a flannel shirt tied just so, above her washboard abs with me running after her with a chicken wing in one hand, beer in the other my kegger abs for all the world to see I realized that women just aim higher.

marriage
Marriage has existed thru time and space in many different forms: polygamy, monogamy, serial, marrying dead brother's wife, marrying wife's sister, [forget anthropology terms], arranged, love, etc.

To say that one form is better than another is quite arrogant (my culture is superior to your culture).

Each society selects certain form(s)and can change over time, example, arranged to love.

The Western idea of Love Marriage is a recent phenomenon in history (about 400 years old).

Ideally, each society should have different forms for different people, not just one form for the whole society.

As long as children are taken care of, the parents should have freedom in their marriages to develop relationships with other people.

That is the Essence of the Western Idea of Freedom.

People's marriages are private and should be respected by Busybodies. Too many people are too concerned about other people's lives.

Styx (IL) 12:31 PM said:
"Republicans who are in scandals are always the most vocal and preachy about "family values" "defense of marriage" and "Christian ethics."

That only means that they are fallible human beings. Having principles and not always living up to them is far better than having no principles and no scruples. The media always highlights the "hypocrisy" of Republicans who fail to live up to the high standards they espouse. Likewise the media ignores or downplays Democratic scandals because there's no hypocrisy, they're just living down to their lack of morals, principles and scruples. Frankly, I'd much rather my politicians have principles and high standards, even if they don't always live up to them. Phooey on the dominant media! CNN lies!

I am the expert with no experience

I am sick and tired of hearing about this one or that one, cheating on someone or the other one.

That is no one's business except the spouse.

It has been going on for a million years, and will continue as long as there are men and ladies.

I have absolutely no experience with anyone but my Sweetie, and that was after we were married.

=====
Why me of all people, but at least three times in the past 55 years a recently divorced beautiful lady asked for my advice when the man they were dating wanted to hop in bed with them. They were all very nice ladies indeed.

My six instructions, in this order were.
— Don’t break up a happy marriage
— Don’t get a disease.
— Don’t get pregnant
— Enjoy
— Enjoy
— Enjoy.

They later said my advice was perfect.



Friends
Friends, let us all endeavor to live our marital lives more like Obama and less like Limbaugh...

Mother of 4
is correct. Marriage is a social/cultural institution and binds not just the husband and wife, but two families and all of the greater society. You can look at marriage in any culture and see the same thing. There tends to be a great deal of societal symbolism in any marriage, be it dowry, bride price, naming/descent, inheritance, etc.

And, it does not require "government" to make it a societal institution. That is so much like the liberal to view society as only existing in the context of a government. However, we do expect our government to uphold and not tear down our societal institutions, else it becomes abusive.

Mother of 4
Anyone who wants to meddle in other peoples lives is a liberal, through-and-through.

My posts are not about the merits of adultery--why would one get married if they think adultery is okay? My concern is Ms. Lopez's implied assertion that it is okay for people to meddle in other peoples marriages. This is not appropriate no matter what evils one perceives are occurring.

My marriage
Is my business, and anyone who pokes his or her nose in it will find my fist poked in his or her nose, but fast.

Uninvited? Unwanted? Unwelcome? Unheeded? Then get out!

That's not conservative or liberal, that's common sense, people. Don't get yourselves shot for not knowing when to get out of other's business.

correction
train.

Also, they don't pass laws or make speeches that harm others just so they can scrape a few more votes off the bottom.

STAN
What you and other conservatives like to forget, conveniently, is that the Republicans who are in scandals are always the most vocal and preachy about "family values" "defense of marriage" and "Christian ethics." They rode over the backs of these slogans on their way to elected office. They were among the most vocal while it was fashionable to moralize and pontificate about Clinton's escapades.

The Republican values conservatives pander to their religious base, always gullible and willing to play, are the ones who show up in emn's rooms, spending taxpayer money to fly south, bragging about illicit spankings and sex in cheesy motel rooms, and boinking their staff members while their parents buy silence.

I don't think Dems actually have kept up with all of this pathetic stuff, but when they do, they didn't ride to it on the hypocracy ytsin.

HAVE YOU NOTICED
When one of theirs falls,they circle the wagons,but you let a repub mess up;all hell breaks loose!

Jim:
You were and are one lucky man. What a wonderful post! As a young man in his 30's I want to thank you sir for your service. You are what keeps hope alive during these tough times.

A prefect Marriage

The eye can see and the heart can love what the word cannot describe.
=
Not Love at First Sight, it was LOVE AT FIRST GLIMPSE, as my Sweetie opened the door for our blind date, Nov. 3, 1950.
=
The old fable that “The way to a man's heart is through his stomach,” sure didn't apply to me. The way to my heart was my Sweetie's beauty, her character, her figure, and especially her hugs and kisses.
=
Seven months later — minus one day — on June 2, 1951, after we had seen each other maybe 10 to 15 times, we were married. Emmy is the first and only lady I ever dated. What would I have done without her? (I was in the Army.)
=
You should see the enchanting, delectable, heavenly view I saw at most every meal!
=
I could have spent my life with her in a phone booth, that's all the space I needed - the closer to my Sweetie, the better.
=
There's nothing more beautiful than a beautiful lady. The less the clothes, the more the beauty.
=
When I would squeeze my Sweetie I always heard bells and chimes.
=
For Sweetie's 50th birthday I gave her 50 tiny pieces of gold, and 50 small emeralds, in a glass vial, held by a chain.
=
For Sweeties 70th birthday I had a necklace with 70 stones made especially for her.
=
When my Sweetie complained about my narrow taste in food, politics, books, etc., I just reminded her of my extremely narrow taste in women.
=
The lady trying to tell us where to sit at the Cruise ship dinner table, was highly dismayed when I informed her that for the rest of my life, I expected to sit right next to my Beautiful Lady, at each and every meal.
=
I was sitting by her hospital bed one day when she said, “This must be awful boring for you.” I responded, “It ain’t boring, you’re my Sweetie”
=
Alzheimer's is the disease where the caretaker suffers more than the patient.
=
Sweetie's headstone tells the story of her life, it states:

“Now the Angels have a Role Model.”


Balanced
Your post was either sarcasm or one of the most ignorant posts I've ever read.

DU, Strawman Bull
DU, Basically your logic goes as follows: Since some people cannot live up to the marital standards they profess then we should get rid of the standards.

The definition of marriage is and always has been between a man and a woman. It is the basic and necessary building block of any healthy society. Gay marriage, like societal acceptance of easy divorce, co-habitation, abortion-on-demand, rampant promiscuity et al. will just further destroy our society.

DU, please take a walk around a neighborhood where marriage basically doesn't exist. Walk there alone at night. Ask yourself, "Do I feel safe? Do I want to live in a place like this? Where are all the fathers?"

Furthermore, not only is gay marriage detrimental to the institution itself, it is dangerous. It will normalize and promote very dangerous behavior - anal sododmy. Anal sodomy is the number one transmitter of AIDS/HIV in the U.S. I am sure you are familiar with the ravages of AIDS. Why would you want to promote behavior that leads to it? Why would you want to promote behavior that costs people their lives, jeopardizes the blood supply and costs society billions of dollars every year?

Don't fool yourself, "gay marriage" will not reduce homosexual promiscuity. The overwhelming majority of gay men have over 100 sexual partners in their lifetimes. Gay men are not constrained by nature's civilized regulators - women. Promoting and normalizing their behavior will only make things worse.

If you cannot abide by this logic then embrace your god of science. Homosexuality is a corruption of the human species' prime objective, to perpetuate itself. Not only does the behavior stemming from that corruption not produce offspring, it often kills its participants. Thus, because it is so harmful to our species I, according to the hard evidence of science (not emotion), cannot support the perversion of the marital relationship.

You can't argue with science DU.

Du,
The defense of marriage on the many fronts where the battle is fought is all one piece.

Marriage IS the permanent binding of man and woman.

Attacking any portion of the definition weakens and devalues the entire institution.

Easy divorce has attacked the permanence, both the trend towards "living together" without bothering to get married and the increasing tendency to wink at adultery have attacked the binding, and homosexual perverts have attacked the man and woman part.

If someone shoots me in the foot I will not shrug it off because they claim they will help strengthen my hands.

If someone chops off my hand I will not shrug it off because they claim they will help me to run faster.

If you want to defend marriage you must defend all of it. There is no good to be found in manning the cannons on some of a fort's walls while simultaneously undermining the foundations of the other walls.

mother of 4
On a previous thread, I didn't differ or disagree with you except on a few points regarding what marriage is for.
Specifically I differed where you use of the word 'pervert' is not a matter of law, nor definition of a SPECIFIC adult.

And know this: gay people don't differ from, nor can change the definition of legal marriage now. They have had to go by the SAME legal standards as hetero couples. I guess you don't know much about MA.

The point here is: LAWMAKERS who use their marriages and families as props for support in anti gay laws and incapacitating restrictions on the responsibilities that gay people have, are dangerous hypocrites.
They are interfering with the quality of life a gay person CAN provide, even as said politician cannot to their own.

And no, we can't be having that.
Why don't you accentuate what what we AGREE on? And notice that gay marriages DO agree with almost everything YOU do? At least the most important things, not the non existent ones.

qhoratius (formerly povidus),
ROFLOL!

First you threaten people who disagree with you than you complain about people trying to "control other peoples lives,"(sic) then you call *me* a liberal? Don't drink while posting, it makes you say stupid things.

Marriage is the most conservative of institutions.

And if you were to try to put threats into action know that you would be given 38 very special reasons to regret.

PS -- If you're married, does your spouse know that you think adultery is just fine?

Kathryn Lopez
You always up-lift!

Marriage, if it is anything, is about two becoming one flesh. All the Freudian emphasis our culture has adopted, with the cult of personality, aside.

Up until 'no-fault' (circa 1965) the law could and did stipulate.

It's been downhill since, to the point that 'single mother' is now a badge of honor and 'gay marriage' is on the horizon. With the swearing in of Cass Sunstein, can marriage to your dog be far behind?

Which is why Kathryn Lopoz up-lifts, literaly & figuratively. There is hope.

TO THE AUTHOR OF THIS ARTICLE
Perhaps you should've been listening to the actual address. Or were you the one Mr. Cantor was texting?

Here's the real problem with the right today. They're like a bunch of adolescents. Whining and yelling, and without substance. Pure conjecture that is based on an agenda other than serving the people of the USA.

What a shame.

Reply to MMaddox
The biggest problem in America today is the size and scope of the federal government. This is due to people seeing something they don't like, and saying the government ought to do something about it.

The religious right and the economic left are flip sides of the same coin. They are morally equivalent because their desire is to control others making them both un-American, dangerous, and worth fighting against.

Mother of 4
I shall deliver my advice to Greg to you: Do not be surprised if your nose gets cut off when you stick it where it does not belong.

Liberals like you and Greg want so bad to control other peoples lives. I do not understand why, but understanding won't help--fighting for liberty is the only recourse.

Personal Responsibility
required that I hold myself accountable for the commitment I made to honor marriage vows.

Many of the problems in America today exist because we ignored broken vows, contracts, and laws because liberals insisted there were excused for those who refused to be responsible for their actions. Each time an excuse is accepted we devolve further in chaos.

None of believes adultery should be treated as a crime but the offenders should feel a sense of failure and shame.

qhoratius (formerly povidus),
PS -- Do your creditors know that you don't consider vows, promises, and contracts binding?

qhoratius (formerly povidus),
When I got married I took my vows in public. Why wouldn't I expect the public to hold me accountable for keeping those vows?

Marriage is not a private agreement. Marriage is a social institution.

In fact, as carefully explained above, marriage is the very foundation of civilized society and thus society has considerable interest in advocating, defending, and supporting marriage and, as part of that support, in condemning those who are false to their vows.

We are never more than one generation from barbarism and every member of society has both the right and the duty to strengthen civilization both by behaving properly himself/herself AND by condemning anti-social (literally), behavior.

To deny that is to demonstrate a considerable degree of both selfishness and immaturity.

Reply to Greg
If you enjoy people insinuating themselves into your marriage and your family life uninvited, that obviously is your prerogative.

Most Americans embrace individualism and self-reliance and do not take too kindly to people poking noses into their businesses.

Don't be surprised if your nose gets cut off when you stick it where it does not belong.

Reply to Mother of 4
Do you want others implicating themselves into your marriage and your family without your invitation? This article seems to imply that this is okay.

The court system exists to enforce or remedy contracts. Though marriages are not technically contracts, family law exists to regulate the formulation or dissolution of marriages.

But the court system only gets involved when a party to a contract or a spouse petitions the court by filing a grievance.

My objection to this column is the implication that individuals ought to insinuate themselves into others' relationships without a petition. Nothing worse than a busybody.

Greg,
Thank you.

:-)

Mother of 4 . . .
BTW . . . I thought your posts were quite good.

(I'm really on your side . . . but don't tell quoratius!)

I guess I was just in a sort of infantile mood at the end of a Friday afternoon - I normally never respond to trolls.

:)

qhoratius is very wise . . .

Yes, just change the channel - to believe that society should have ANY moral standards at all would cause (as was impeccably argued) "harm" - and we certainly don't want any of that.

Hey, WAIT a minute!

What gives quoratius the right to tell us to 'mind our own business' or to 'change the channel,' anyway?

What gives him/her the right to tell ME what to do?!

I hate all this self-righteous Puritanism.

qhoratius (formerly povidus),
Do you believe that same principle should apply to ALL forms of contract violations?

That it should be A-OK for people to tell a bank that the car loan is just not working so they'll just keep the car and stop making payments -- and that society should show no disapproval whatsoever?

That it should be A-OK for a company to tell customers that the extended warranty they paid for just isn't working so they aren't going to make the repairs that the contract said they would -- and that society should show no disapproval whatsoever?

That it should be just fine for a contractor to tell a homeowner that putting in hardwood floor just wasn't working so they tossed the hardwood the homeowner had already paid for and put in sheet vinyl instead -- and that society should show no disapproval whatsoever?

Or is it only the most profound commitment one person can make to another that should be free from all contract enforcement and all social disapproval when that commitment is violated?

All well and good, but
Ms. Lopez asks: "Or will we forever hold our peace in the face of blatant offenses to all that we should hold dear?"

Yes, forever hold your peace. The internal workings of others' marriages and relationships is none of your business. If others commit adultery, it is none of your business. If you don't like the commercials on MSNBC, change the channel. If you don't like the news stories on ABCNews.com, go to a different website.

Nosy do-gooders cause more harm than good. Please mind your own business.

I agree
This kind of advertising is something that I wouldn't want in any thing that I published with my name on it. I'd be embarassed, but I guess (with a lot of blame going to Clinton) a lot of people don't care anymore. Adulterers cause a lot of harm. They bring STDs to marriage, they break up families and make it more difficult to raise children, the children are scarred and less likely to have a successful marriage. Adulterers should be ashamed and people should let it be known they don't approve.

As far as politicians who commit adultery, how can citizens trust them if their spouse cannot?

Perhaps we should go back and put a scarlet A on them.

What is Marriage For? Cont.
...
6. Marriage provides for the orderly transmission of both wealth and culture from one generation to the next. The first through financial support AND education while the parents live and through the inheritance of property after the parents die. The second because despite the efforts of government schools and tax policies that often force mothers into full-time jobs children still learn their values at home.

A child raised by his/her married, biological parents is better off by every measure of success than a child raised in any other living arrangement.

Marriage is not for "two adults in a loving relationship". Marriage is bigger and grander and more ambitious. Marriage is for nothing less than the perpetuation of human civilization.

And the social pathologies that accompany family breakdown -- whether this involves never marrying at all or uncommitted marriages resulting in serial polygamy via too-easy divorce -- prove that we need to recapture the proper understanding of marriage if the US is going to survive in any recognizable form.

What is Marriage For? Cont.
...
4. Marriage ensures mutual support through the difficulties of life and the vicissitudes of fortune. Families and extended families assist each other in a myriad of ways that no other community, however well-intended, can duplicate. Friends may have other obligations. Neighbors may not even know each other. But couples, siblings, cousins, and even in-laws are there for each other because that's how families are.

5. Marriage provides beneficial connections to extended family groups. Few things are rarer and more remarkable than for a mere friend or acquaintance, much less a stranger, to help a young couple with the down payment for a house or a car or to provide other financial support to help set a new adult on his/her own feet. Few things could be more commonplace than for family members to do so.

Many people gain their first, valuable work experience that sets them on a lifetime of productive employment in a family member's business. They might not have taken a chance on a completely inexperienced stranger, but since its a nephew, a cousin, or your sister-in-law's sister-in-law the connection makes a difference. The old saying is true -- you don't just marry your spouse, you marry the family.

So we need to recognize that the formation of these social bonds and connections -- things far removed from mere adult companionship -- is part of what marriage is for. Indeed, in many societies, these literal or figurative tribal connections are more critical for the ordering of society than local, regional, or even national politics.
...

What is Marriage For?
The question to ask, in order to provide a solid foundation to all arguments about marriage is this:

What is marriage for?

Is it for adult companionship, pleasure, and convenience? If so, then what we have now -- marriage as a purely optional possibility, lightly entered into, lightly gotten out of, completely divorced from childbearing, and extending as a "right" to any number and/or combination of consenting adults -- is the inevitable result.

If the current situation is not desirable then marriage must have some other purpose than merely as a pleasant possibility to facilitate companionship among adults.

In the traditional understanding of marriage, as practiced by every society humanity has ever produced, marriage is much more -- it is a formal, permantent, legal (and often, but not necessarily, religious), bond between male and female that serves multiple functions.

1. Marriage obligates both biological parents to participate in raising their offspring. This drastically reduces the number of children thrown onto the community to be supported via taxes.

2. Marriage obligates sexual fidelity -- harnessing biological drives and channeling them to productive rather than destructive purposes. This drives down rates of both sexually transmitted disease and the depression and other mental problems which plague the promiscuous as they continually form, destroy, and re-form relationship bonds.

3. As a corollary, by assuring that each child's parentage is known marriage improves the next generation's ability to find suitable, un-related mates and the raising of blood-siblings in the same household makes incestuous attraction unlikely. This is biologically healthy for the human species.
...

I have seen
people terribly hurt by adultery and by divorce. Their pain just keeps coming. It is so sad.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.