ProWomanProLife

So this is what marriage is coming to?

Americans are taking a cautious approach to marriage and are seeking more prenuptial agreements before walking down the aisle.

[. . .]

More women and middle-class couples are opting for prenups, which can also include adultery clauses, protection of retirement benefits and even custody of the dog, according to the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML), which represents more than 1600 lawyers.

“It’s a planning tool. Given that half of marriages end in divorce it makes sense to plan,” said Marlene Eskind Moses, the president of the AAML.

Sure, I can understand that a pre-nup makes sense from a legal standpoint, but from a relational standpoint? I don’t think beginning your marriage with, “Hey, I love you but I don’t think I can ever fully trust you” is a good way to start.

It’s also worth pointing out that the “half of marriages end in divorce” statement isn’t true. No wonder they’re so cynical, they’re getting bad facts. Not that it should matter, everybody else’s divorce rate holds no bearing on your own marriage.

And now these pre-nups include requirements for date nights, nights per week a spouse can go out without the other, and who gets the puppies if their dog gives birth (somebody please tell me when a divorce is really going to coincide with a litter of puppies being born?). Sounds like a recipe for a legalistic marriage if it’s just full of rules as to who can do what and when.

But I’m a traditional girl, my vows included, “I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honour you all the days of my life . . . to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poor, in sickness and in health, until death do us part.” If that’s not good enough for people, then I don’t know what is!

That’s the sort of thing they should be up in arms about, right?

LONDON — A leading Muslim cleric has sparked controversy in Britain by claiming that it is impossible for men to rape their wives.

Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, who is president of the Islamic Sharia Council, told a website that “sex is part of marriage” and suggested that husbands who commit such acts should not be prosecuted.

“Clearly there cannot be any rape within the marriage,” he told The Samosa website. “Maybe aggression, maybe indecent activity… Because when they got married, the understanding was that sexual intercourse was part of the marriage, so there cannot be anything against sex in marriage. Of course, if it happened without her desire, that is no good, that is not desirable.”

One week today there’s a conference in Ottawa for married folks put on by the folks at the Neeje Association for Women and Family. I hear good things about the speaker. I also hear that most married people long for better communication. So here’s the info:  

In an era of social networking, what about communication in marriage?

Friday, October 22, Ben Franklin Place (101 Centrepointe) 7:30 p.m.

Tickets www.neeje.ca
$25/person $40/couple free refreshments and parking

_____________________

Véronique adds: I also hear that I am on the organizing committee. Tickets anyone?

Forgive me for ruining the week’s feel-good story. But this guy needs a serious kick in the pants.

First of all: who on earth is paying these researchers and why are they wasting their money on them?

Second: I knew their conclusion already. Why can’t someone pay me to tell everybody? I probably offer way better rates. Just sayin’ . . .

While the article is kind of all over the place (including defining love — at one moment it’s a flimsy emotion and paragraphs later it’s actually commitment and putting your partner above yourself? Make up your mind! Personally, I was raised with the latter definition, which is what works:

Lasting marriages combine commitment, passion: Researchers

Interesting advice:

A priest offers advice on which men not to marry.

Good grief:

Thousands of women demonstrated outside parliament Sunday to oppose legislation banning the marriage of girls under 17. The protesters held up banners proclaiming “don’t ban what Allah made permissible,” or “stop violating Islamic sharia law in the name of rights and freedoms.” Proposed amendments to the civil status law stalled in parliament last August after severe opposition to a government proposal that would ban girls under 17 and males under 18 from marrying. Child marriages are common, especially in rural areas, where girls as young as eight have been married off.

________________________

Véronique adds: Don’t move to Yemen. That being said, you’re safe Brigitte. Being already married. And just over 17.

A poll of Canadian values presented at the Manning Centre conference did surprise me, but here you go, these are the results:

On moral issues, Canadians are more socially conservative than most of us would be led to believe. 89% of respondents strongly agreed with the statement “nothing is more important than family.” 67% strongly agreed that, by definition, “marriage is between a man and a woman.” And 60% strongly agree that abortion is morally wrong.

At the same time, only 31% feel government should play a major role regulating individual behaviour and morality, and there is a pretty even split (46%:50%) on the role of government in preserving the moral fabric of society.

After everything was over at the conference, I went out with a family friend. I told him about the poll. He scoffed and immediately, and much to my embarrassment, took a poll of one by asking the waiter if he agreed that marriage should be between one man and one woman. To which the waiter replied, “No (pause) and if I did I wouldn’t tell you.”

But perhaps he would tell a pollster anonymously? Anyway, interesting results.

Ha:

Historically, marriage was the surest route to financial security for women. Nowadays it’s men who are increasingly getting the biggest economic boost from tying the knot, according to a new analysis of census data.

[...]

In 1970, according to the report, 28 percent of wives in this age range had husbands who were better educated than they were, outnumbering the 20 percent whose husbands had less education. By 2007, these patterns had reversed — 19 percent of wives had husbands with more education, compared with 28 percent whose husbands had less education.In the remaining couples — about half in 1970 and 2007 — spouses had similar education levels.

Only 4 percent of husbands had wives who earned more than they did in 1970, compared with 22 percent in 2007.