Divorce--moral & ethical perspectives

I can understand the sacredness of virginity. I can't understand how a guy marries a girl, sleeps with her and then says she isn't a virgin so the parents bring over the proof of virginity? Very confusing.

 

Insanity, I don't care how ancient the civilization is.

 

The best I can make of this, after looking at the entire chapter to put the verse in context, is that this is a symbolic & prophetic discussion about the nation of Israel & the coming Messiah.

Israel is the mother, a symbolic wife of God, whom he has "divorced" for for the people's transgressions/sins. Interesting to note that the people's transgressions as a whole are equated with "adultery," or unfaithfulness to God.

I'd like to have someone better versed in the bible, & in this section of it particularly, make some comments.

 

Remember this was a different time - back then there was "proof" - over course of time those myths has been dispelled of course, for the reasons you stated.

"Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives."

Why the heck would I want someone who "has given an Israelite virgin a bad name" continue to remain married to the man? "I don't believe your daughter is a virgin, she must be a harlot." "Here is proof of her virginity!" "Oh, my bad."

If it is taking literally "display the cloth before the elders of the town" I'm going to guess they are expecting to see a lot of bleeding for her first time. That's the only visual proof I can imagine being displayed on a cloth.

A long time ago I watched a report on couples who wanted to get married in a certain state had to go through counseling of sorts and sign a legally binding type of 'no divorce' clause - meaning they couldn't divorce all willy nilly, they had to go through certain steps such as marriage counseling and try to repair their relationship before divorce was even an option. They could still divorce, but it was made to be more difficult to do so. Of course there were some provisions for things such as rape/abuse.

The sad truth is, it is quite simple for most Americans to get a divorce, it isn't as taboo as it was in the past. Pre-nuptials are meant to protect the person(s) assets. Yes, it does give the vibe of "if one day down the road we split, I keep my stuff and you keep yours". However many marriages take place and not all are because of "love". Some people are looking for sugar mamma's and sugar daddy's.

"Do we take marriage less seriously as a moral commitment than we used to? Do we find it too easy to justify divorce?"

I believe the answers are: Yes and yes.

However there are other factors that perhaps should be looked into.

Marriage is supposed to last a 'lifetime' - life spans certainly have gotten longer since the concept of marriage was introduced. So many things have changed with time.

We no longer (well, some do) live in small tight knit communities where everyone in town knows everyone else and get married at 13 and live to the ripe old age of 27.

Marriages were arranged in some societies, and some were "deals" between the men of the land.

Temptations have increased as society & technology develops.

How many people marry their first love? How many are still married to those first loves? How many people loved someone who didn't return those same feelings? Have you been in love? Fallen out of love? Fallen in love with someone else?

I'm not expecting answers, just questions to think about.

 

Thanks for the post! You've made several excellent points.

Part of my inability to accept the bible as totally divinely inspired includes that issue about proving a woman's virginity. It's reasonable to expect that some ancient cultures might believe there's a valid proof of that. But to me, it's unreasonable to believe that an omniscient god would want such claptrap included in his "divine revelation."

While I agree that, unfortunately, many of us take marriage less seriously as a moral commitment & find it too easy to justify divorce, I definitely would not want to return to older legal situations in which there must be some legal guilt assigned in order to obtain a divorce. Nor would I want being divorced to be the horrible social stigma it once was. I like keeping the civil/legal stuff as separate as possible from personal moral & religious views, allowing people to live by their own values without government interference. If individual churches wish to ostracize members or kick them out based on such things, that's their business. I'd like to keep that separate from the society as a whole, though.

Your point about our lifespans being much longer than they used to be is a very important one! We DO live a lot longer than we used to. Change in life is inevitable. The only question is what direction it will take. Perhaps it is unreasonable in modern times & modern societies to expect the majority of couples to remain together for life.

Temptations being increased with advances in society & technology--that's something I hadn't considered in exactly those terms before. People's lives used to be much more limited & sheltered. There was much less to interfere with the relationship between 2 people--whether those are "temptations" or just interference or interruptions of some kind.

 

I've wanted to explore religious views on marriage & divorce that are less familiar to me than the predominant Judeo-Christian views in this culture & my own pagan views. This weekend I looked for information on the Hindu perspective. Hinduism is the 3rd largest religion in the world, after Christianity & Islam.

I looked at several websites, & found this one to be the most clear in its explanations:

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_divorce.asp

Quoting from the website above: "Hindu civil code permits divorce on certain grounds. But the religion itself does not approve divorce, because the concept is alien to Hinduism. According to the tenets of Hinduism, marriage is a sacred relationship, a divine covenant and a sacrament. Marriage is meant for procreation and continuation of family lineage, not for sexual pleasure. It is an obligatory duty, part of Hindu dharma . . ."

Note: DHARMA in general terms refers to natural or divine law; & in more specific terms is the right way of living, the rules of righteousness.

 

The Pagan View

Paganism is a very individualistic path. Pagans have no hierarchy, no central leadership, no dogma--just a lot of widely varied traditions with various cultural origins. So any generalizations I make here are bound to have exceptions. But generally speaking, regarding marriage & divorce:

Pagans can choose to be handfasted, married, or both. Couples can, & generally do, outline the details of what exactly they're agreeing to individually. They can & do choose the time limit of their agreement. Couples may be heterosexual or homosexual. Groups of more than two may choose to be bonded in this way, to essentially become a family.

A traditional term for a handfasting is a year, or "a year & a day." This may be a trial period before a more traditional Western marriage, or it may be something the couple chooses to renew at 1-year intervals.

There is also a tradition known as a "handparting," more or less equivalent to a divorce. Neither a handfasting nor a handparting is recognized legally. The couple's legal relationship is not necessarily the same as their spiritual one.

From Paganism: An Introduction to Earth-Centered Religions by Joyce & River Higginbotham:

"The purpose of a handparting ritual is to mark the end of a relationship . . . and to help those involved say goodbye and let go. It provides ritual space in which to heal, forgive, and to grieve . . . A handparting openly acknowledges the personal season of letting go, and can occur with all parties present, or with only some. It may be done publicly, or as a private goodbye with a few close friends."

All of life is circular in the pagan view: birth, growth, adulthood, parenthood, aging, death, & rebirth. Partings are seen as just another part of the natural cycle of life to pagans.

In my experience, pagans take their relationships & their promises just as seriously as any other people do. They don't tend to fly in & out of relationships any more often that our society as a whole.

 

you found Dollface while travel across the country, didnt U?

 

i love the fact that 1 year and 9 months after me and my exwife were divorced, she was remarried in the same church by the same pastor...wonder what the hell god was looking down and thinking???

 

"Today, in most states, it's easier to get a divorce than to get an automatic transmission repaired properly." --Dave Barry

Of course we (as a society) do. In fact, I believe "commitment" has become one of the most distasteful words in America. Everything about us -- our history, our culture, even our system of government works against any kind of long term commitment. If we don't like it, we change it. Period. There's little cultural incentive to make something work if we grow tired of it. When the societal taboo of divorce faded, the motivation to work out problems faded with it. And because we are a democracy, we empowered our elected government (over time) to make divorce as painless as possible.

I mean seriously -- what's out there to motivate couples to stay together? To make the tough choice of putting their marriage before their own interests, and to keep on making that choice over and over again? Not even the presence of children has that kind of influence anymore.

I think it takes a voluntary allegiance to something bigger than ourselves to keep that motivation strong. I feel pretty confident in saying that I'd almost certainly be divorced right now if my wife and I weren't committed Christians.