Blog 3
Recently, a friend sent me an interview with the gentleman who proposed a bill to ban divorce in California. I think it is brilliant. It is a direct response to last year’s Prop 8, in which Californians overturned the Supreme Court’s decision to allow marriage between same sex couples. John Marcotte, the petitioner, has proposed a ballot initiative that allows voters to bypass the state legislationand vote yes or no to restore traditional marriage and ban divorce.
This is an interesting way to address both hypocrisy and encourage people to think about their rights and privileges in a state where the divorce rate is calculated as high as 75%. John states in the interview that, like the voters who opposed same sex marriage, it is not about taking rights away. Instead, it is simply about protecting marriage. He uses much of the language of Prop 8. People will either have to support Prop 10 to ban divorce, or admit that they are hypocrites who are not actually interested in protecting traditional marriage.
Marriage is an agreement with the state, which is why state legislation governs it. Most major religions promote it as a sacred union between a man, a woman, and God, but it is about one person saying that they will support another person for life. It is, traditionally, about creating dependency and ownership, one person above another. A contract is signed, which is filed with the government. Tax benefits are granted for signing that contract. If things do not work out, that contract can be dissolved in a court of law. How can that be possible, if it is a sacred union involving God? Yet, the sacred union argument is the one that is used most against same sex marriage.
Most people do not think of the ability to get married as a privilege. They also do not think of divorce as a privilege. Prop 10 demands that this thinking change.
