Liberals are testing the waters again. Like what they did with the Reproductive Health Law as they pushed for its passage. We prolifers cautioned then, again and again ad nauseam: The enactment of the RH Law will usher in more antifamily bills like the one we’re seeing now—on divorce.
And divorce advocates have managed to drown out the sound of reason in demagoguery. Yet, there’s more to marriage than just two folks agreeing to sign a piece of paper. Mom and Dad are there not only to become biological parents; they are their children’s primary protectors, educators and moral shepherds, whose guiding hands the children need to grow into productive citizens contributing to the good of society.
The family is the building block of society. Needless to say, a stable family makes for a stable society. To ensure the stability of the family, Mom and Dad’s marriage needs to be stable, even permanent. Children grow up best in this stable environment where Mom and Dad work together to build the family in love. Here we see that society benefits from this permanence of marriage and that marriage is something intrinsically good for society.
On the other hand, nothing is intrinsically good in divorce. It only seeks to separate the couple, a dumping of their marital vow. It destroys the family. Studies show that divorce has profound and lasting effects on the divorced couple’s children.
Divorce proponents say that a divorce law will prevent husbands from physically and emotionally abusing their wives. This is wrong on two counts: First, abuse does not primarily come from husbands. Many husbands are in fact victims of abuse, but will not come out publicly to admit it. Secondly, regardless of who does the abuse, divorce will not prevent it; it will only grant the victim a way out of the marriage.
True, couples go through difficult times during their marriage, but this should not mean they should foresake their wedding vow: “For better or worse, in sickness and in health, till death do us part”—this is a promise to stick it out with each other and with the family they will build, until the end.
If we allow divorce, every couple growing through trial and tribulation will most likely choose the easier way: Divorce. Who then will be there long enough to build a solid family?
Instead of divorce, why don’t we strengthen the marriage institution? Learning to be a good husband and wife and learning how to be even greater parents do take years. We therefore should support all efforts by both the Church and the government to come up with tangible measures in order to strengthen the family.
A lot should also be done to prepare those who seek marriage, so they do not wed unprepared for the realities of married life.
What has marriage and the family contributed to society? On the other hand, what has divorce contributed to society? Which is more logical: To destroy and separate, or to strengthen and rebuild?
Let us fortify the family instead of destroying it.
—ANTHONY PEREZ, ajuperez@gmail.com