According to a new report by Britain’s Office for National Statistics, the proportion of Britons getting married “has collapsed to a record low,” and that is a quote. One critic of the current government called it “a disaster for children, families, and society.” But, unlike natural disasters, this disaster is completely man-made.
In 2006, there were approximately 237,000 weddings in Britain—the fewest since 1895, when Victoria was still queen and Britain’s population was about half of what it is today. In fact, “the proportion of men and women getting married is below any level found since figures were first kept nearly 150 years ago.”
The marriage rate for British men is 22.8 per 1,000 and for women 20.5 per 1,000.
Clearly, British marriage is in trouble, and there is no shortage of suspects. Conservative Tories point to politically correct tax policies and government benefits that treat all living arrangements as equal—civil unions. The idea has been to shift “the tax burden away from families” and “provide incentives for all couples to get and stay together.”
Well, maybe there is some sound economic reasons for that, but what is far more important is how these policies shape cultural attitudes toward marriage. And, as the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, while culture does precede politics, politics can and does influence culture. And the law, after all, is a moral teacher.
In Britain’s case, this politically correct politics “for a decade maintained that all kinds of families are equally valuable.” Government officials “have campaigned for all references to marriage to be removed from state documents”; and a plan for helping British children “does not even mention marriage once.”
This is why researcher Patricia Morgan says that “[the marriage numbers are] what [government policies] have tried to achieve, and they ought to be congratulating themselves.”
According to Morgan, the government has encouraged the creation of marriage substitutes, what she calls “Marriage Lite.” The best-known of these legally recognized cohabitations is “civil unions.” What started out as an accommodation for same-sex couples has become an alternative to marriage for millions of heterosexual Europeans.
As Peter Wehner of the Ethics and Public Policy Center says, what is going on in Britain is “part of a broad, on-going trend.” Wehner remembers the same Senator Moynihan saying the biggest change he had witnessed in 40 years of politics was “that the family structure has come apart all over the North Atlantic world.”
Bad news—very bad news—because the links between crime and family breakdown are so well-established nobody could deny them anymore. Likewise, the link between marriage and children’s well-being is not a subject for debate—it is documented. And as marriage declines, so does the birth rate.
So, why do societies persist in this? Their worldviews demand it. Their commitment to personal autonomy and sexual freedom will not permit them to make the needed sacrifices to promote healthy families.
And by “them,” I also mean us. The state of marriage in America will be the subject of the president’s meeting with the Pope this week. And it will be the subject of tomorrow’s “BreakPoint.” Be sure to tune in.
This is clearly a case of “be careful what you wish for,” because, sadly, the consequences will not be limited to those doing the wishing.
_________________________________________________
From BreakPoint®, April 15, 2008, Copyright 2008, Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with the permission of Prison Fellowship Ministries. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced or distributed without the express written permission of Prison Fellowship Ministries. “BreakPoint®” and “Prison Fellowship Ministries®” are registered trademarks of Prison Fellowship
RSS
Comments
"These are the result of people living recklessly and always avoiding responsibility in a committed and faithful marriage."
I would be careful about what you say, especially when using terms like "always" and "never". This appears to me to be a completely unfounded statement. I can't find any information online that suggests that opposite-sex couples are even allowed to participate in civil-unions in the UK - which by the way, have only been in effect for a couple of years.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_union)
If that's the case, suggesting civil-unions contribute decline in marriage rates (or childbirth rates) "in the UK" over the last 150 years is clearly misleading.
Also, there is a domain shift in this article from the subject "The Demise of Marriage in Britain" - which suggests that the article must be discussing issues with the family in "Britian" - to all of Europe:
"According to Morgan, the government has encouraged the creation of marriage substitutes, what she calls “Marriage Lite.” The best-known of these legally recognized cohabitations is “civil unions.” What started out as an accommodation for same-sex couples has become an alternative to marriage for millions of heterosexual Europeans."
Mr. Colson is quoting researcher Patricia Morgan who is suggesting that the (UK?) government has created marriage alternatives such as the civil union (which we have seen is probably not applicable to opposite-sex couples), and she then attempts to suggest that those same civil unions are a valid marriage alternative for all of Europe. This is clearly a false statement unless the "goverment" she is referring to is the goverment of Europe in its entirety. If she is discussing all of Europe, what relevance does that quote have in a discussion of the demise of marriage in "Britian"? ( The British government includes the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and 24 other bishops in the Hourse of Lords by the way - which suggests that at they are privy to spiritual guidance when discussing legislation.) Obviously, this quote is being used out of context and without more information we are forced to dismiss it as irrelevant.
For the record:
Upon further (but not exhaustive) searching, I found some information suggesting that there are certain rights for unmarried couples in the UK, but nothing resembling the rights conferred by a marriage. In fact, it is a common misconception there that common-law marriages are legal when they actually haven't been since 1753. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage)
The reason I bring this up to point out that we all have the reponsibility (leaders, reporters, and readers) to not jump to hasty conclusions (or condemnations) based on something as insubstantial as a news story or our own opinions.
"No wonder the Muslim MP in British government are demanding more and more UK Islamic autonomy.
Being a reader of 2/3 daily British papers I wonder if you could let me know what MP's you are writing about as I have not come across this story. I do know that following the recent comments by the archbishop of Canterbury concerning Sharia and British law the Muslims MP's in parliament distanced themselves from his views.
These are the result of people living recklessly and always avoiding responsibility in a committed and faithful marriage.
Government craving for popularity alters and adjust British law to accommodate anti family promiscuous pop culture values and in turn weakens the British society.
Easy for them to say wrong as right and right as wrong based on secular humanist voting
Meanwhile UK Muslim are increasing in numbers through high birthrate and near zero abortion
Then in 20 years, the no-go areas for infidels in Britain shall double in size.
No wonder the Muslim MP in British government are demanding more and more UK Islamic autonomy.
ProfessorX,
Your link does show a high number of atheists in the UK, but it doesn't prove that atheism has anything to do with the decline in marriage rates, let alone "human desolation." Can you post a link showing credible and repeatible studies demonstrating either of those two claims?
Additionally, the link between civil unions and low birth rates has not been shown to be direct. Correlation does not prove causation. At best it suggests a place to begin looking. There are any number of possible causes, though correlative evidence may suggest a simple explanation.
Just as a thought experiment, imagine that the cause of the decline in birth-rates in the UK was that couples have less desire to become parents (for whatever reason). In that case, you could theorize that it doesn't make financial sense to incur the high cost of marriage when you could get the same benefits at no cost in a civil union. In this scenario, the civil union is not the cause though there would be a correlation between the rise of civil unions vs. the decline of marriages. Doing away with civil unions would not fix the problem that couples do not wish to procreate. Perhaps a more loving approach (assuming it's desirable to convince couples to become parents) would be to educate them on the benifits of having a family and the neccessity of protecting family values?
Please remember that this hypothetical situation is only an illustration that it's possible that the statistics do not tell the whole story. Much more information is required to attempt to determine the causal factors. Also, it's never helpful to make comments that could be interpreted in a negative way, which is why I called your post abusive.
Dear professorX (ifs that is your real name)
Writing from the UK concerning your comment
"In the United Kingdom only around 30-35% of the People believe God exists"
you make that sound like a bad thing!!
Regards
Steve
In the United Kingdom only around 30-35% of the People believe God exists. Here is your proof http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
Atheists are real quick to boast about the growth of their religion of disbelief in the UK but then refuse to take any credit for how that secular worldview has inspired hostile attitudes against a basic social institution called marriage to the extent that new political policies are enacted which economically penalize husband & wife marriages for merely existing.
Marriage hits lowest rate since records began almost 150 years ago in the UK
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23465208-details/Marriage+rates+hit+lowest+rate+since+records+began+almost+150+years+ago/article.do
We may be witnessing the extinction of the original british population from the same nation which ironically invented science-Fiction stories about all life arising from common ancestors and survival of the fittest. Shame on the UK.
http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
Proof http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
In the United Kingdom only arounld 30-35% of the People believe God exists.
Atheists are real quick to boast about the growth of their religion of disbelief in the UK but then refuse to take any credit for how that secular worldview has inspired hostile attitudes against a basic social institution called marriage to the extent that new political policies are enacted which economically penalize husband & wife marriages for merely existing.
Marriage hits lowest rate since records began almost 150 years ago in the UK
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23465208-details/Marriage+rates+hit+lowest+rate+since+records+began+almost+150+years+ago/article.do
Shame on the UK.
http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
ProfessorX,
Mr. Colson is suggesting the decline in marriage is related to the rise of civil unions, which he goes on to say was an accomodation for same sex couples. Wether this correlation is 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc) is up for debate, but even he has not tried to imply that atheists are the root cause of the decline of marriage. Provocative (and unsbstantiated) comments which are in no way related to the story sounds a bit abusive to me.
It goes to show you that "where atheism abounds - human desolation abounds even more."
- Hilton M. Harrell, Jr
http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com