It was just this past summer that NY Mag contributor “Michael Sonomore” attempted to make the case for “open marriages.” Tech Insider has now jumped on a new study by Journal of Marriage and Family to basically say, “Hey, did you and your spouse ever think of becoming a swinger? Maybe you should.”

First the goal of popular culture was to divorce the definition of marriage from Christianity. Then the goal was to strip people of the idea that the union between one man and one woman is so integral to building a healthy civil society that it should be cherished with its own institution. Sometimes sociologists describe marriage without ever using the world “love,” and now it’s essentially “marriage means whatever we say it means,” (i.e., it means nothing).

“Marital Monogamy as Ideal and Practice: The Detraditionalization Thesis in Contemporary Marriages” includes the results of surveying 90 Canadians who were questioned on monogamy and marriage. Researchers spoke with 26 heterosexual females, 21 heterosexual males, 21 gay males, and 22 lesbians. Most of the couples were relatively young.

Tech Insider reported Wednesday:

“Research published in the Journal of Marriage and Family suggests that another big change is happening in how people think about marriage: Some no longer consider monogamy an absolute essential. …

The first questions the couples answered revealed that people are becoming more open to the idea of non-monogamous marriages. Less than half of all the heterosexual female respondents, about one-third of the heterosexual male respondents, and “relatively few” homosexual couples felt that marriage and monogamy were inseparable, the researchers concluded.

Most people interviewed thought that monogamy isn’t something that a marriage necessarily requires. As one participant explained:

‘I’ll say that it’s different for everyone … and you have to find what works for you … [maybe] you’re committed to each other and you’re married but then you guys decide every Friday night we’re going to swinger parties and that’s what we want to do, and that excitement is what brings us together, then awesome. But is it going to be for me? No. Am I going to say, you can’t do it? No.'”

Where is this idea coming from? We know the New York Times has been exploring it since at least 2011:

Although best known for his It Gets Better project, an archive of hopeful videos aimed at troubled gay youth, [Gay-rights activist Dan] Savage has for 20 years been saying monogamy is harder than we admit and articulating a sexual ethic that he thinks honors the reality, rather than the romantic ideal, of marriage. In Savage Love, his weekly column, he inveighs against the American obsession with strict fidelity. In its place he proposes a sensibility that we might call American Gay Male, after that community’s tolerance for pornography, fetishes and a variety of partnered arrangements, from strict monogamy to wide openness.

What does it say about a culture when a growing number of couples see nothing wrong with taking other human beings, objectifying them, and then using them as nothing more than masturbatory devices?

Popular culture does not promote loving relationships — it promotes lusting relationships.

The spiritual fulfillment that comes when two adults have a proper understanding of marriage — and then they put in the effort to realize its potential — is unmatched. It takes patience, perseverance, humility, selfless sacrifice and a whole host of other virtues to arrive at the final destination, which is why “pornography, fetishes and a variety of partnered arrangements” are peddled to the public instead.

Is it easier to act like an animal or act like an angel? The answer is self-evident.

Yes, it may bring “excitement” to act like a beast on occasion, but marriage was never meant to bring two beasts together. Marriage unites human souls, which is why perverting marriage’s proper definition and function is a travesty.

Here is what the modern American male is up against: On every level — physical, mental, and spiritual — there are forces at work to turn him into glorified cattle.

On the physical level he is encouraged to embrace sloth and gluttony; on the mental level he is encouraged to become a servant of the state; and on the spiritual level he is encouraged to become a libidinous pig who drags his wife into the muck.

True happiness can be found, but the path does not begin by taking directions from the purveyors of moral relativism.

Advertisements

About the Author Douglas Ernst

I'm a former Army guy who believes success comes through hard work, honesty, optimism, and perseverance. I believe seeing yourself as a victim creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. I believe in God. I'm a USC Trojan with an MA in Political Science from American University.

8 comments

  1. Editor’s note: If you have never commented on this blog before, and your very first post involves nothing more than telling my regular readers to check out your Christian blog, then that is what the Army calls a “‘no-go’ at this station.”

    Build a relationship. Contribute. Then, when that is established, tactfully plug your blog and there will be zero objections.

  2. Doug,

    I’ve only recently found your blog and I’ve been consistently impressed by the moral clarity of your writing and the positions that you’ve consistently taken and defended. I’m 49 years old, a fellow vet and fan of comics, etc., and have been stunned to find another person that thinks like I do (and have since my teens). I enjoy your blog a great deal and hope you continued success and happiness. Thanks for championing the manly virtues of strength, intelligence, compassion and virtue.

    1. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment, Chris. I really appreciate it. I have told others over the years that it really makes me happy when a reader says some variation of, “[I was] stunned to find another person that thinks like I do.”

      That was one of my goals of the blog from the beginning, so I appreciate your feedback.

      Also, I will always strive to intellectually consistent. Thank you for that compliment as well. If I ever seem to veer off course, please let me know right away. I may be a conservative guy, but the truth is what I am really after — no matter where it takes me.

  3. I actually no longer can offer a logical reason for why non-monogamous (or polygamous) marriages should NOT be allowed. There is precedent for such behavior. There is no precedent for sodomy-based marriage. Therefore, now that society has legalized same-sex “marriage,” everything else is permissible.

    On a separate note, in keeping with Doug’s reference to the Army, there is an ideology in the Army that if you cannot complete the simple things or follow simple orders, you’ll never be able to do the bigger and more complicated things or follow the bigger and more complicated orders. (“Attention to detail!”) Now that society cannot understand the simplest of things–that the sexes (not genders) exist and they have defined roles–it no longer is capable of understanding or dealing with anything else. Hence, when people say to “ignore the social issues and concentrate on fiscal and defense matters,” they are arguing without an understanding of human nature.

    In short, fix society’s perversion of the sexes and fixes for everything else–fiscal and security–will follow.

  4. Hey Douglas,

    I was listening to this podcast called “Drunk Ex-Pastors” the other day. They were interviewing Dan Savage. Dan kept saying, “We are just monkeys with shoes on.” It seems to me he agrees that the idea of monogamy is desirable, but that it just isn’t practical. I get the impression he is defeated and therefore believes it is better not to try to live according to what we think is best, but to settle for accepting our fate; “we are just monkeys with shoes on.” He has convinced himself that he is saving marriages by encouraging tolerance for infidelity between spouses. It is actually very sad. I kind of feel sorry for him. He believes we can’t control our sexual impulses to that extent and that it is healthy to let off some sexual steam from time to time.

    It is strange how unromantic this generation is. They are so boringly practical, so cowardly. Not that there isn’t reason to fear of course. They’ve seen broken families all around them and fear the same fate. But they don’t have the courage to rise up against that God damned monkey in shoes and declare to the one they love, “I will love you, and only you forever! I forsake all others no matter how beautiful they are, no matter how desirable they are. Your suffering is my suffering and your joy is my joy! If you become unable to have sex, I will become celibate. I nail this God-damned monkey to a cross, and I will keep his stupid ass on it no matter how much he screams…with God’s help.”

    Here is to the courageous!

    1. “I was listening to this podcast called ‘Drunk Ex-Pastors’ the other day. They were interviewing Dan Savage. Dan kept saying, “We are just monkeys with shoes on.” … He has convinced himself that he is saving marriages by encouraging tolerance for infidelity between spouses. It is actually very sad. I kind of feel sorry for him.”

      It is very sad, Eduardo. Is Dan really just a monkey with shoes on, or does he simply choose to act like one? Fire tempers steel. Likewise, our soul must successfully pass through the fires of temptation in order for it to be strong and beautiful. Do we fail again and again and again at many of the little things? Of course. In some ways it is a blessing that God allows us to falter in the small things so that we might realize just how much grace he gives us to avoid the bigger pitfalls…

      Sticking with metallurgy metaphor, we it is safe to say God perfectly dispenses justice tempered with mercy. He can show mercy to the man who falters and seeks genuine forgiveness, but how can he forgive a man who is unapologetic about behaving like “a monkey with shoes on”? I pray that Dan and his followers — very lost and confused individuals — come to their senses before it is too late.

  5. The social engineering train of the media keeps on a rolling. I googled “non-monogamous relationship failure” and it was page 4 of results before I found a page that wasn’t fully supporting this trash. I always love to read the comments. The people supporting non-monogamy shriek it’s not about sex. They are right, it’s about avoiding things like: dealing with issues, work, controlling your urges, acting like an adult, consequences, and pain.

    1. “The people supporting non-monogamy shriek it’s not about sex. They are right, it’s about avoiding things like: dealing with issues, work, controlling your urges, acting like an adult, consequences, and pain.”

      It is very interesting to see just how far some people will go to delude themselves. They fail to see that something that very much casts the illusion of “love” can in truth be a form of hate. The devil can appear as an angel of light…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s