What is the purpose of a life-time partner?

I meant to avoid the terms 'husband', 'wife' and 'marriage'. But I guess the phrasing I chose begs another question: is a partner for life?

I am going to spend some time looking for ways to get this blog noticed, I would really like some dialogue on these questions.

I am not however looking for pat answers. Procreation as the sole, or even primary purpose of marriage is a load of hooey. Only the most extreme fundamentalists would even suggest barring a barren woman or sterile man from marriage. In fact there seems to be scriptural support that the commitment of a husband or wife to their partner supercedes their commitment to their children. Makes you think about staying together "for the children" doesn't it? (I for one don't think it helps kids to grow up in a household with parents who are not demonstrating how to love an intimate partner.)

Lovemaking is often stated as the "next" purpose of marriage. That makes a lot of sense if you think about all those kids who got married young because they couldn't wait any longer to have sex. What does that mean now that so many people are having sex before marriage? What if one partner is not able to participate fully in sexual intercourse - maybe a parapalegic?

And what about adultery? Hopefully, any readers of this blog are past the thought of stoning an adulterer / adulteress to death! Although the story about the adulteress in the Gospel is one of my favourites - historians have demonstrated that it was added to the bible sometime around the time of the Battle of Hastings (1066). That said, I think whoever thought up that beautiful story was onto something. (The fact that it did not happen makes me wonder all the more what Jesus was supposed to have been writing in the sand. I understand some people believe he was writing the names of each of the townspeople who had also commited adultery - and each person left as they saw their own name written in the sand.)

Let's face it - although I would like to think most partners do not cheat compulsively, slip-ups have got to be VERY common. It seems to be so at least anecdotally. So what is the responsibility of one partner if the other cheats? And how many strikes are there? One? Three? Twelve?

Is marriage a contract? What happens if one side fails to hold up his/her commitment? Is it over? If it is, is that divorce?

Personally, I beleive that when Jesus said that divorce was forbidden - "divorce" was not really his concern per se. The fact is that a divorced woman in first century Palestine would have been forced into begging, prostitution or crime in order to survive. Her chances of marriage would be nil - as every man would want a virgin. Custom at the time allowed a man to "put a woman aside" if it suited him. His own virginity not being an issue, he would be free to remarry. But the wife would be left outside like yesterday's trash.

I think the point Jesus was getting at was almost the same as God's position on the actions of Onan. I do not believe that Onan was guilty of maturbation (or that masturbation is wrong). Onan was being pressed to marry his brother's widow since she had not become pregnant before the brother died. According to custom, a woman did not officially enter the family until she bore a child to her husband. When Onan pulled out and "spilled his seed" refusing to impregnate the woman - he endangered her life, shirked his responsibility to his family and focused on his own needs.

Of course, I do not think the specific principal in each story can be applied today. The point in both these stories seems to be that if a woman is to submit to her husband in the extreme manner of the biblical era - then this placed tremendous responsibility on the men. In the case of both Onan, and the man that Jesus stopped from divorcing, these men had failed to satisfy their obligations. I think Jesus was an early feminist.

What do you think?

Sex is a gift, marriage institution in need of renovation

I believe sexuality is a precious gift from God.

I do not believe that sex is only condoned by God in the confines of marriage. I do not believe that there is scriptural support for restricting marriage to "the union of one man and one woman" - meaning that I am a supporter of same-sex marriage.

That said, I do not believe that every expression of sexuality is appropriate or healthy. I believe that now that the definition of marriage has been expanded in Canada and in parts of the US, it is time to stop fighting over who is allowed to partake - and start joining forces to fix an institution that has been in decline for years. I believe that the majority of our culture has no idea of the relevance of marriage in our society whether they are straight, gay, lesbian or indifferent. And since that is the case, marriage is in danger of losing relevance - and it is not because two men or two women can marry today. How many times have you heard a straight couple (usually the man) say "we don't really see any reason to get married"?

If I have raised your defenses in these last few paragraphs (whether you think I am advocating licentiousness or that I am just sex-negative or old fashioned) I urge you to stay with me as this discussion begins.

This topic is rarely discussed in a way that acknowledges the wisdom and sincerity of opposing camps. I believe it is for this reason that the discussion tends to go nowhere and degrades into an arm-wrestle of political power.

I invite dissent, discussion and debate in this blog. I require that comments are respectful, and that contributors take the time to read and contemplate a posting or comment before posting a response.

So I hope you will join me in exploring the intersection of sex, intimacy and spirituality.