validating Adam and Steve being hitched. Well guess what. That same "church" which doesn't exactly encourage its congregation to study their Bibles (oh, big red flag right there) will not honor the marriage of Ronald and Shirley either, because one of the individuals had gone through a divorce some years back. Yea, there is the annulment process - and what a proce$$ indeed. It's not just the initial $500-some involved, it's the paperwork, and alot of stirring up old memories which (extended) family members may not care to recall. And after all that - and some more money thrown in (to add to the pretty hat collection?) - there's no guarantee the annulment will go through. Which raises another key question: if, after a year or two - or three - the process does go through, where does that put the (now an adult) child of the previous marriage? If the marriage is annulled, then the child conceived during that marriage ... isn't having grown up in a broken home damage enough?
Go back a mere fifty years, and only the wealthy could get annulments; the process was longer, with even less of a guarantee that it would go through. So alot of couples just stayed together, or moved on ... or moved in a "companion."
At the church i go to, there was a Mennonite man who had also attended - he goes to another church now, because he can no longer drive to ours. But anyway, Mennonites don't have annulments. They believe one spouse for life, and the only people who can remarry are widows and widowers. That protestant sect is not alone in their no-annulments no-exceptions policy. By the way, the same no-exceptions sects are also very works-oriented - ya know, if you chew green bubble-gum and drink orange soda on Sundays, you're so worldly and probably not even saved; and frankly, like the Catholics, you really don't know, from one minute to the next, where you will spend eternity. Kinda new-agey in a way, where you end up, it'sbasically up to Captain You.
Godda set sail for work.
No comments:
Post a Comment