freedomofreligion.myfreeforum.org

Smokey Stover · Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:21 pm Post subject: Until death do us part!

So cleave together Until death do you part.

I hope no one is going to take this personally, but I have seen, both on the Web and in "real life" (whatever that is), a fair number of complaints that the other party to a marriage has violated the oath that he swore, to love, honor and cherish until the heavens shall fall--or some such.

There’s a question here. What is it that we think makes valid an oath, a pledge, a promise, a vow, somethng sworn? Historically wedding vows are far from the first kind of vow to appear. Whatever may have been the procedure for getting married in pre-historic times, wedding ceremonies in historic times are a late-comer. But let’s start with them as an example.

What makes the wedding vow “sacred,” as I have seen it described. Perhaps because it is often made in a church ceremony? But how many of those joined in “holy” matrimony actually believe God will punish them if they go back on their promise? How many think punishment of any kind awaits those who violate their vows?

And if you don’t fear punishment, what motive do you have for NOT violating your vow? That’s an easy one. Marriage holds more for you than not-marriage, and marriage to this particular party is better than what happens if you dump him or her, or miss out on his/her company.

Let’s say your spouse left you inthe lurch. What makes you mad (if anything)? That your partner violated a vow? Or that he dumped you?

So how important to you are the vows that YOU have taken? Can you imagine a situation in which YOU might wish to dump your partner? Perhaps you have been tempted, or have been invited to participate in what you regard as a violation of some kind, but didn’t yield to temptation. Why not? Was it fear of punishment for vow-breakage? Or was it fear of something else, like ending up worse off than before, or finding yourself the object of endless criticism by friends and family?

Two of the memorable events of my childhood were (1) learning, and saying, the Pledge of Allegiance, and (2) learning and saying the Scout Oath. I enjoyed the Pledge of Allegiance, as it was performed in those days. My Dad was very patriotic, and I was happy to be a chip off the old block. I cheerfully pledged Allegiance, and faithfully placed my hand over my heart when the flag passed by, as it often did in those days. But there was something else. The Pledge was then poetry, four lines of iambic tetrameter, the easiest meter to learn and say. It went this way (I’m separating the feet at the accented syllable, so it looks like trochaic tetrameter, but that really doesn’t matter.)

I \ pledge al- \ legiance \ to the \ flag,
And \ to the Re- \ public for \ which it \ stands:.
\ One \ nation, \ Indi- \ visible,
With \ liberty and \ justice for \ all. (\)

In English poetry, the accents and regular timing of the feet are more important than the number of syllables. If this were classical poetry we might say that the first full foot of line 2 is a dactyl, the first foot of line 3 is a spondee, and there are other irregularities. The final line of the strophe ends with a silent foot, which often occurs in English poetry.

The point is, this was easy to say and involved no controversial questions of religion. If we add “under God,” we destroy both the poetry and the purity. We throw away the prosody and invite controversy. We also invite contempt for the pledge as a pledge. If the flag is going by, and people are saying “under God,” I can no longer put my hand to my heart and go along. If I go along I’m ratifying someone else’s sneer at me and my worthiness.

The Scout Oath goes, to the best of my recall, “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my Country, / To obey the Scout Law, / And to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” (I shan't recite here the Scout Law, but I've never forgotten it, and can recite it at will.)

I had no quarrel then (at the age of 11) and I have no quarrel with it now. Lord Baden-Powell had a view of the world that was largely free of today’s cynicism, but there is no doubt that he meant the Boy Scouts to be a secular organization, an organization to benefit boys, not to render homage to God, or perhaps I should say, a “Mormon” God.

When the Mormons got hold of the BSA by what amounts to extortion, suddenly the organization became a bulwark against homosexuality and atheism. It became a religious organization, not a secular one. I can still recite the Scout Oath without hypocrisy, but only in a context entirely separate from the modern organization.

On the other hand, the Scout Oath represents, in essence, my own view of duty and responsibililty, and the punishment for violating it is lowered self-esteem. Lord Baden-Powell does not have to jump out of the closet wagging his finger to make the Oath valid.

When Richard I (“the Lion-Hearted”) left England to sojourn abroad on his Crusade, he left his brother John in charge–bad King John, if you believe the Robin Hood stories (even though he was a better king than Richard). Naturally Richard’s vassal lords, the earls, barons and knights of the realm, had to swear fealty to the new king. Fealty indeed! They made King John sign the Magna Carta, the Great Charter, which is thought of as a milestone in the devolution of absolute royal power. Actually, the fact that King John signed shows the weakness of oaths in general. John could not enforce the oath, and the barons were left to ask: “What’s in it for me?”

Another example of an oath that turns out to have the opposite effect is the loyalty oath, widely required in the McCarthy era, even in colleges–or perhaps especially in colleges and universities. The most educated stratum of society so reviled these oaths, that you could say that the idea of loyalty as a patriotic duty took a heavy hit. In an unrelated context, E.M. Forster quoted a well-known English publisher (whose name I forget) who said something like: “Thank God I never allowed myself to be influenced by love of country.” I had to ponder that awhile to figure out what he meant. Perhaps it was a version of the famous saying, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

So, let’s return to our married couples. What keeps them together? A vow? A promise? An oath? If you swear in court, and turn out to be telling lies, the punishment can be severe. What punishment awaits you when you say, “Tried it, didn’t like it,” and then dump your unhappy bride? So be prudent when you marry, boys and girls, because promises don’t come with a warranty. Find someone who will stick with you because he or she wants to, because a promise is just a feather in the wind.
_________________
According to Smokey,
Circumstances alter cases.

DurhamDawg · Sliver STAR Joined: 08 May 2006 Posts: 225

good topic, Smokey.

For me, a marriage vow doesn't mean you'll put up with anything and everything out of your spouse, forever. There are limits. No one should be expected to endure abuse, mistreatment, dishonesty, rampant irresponsibility, unaddressed and out-of-control addictions, and stuff like that. Love has its limits. If a partner is engaging in hurtful and destructive behavior and doesn't see it or won't work on stopping it, it's time to cut one's losses and move on.

For me, besides the loss of the companionship of my lover, what I'd fear by breaking such a vow would be not any type of punishment from an outside force, but rather from within -- the loss of my own integrity, which to me is about the most important thing a person can possess. If you don't have that, you don't have much of anything in my view.

If someone wants out of a marriage, there are responsible and irresponsible ways to go about it. Irresponsible would be things like lying, having affairs, being so abusive that the other person wants to leave, etc. Responsible would be to simply tell one's partner, "this isn't working out," or "I can't be in this marriage any longer" or "I'm no longer happy in this marriage." Of course, if one feels there's a chance of improving things, counseling is always an option too. There are compassionate and not-so-compassionate ways of handling these types of situations. Awareness of one's own feelings is very important. I think often, folks are in denial of their own feelings, and so they act out by doing things like having affairs while trying to stay married, rather than facing the truth about how they feel.

Also, marriage means different things to different people. Not everyone regards it as sacred (I sure don't). Not everyone sees it as a promise of lifelong fidelity. It's important to be clear with your partner about what it means for each of you so there's no misunderstanding.
_________________
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." - Mark Twain

ReasoningFilly · Bronze Star Joined: 03 Feb 2007 Posts: 178

Find someone who will stick with you because he or she wants to[b]

Wonderful thread Smokey!!! I copied and pasted the above, because it seemed to jump right out at me!

I've been married more than twice, and so has my husband. I will admit, that when I married the first time, I was young and quite immature. Looking back, even with all the pain that came from divorces, cheating, etc., I truly wasn't 'in' love. I was simply infatuated with being married.

I've made tons of mistakes in my life. I'm coming to the realization that, perhaps it wasn't really 'mistakes', but instead, stepping stones of growth. Heck, I most likely ran my exes off with my actions, expectations, judgemental ways, etc. I know for a fact that I wasn't perfect during any of it.

As time went on, and I had a career, I realized that I needed to focus on me. Selfish as it may have sounded to me, it's what I felt I needed to do. I went through the entire gammet of saying I didn't need a man to fulfill my life. I didn't need anyone.

The truth, for me, came when I learned to love myself. To admit that I was at just as much fault with any negatives that had occured, as the person I was with.

Then, I began dating my now husband. Things were very different this time. I realized that I had choices. I could decide if, in fact, I wanted what he had to offer. I also realized that HE had the same choices.

Respect is probably the most important thing I learned. Respect, not only for him, but for myself as well.

Yes, we made our vows, however, we both feel that this time, we knew what we were doing...what we were getting into.

Pride is gone this time. Demanding ways are gone. Expectations are gone. We simply realize that THIS TIME is OUR time.

My husband is the only person that I've ever wanted to spend every breathing moment with...yet, at the same time, we both understand that freedom and space is a healthy formula.

I don't know if I've made sense here or not. I'm just trying to put into words what I've gone through.

ReasoningFilly · Bronze Star Joined: 03 Feb 2007 Posts: 178

Sorry for all the bold in my post up there. As you can see, I don't know how to use all the functions here! LOL

DurhamDawg · Sliver STAR Joined: 08 May 2006 Posts: 225

I just wanna say that I'm really glad to see this board start to come to life again!!!! Thanks, y'all!
_________________
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." - Mark Twain

ReasoningFilly · Bronze Star Joined: 03 Feb 2007 Posts: 178

I'm happy to see this board back as well!

It just 'feels' right here, doesn't it?

quiscalus · Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:26 am Post subject:

Great topic, smokey.

I've no doubt that there are many people who, whether they wish to admit it or not, marry because they believe they are supposed to. And they have children because they are supposed to. There is still great pressure, in our society, to do both. Often there's not much thought behind marriage or child-bearing. I can even use the "Pledge of Allegiance" as an example, in a different way than you did. How many of us learned the Pledge without its meaning being explained to us? You were supposed to say it...just as you're supposed to marry and procreate.

On a personal level, and as someone who has also been married twice (my first husand passed), that marriage license, for me, was my way of telling my spouses, "Through thick and thin, I've got your back. This is now a partnership, and as long as you respect me, I will be there for you no matter what."

Would my attitude be any different were we living together without the benefit of the paper? No. But the "benefit" of the paper is that, should something happen to me, my husband, who is mentally ill, will get my work benefits, and I sleep better at night knowing that.

I don't think this really answered Smokey's questions, but it's the best I can do now on my work computer, which for some reason hates message boards. It took me over a half-hour just to type this. Brutal!
_________________
"I know not all that may be coming, but be it what it will, I'll go to it laughing." -- Melville

DurhamDawg · Sliver STAR Joined: 08 May 2006 Posts: 225

I don't say the pledge of allegiance anymore, because I don't believe in it. I don't like the god part especially, but I don't care for the rest of it either. The whole idea rubs me the wrong way. I don't stand up for it or put my hand on my heart either. All BS if you ask me. I love my country and what it stands for, and I'm patriotic -- and that's exactly why I won't recite some meaningless oath to a piece of cloth. I express my love of country by voting and being politically active.
_________________
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." - Mark Twain

quiscalus · Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:45 am Post subject:

ReasoningFilly · Bronze Star Joined: 03 Feb 2007 Posts: 178