Two days ago, I read an
article written by a Filipina divorce advocate who has been living in the US for 20 years and who is married to an American divorcé herself. Apparently in awe of the "beauty" and "benefits" of divorce, she even entitled her piece,
The 'Sanctity' of Divorce. As expected, the writer basically just promoted divorce in the Philippines and pointed out that there is nothing sacred about marriage, so her fellow Filipinos should stop using the "marriage is sacred" argument when talking about divorce. Never mind that marriage is the foundation of the family, and that stable families are needed for a stable society. Never mind also that it is through the permanence of marriage that children are raised by both a mother and a father who both have equally important, distinct and irreplaceable roles in the children's lives. Never mind the intrinsic good of this institution and all its invaluable purposes. Marriage is not sacred, but divorce is. There's the gist of the article.
Well, coming from anyone who has a distorted sense of the sacred, this is not surprising. But even if one is not religious, one will know, through common sense, why marriage deserves to be upheld and protected. But instead of coming up with reasons to protect and fortify marriages, the author provided excuses to end them. As usual, the author just parroted their tired arguments in favor of a divorce law in the Philippines. Their favorite one is domestic violence, which is already addressed by existing laws, such as Republic Act No. 9262 or the Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Law, as well as provisions in the Family Code that provide for the legal separation of the spouses.
No need for a divorce law. I find it really distasteful that these divorce advocates are exploiting the plight of abused women to advance their agenda. Other excuses mentioned were annulment and legal separation supposedly being too expensive, a 'peaceful divorce' supposedly being good for children, etc.-- all of which are already 'gasgas' and have already been debunked a long time ago. (READ:
The Lamest and Most 'Gasgas' Excuses for Divorce in the Philippines)
There was nothing new in the said pro-divorce article, except for the faulty analogy in the last part. Even their typical
ad hominem attacks against those who are pro-family and anti-divorce were there to complete the package. Again, not surprising. But the author's defective analogy made me cringe and shake my head in disgust. The closing paragraph read:
"It is necessary. Divorce protects the safety and dignity of people who enter into marriage. If marriage is the home a couple builds together, divorce is not its front door but its fire escape. They might never use it, might never even think about it, but their house is safer and more secure knowing it is there."
The author's analogy is so wrong, yet it is also telling of the kind of mentality these divorce advocates have-- the kind that runs away and throws away, as opposed to the kind that faces challenges head on and fixes whatever is broken. However, should the author insist that divorce is a fire escape, let me remind her that fire exits can also be used even when there is no fire. I remember the time when I lived in our school dormitory in college, some students would even use the fire escape to sneak out of the dormitory late at night to go to parties or do their 'extra-curricular' activities. So if we talk about it that way, then divorce can indeed be compared to a fire escape... or simply, "an escape" and "an easy way out."
However, I don't think that's the point the author wanted to make. To her, "divorce protects the safety and dignity of people who enter into marriage," hence, the fire escape analogy. But
NO, divorce is NOT the life-saving fire escape the author imagined it to be. The truth is, divorce is the fire that burns down that home along with the family that lives in it. If marriage is the home a couple builds together and it catches fire (usually in the form of "irreconcilable differences"), the sensible thing to do is to first get a fire extinguisher or a fire hose to put the fire out. They can even call for the help of firefighters (i.e. godparents, friends, their community, marriage counselors, priests, pastors, etc.). But if all else fails and the house goes down in flames, the husband and wife shall REBUILD the home they have lost. And they will do it TOGETHER, just as they have vowed on their wedding day:
"for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part." No mention of fire escapes there whatsoever.
(Anna C.)
