Navigation: This page 'marriage.html' ---> Main Page (Xn) ---> Author. Contact. About Page.

IN DEFENCE OF MARRIAGE

Marriage - as a well-considered public declaration of life-long loyalty to the other, and as the state accepted by society in which sexual union and child rearing can occur - has many advantages over the alternatives that seem to be assumed as acceptable today. We do not need to engage in a 'preachy morality'; we can employ logic and reason.

Protection: Marriage Ensures the Impoverished are not Disadvantaged

Suppose there is no marriage, no loyalty. Then all people are 'fair game'. Those who are 'rich' in charm, eloquence, sexuality, looks, etc. will be able to 'win' partners more easily. In fact they will be able to steal (or 'win') other people's partners. They will gradually have more and more partners, while those who are deficient in charm, eloquence, sexuality, looks, etc. will lose out. It will also mean that those with access to wealth will have an advantage over those who do not.

Marriage ensures that even those who are poorest in charm, eloquence, sexuality, looks, etc. will have the opportunity to intimate, sexual, supportive, loving, partnership and the ability to bear children. And to have this opportunity without fear that some better endowed person will come along and deprive them of it.

Marriage Defines Best the Boundary for Valid Sexual Activity

The concept of marriage as the proper context for sexual relations provides a clear definition of who can 'have sex' and with whom they can have it. And the definition is not arbitrary.

But when society assumes that anyone can, in principle, 'have sex' with anyone, then we find problems in defining who can have sex with whom.

But marriage provides a much better definition.

LAST WORDS

We might ponder Guy Brandon's words:

"The media continually takes the line that romance is indispensable
and sex vital to personal fulfilment.
Sex is seen as a safe, low-consequence activity engaged in by just about everyone
- except,oddly, within the context of lasting marriage,
where it can often represent stagnation and freedom-curtailing responsibility.

"In the real world, meanwhile,
friendship runs the risk of being demoted
- still important, perhaps, but a second-best option
without the prospect of upgrading to romance.

"Rootlessness and mobility have encouraged the expectation
that our partners should fulfil the role of every other kind of relationship,
and the same is true in reverse as
friendships have become increasingly sexualised."

Guy Brandon, Spring 2007, Engage, Cambridge, UK: The Jubilee Centre

Almost the whole of the aristocracy of the world - the rich world, including most Westerners - loves to glorify and justify adultery and unfaithfulness, turning a blind eye to the misery that results for many others.

And almost the whole of the artistry of the world - the media, novelists, playwrights, painters, composers - loves to excuse and gratify them. Why cannot this artistry be put at the service of faithfulness? Why cannot it show the glories of faithful, married life? There are many reasons, but Simone Weil has perhaps found one.


This page is offered to God as on-going work. Comments, queries welcome.

Copyright (c) Andrew Basden 2009. But you may use this material subject to certain conditions.

Part of his www.abxn.org pages, that open up discussion and exploration from a Christian ('xn') perspective. Written on the Amiga with Protext. Number of visitors to these pages: Counter.

Created: ?. Last updated: 7 February 2001 email. 19 November 2006 Terry Grange; unet. 18 April 2007 sex, marriage, friendship. 19 February 2011 aristocracy and artistry at end; link to Weil.