Nick and Sarah Jensen have announced that they will get a divorce if marriage equality is allowed in Australia, which is simply the most childish, spiteful response to the situation that I’ve heard of yet. It’s like, if stupid people were allowed to marry, I’d have to top Jensen by divorcing my intelligent wife and tearing up my Ph.D.
The logic behind their decision is inane.
Mr Jensen goes on to explain the divorce plan, where the pair will continue to live together, have more kids, and refer to each other as husband and wife, but will legally end their marriage because they believemarriage is not a human invention.
Our view is that marriage is a fundamental order of creation. Part of God’s human history. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman before a community in the sight of God. And marriage of any couple is important to God regardless of whether that couple recognises God’s involvement or authority in it,he writes.
In the piece, Jensen describes the intervention of the state into marriage asodd, and says he and his wife refuse to recognise the government’s regulation of marriage if its definition includes same sex couples.
If our federal parliament votes to change the timeless and organic definition of marriage later on this year, it will have moved against the fundamental and foundational building block of Australian society and, indeed, human culture everywhere,he writes.
All right then. I’m going to have to call up my wife and tell her that she’s too clever to be in this relationship, and I’ll have to rummage around in the basement for my diploma, because the numpties have clearly taken over marriage.
Marriage is an entirely human invention, and if it’s so
timeless and organic, and the
foundational building block of human culture, how come it varies so much in different societies, and even in subgroups within a single culture? Has this guy ever managed to pull his head out of his ass and look around him at something more than the lining of his own colon to see that his premises are patently false?
But there are smarter, more compassionate people around. Annie Haggar is getting married, and she and her fiance are friends of Nick and Sarah…but they’ve disinvited the bigoted couple from their wedding. And she makes a very good argument for why it’s unfair for Nick and Sarah to act as they do.
We’ve lived together quite happily for the last five years as a de facto couple. I didn’t expect to feel different when we decided to get married, but I do.
It felt different for my fiance when he decided he wanted to ask me to marry him, and it feels different now that I’ve accepted his proposal. We have known for years that we will spend the rest of our lives together, have children, watch them grow and grow old. But knowing that someone wants to marry you, and that you want to marry them — something changes when you know that.
I’m sure everyone already married or currently engaged knows exactly that feeling, and how joyous declaring and celebrating that with your family and friends is. I’m entirely certain Nick and Sarah remember this feeling, too — and it’s a happiness Nick has decided some people should explicitly be denied.
Marriage isn’t for everyone, and that’s fine — you need to live your life as your conscience tells you to do. But some people flourish in marriage, and it isn’t only heterosexuals, so it is not humane to deny people mutual happiness.
Haggar also makes a good point: the Jensens are grandstanding — they want to be divorced in name only, while living as a married couple.
Nick and Sarah are going to have to jump back over their broomstick on the threshold if they’re going to get divorced. Google ‘divorce in Australia’, and in three clicks you’ll know that to apply for divorce you have to prove that you have been separated for 12 months, and there is no reasonable likelihood of resuming married life. While you can live under the same roof and still be considered ‘separated’, you need to provide evidence that married life has broken down irreparably.
Given that Nick and Sarah have as publicly as possible said they’re going to still refer to each other as ‘husband’ and ‘wife’, are going to try to have more children together and that for all intents and purposes, their lives will continue unchanged as a de facto couple, I’m pretty confident they have zero chance of getting a divorce.
Do I even need to get into the poisonously god-soaked rationale for Jensen’s idiotic decision? No, I do not. You know how much contempt I have for that kind of crap.