home > archive > 2009 > this article


Search this site Search WWW

Nuptial disagreements

By Lisa Fabrizio
web posted December 21, 2009

The latest allegations by numerous women involved in the Tiger Woods flap took many folks by surprise, including me. I bought into his external show of gentlemanliness and thought that he might be one of the few celebrities of his generation who were exempt from our poisonous modern culture which prescribes self-gratification and sex on demand as the way to live life to its fullest.

In some public quarters there has been a goodly amount of righteous hand-wringing, but oh, how the media has loved it all. In an effort to silence the buzz saw that he himself has unleashed, news is that Woods will take some time off from golf to rehabilitate his tarnished image.

But until he returns from his self-imposed exile and the inevitable mea culpa has been made, don't expect this story to go away any time soon. Why? It has all the ingredients of a modern Hollywood movie; all that's needed to complete the script is for a wise, black woman--Oprah maybe?--to waltz in and clean up the whole mess. Until then, look for our media to decry his behavior as inappropriate, all the while displaying photos of his adulterous partners in various stages of undress.

Nike founder Phil Knight has brushed aside Woods's serial philandering as merely "a minor blip" on an otherwise glorious career. Pretty predictable comment from a guy whose company bears a hefty share of the blame for the vulgarization of our culture in general and the sporting world in particular. Their slogan says it all: Just do it!

Of course, that is where our troubles began, but are unlikely to stop unless we can push back against a tide which claims that moral strictures are hopelessly out of date and repressive to the good of our nation. But don't look for this to happen any time soon as those who influence and shape our culture are the ones who created this mess.

What mystifies me is how those who gloried in the victories of the sexual revolution and continue to sacrifice our children on its altars--which starts with their indoctrination into sexual intricacies before they are emotionally or even physically equipped to deal with them--are the first to howl at the behavior of men like Woods. Is it any wonder that anyone who's grown up in this country since the 1960's has confused ideas of what marriage should be or even how men and women are to behave toward each other?

Which brings us to the inevitability that the issue of Woods and his marital woes has enabled the proponents of homosexual marriage to jump into the fray. They sneeringly point to rumors of a revised prenuptial agreement whereby Tiger has agreed to up the dough his wife receives if they split, and reduce the amount of time she must stay with him in order to collect it; all very lawyerly and clean, contract-wise.

This has caused gay marriage supporters to opine that marriage, at its core, is simply a contractual agreement between consenting adults, blessed by the almighty State to safeguard the legal and economic welfare of the parties involved. In other words, the same folks who are disparaging the Woods' financial arrangements are those who seek the same kinds of financial protection. The fact remains that homosexuals have the right to enter into contracts with each other that do the very same things. But, of course, that is not what their movement is all about.

Between 1960 and 1980, the divorce rate in this country doubled and today hovers at around 50%, while the birth rate has been in steady decline. This tends to suggest that one of the most historically important goals of marriage--creating a life-long, stable environment for child-rearing--no longer seems compelling to many people. To purport that this trend supports the case for gay marriage rather than eliminate the 'need' for it would be laughable were it not so ominous. And yet this is precisely the theory gay activists continue to advance.

We are often subjected to endless media pronouncements explaining that whatever governmental encroachments liberals wish to foist on the rest of are "for the children." Given their support for abortion and the further erosion of traditional marriage, this gets harder and harder to believe.

In the United States, 90% of children born in 1970 were to married parents while in 2008, the rate dropped to 60%. In that time, over 40 million of our children never made it out of the womb. How this has impacted the way love and commitment are now viewed in this country has been devastating not only to the institution of marriage, but to the overall moral and social health of this country.

Tackling these maladies would be the kind of healthcare reform we truly need. ESR

Lisa Fabrizio is a columnist who hails from Connecticut. You may write her at mailbox@lisafab.com.

 

Send a link to this page!
Send a link to this story

 

Home


 

Home

Site Map

E-mail ESR

ESR's blog

 

Send a link to this page!
Send a link to this story



Get weekly updates about new issues of ESR!
e-mail:
Subscribe
Unsubscribe

 

1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.