Let no man put asunder

At the last SONA, among the priorities mentioned was the passage of a divorce bill. House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez and Gabriela, a woman’s advocacy group, had sworn to file a bill to legalize “the easy dissolution of marriage,” claiming that the Philippines is the only country which has no divorce law.

At the outset, let me put forth my position: I believe that divorce legislation is unnecessary for those seeking relief from excessive difficulties and hardships of a failed marriage. Legal separation already provides this relief. In truth, the bill’s primary purpose is to grant the right to remarry. The legalization of divorce abolishes the right to lifelong indissoluble marriages by making “for life” become “as long as,” i.e., instead of “till death do us part,” substitute, “until such time as...”

Among the reasons cited for the need for divorce are:

1. Pro-divorce advocates say that it would protect battered women and prevent domestic violence. This is a misplaced and selective compassion and should be weighed against the true compassion of supporting marriage itself. The idea of divorce, even if it is well meaning, cannot be the issue since the common good...which applies to most marriages, cannot be sacrificed for the sake of a few. For these few, there are existing measures such as legal separation as well as various institutions and programs to address intolerable situations. Individual cases cannot be regarded as the norm.

2. In unhappy marriages where love has gone, and there is “irretrievable breakdown” it is argued that there should be a second chance for happiness. It would be better to concentrate on addressing existing problems. The sad fact is that a spouse who turns to divorce to seek “new happiness” is more likely to find dissatisfaction and unhappiness at his/her “second chance” (as had been shown in the US where second and third marriages eventually end up in divorce as well).

3. Children would be better off with divorced rather than quarrelling parents. In fact, divorce and the breakup of the family have caused children to suffer. Children of such broken marriages are more likely to be depressed, turn to drugs, crime, and have health and psychological problems. On average, children of married parents are physically and mentally healthier, better educated, and later in life more likely to enjoy more career success than children of divorced/separated parents.

4. Only the Catholic Church disapproves of divorce. Not so. The wrongness of divorce stems from the nature of man and nature of marriage itself. Divorce is wrong for all peoples, religious or not. The theological and moral issues against divorce relate directly to the impact on the State, and are therefore relevant not only to Catholics, but to all citizens regardless of their religion. Private interests of the few cannot be allowed to prevail over the common good, on which the welfare of society stands. Divorce erodes the fundamental values of the family and society, and results in the attack of the common good.

“The family is the natural and fundamental unit of society, and is entitled to protection by society and the State. It focuses on the child. “The best interest of the child must prevail over adult freedoms... even including the lifestyle choices of parents,” as a French parliamentary report affirmed.

Married couples with a family to bring up are more likely to be more committed to their community, their country, and the political process. They have an important stake in both stability and growth. They will tend to put more in their professional work, and not just for the sake of their own family. They have the makings of ideal citizens of the country and the world.

True it is the Catholic Church that maintains that a new union cannot be recognized because the situation contravenes God’s law. However, it is not just a precept of divine law. It is moreover a precept of natural law, and it responds perfectly to our human nature.

merci.suleik@gmail.com