"Til Death Do Us Part"

'til death do us part... no, forget it, how about two-years?'  ' as long as we both shall live love'     


          Why should marriage last forever? Personally, I think it's a rather weird question. This article

by Mary Elizabeth Williams asks the reader exactly that. When you think of a perfect marriage, (well at least us girls anyway) you probably think of two people hopelessly in love with each other, bride in a pretty white dress walking down the aisle to her prince charming. Well after that, reality tends to set in. Issues tend to arise and feelings fall through, leading to a messy divorce. In most places in the U.S. the divorce rate is a whopping 50%. That's just sad. So, as the article explains, Mexico City has taken a more business like approach to the hole marriage concept- a contract. Yes, you read that correctly- a contract. Instead of traditional vows, couples can opt for a minimum of a two-year renewable contract, complete with children custody, and division of assets. Personally, I think if you're already thinking about splitting up, you shouldn't be getting married in the first place. Yes, this concept lowers "divorce" rates, but it still allows couples to break apart. These are just my original thoughts; I'm still not exactly sure where I stand because the question and issue took me by surprise.

          I think the author has a VERY personal opinion on this issue. In the last couple paragraphs she really kills the hopeless romantic vision.  She writes, "The opportunity, even, to say, maybe it's time to move on? Why not acknowledge that a great five-year run could be more satisfying than a 30-year sentence? After all, we leave jobs and houses and quietly distance ourselves from old friends all the time, and it's rarely considered failure. Instead it's understood to be part of growth and the nature of life. So why is permanence so highly prized? Why is endurance equated with commitment?" (Williams 1). Some tough fighting words. She continues to shove questions in the readers face, really engaging them about the subject. She seems to think the only reality is, "The idea of life outlasting love, especially right when romance is fresh and new and being celebrated, is a harsh one. And endings, unmistakably, bring heartache. The notion that the person you've pledged yourself to might opt not to re-up your contract is a painful one." (Williams 1). She focuses on the harsh realities of rough marriages and the ever-present outcome of divorce. She also bashes the Catholic Church when she writes, "Unsurprisingly, the Catholic Church, still fired up over Mexico City legalizing same-sex unions in 2009, is none too pleased with the move...because anything other than a lifetime binding contract between a man and woman is hooey!" (Williams 1). Overall, I'm not exactly sure about where I stand on this new idea, but Williams seems to have no problem with it at all. 

 

 http://www.salon.com/life/gender_roles/index.html?story=/mwt/feature/2011/09/30/why_marry_forever