Marriage is forever – until death do us part. That belongs to the days of “archaic” and traditional values. Society today does not think that way. At least, most western-style societies think otherwise. It is a “use and discard” value system. Everything is disposable. So is marriage and family. It is not cool to be married. It is COOL to have partners that come and go at will. Partners can be of either sex. It doesn’t matter as long as you love (meaning have sex) that partner. You wake up not knowing who was that partner of the night. It doesn’t matter anyway. The same goes for governments today. The European Union was conceptualised as a union of those with similar values and compatible ideals. When a member joins the EU, an eternal treaty of bonding is presumed to exist with member nations. No questions asked thereafter. It is meant to be a marriage to eternity. Divorce is taboo and not to be tolerated. No one ever thinks of exiting from that union of mutual love. It means “I LOVE YOU” unconditionally. Then comes Greece. It irks the EU omnipotent elites. Greece is becoming a pain in the #$%. It hurts having that splinter under the skin that keeps bleeding and needs constant care. But there’s no way out now and EU has to live with the irritation. Is there a way to change the terms of engagement? Perhaps the terms should have been “I LOVE YOU … only if…”. That should have done the trick for divorce provision. Is it too late now?
A better way may be to expressly say that “I DO NOT LOVE YOU ANYMORE”, but let’s remain married. Keep the union intact. Legally, the status quo remains. Practically, each goes their own way. It is possible. There is precedence as in the case of Singapore. The gay issue was so divisive that the Singapore Minister of Law decided to make a case of interesting “law” interpretation. In the previous post “Vatican Gay Relatio”, it was reported,
The ultimate intent was to legitimise gays eventually. Unfortunately, the issue was so divisive that forced the government to back down (from de-criminalising homosexual acts). What is interesting in this episode is that the Minister of Law, Shanmugam, when asked how he would address their concerns, especially S377A, told The Straits Times that the Government has stated its position, which is that it will keep the law but not pro-actively enforce it. For the Law Minister to publicly proclaim that the government will not pro-actively enforce the law is beyond comprehension. What is the purpose of a law if it is not to be enforced?
To EU and Greece – take a leaf from Singapore. It may be a small nation, but it si full of creativity when it comes to law.
Mark 10:9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.