A theory of why so many marriages end in divorce
In regards to human sexuality, relationships and mating, I found an interesting analogy by comparing how elements conjoin thru chemical bonds. I think that if more people would behave like chemical elements, then the world might be a happier place.
In nature, elements are constantly creating, maintaining and breaking bonds with each other. Elements move about freely as dictated by nature. At the subatomic level, electrons are always freely interchanging with other nuclei. When an electron orbiting on the outside of a nucleus encounters a force of sufficient attraction from another nucleus (or if it feels a significant repulsion to its current nucleus) then that electron simply goes away, attaching itself to the new nucleus. No legal documentation or sanction is required—it just happens.
I think if human beings did the same thing on the intimate level of sexuality, they would also be happy and fulfilled. I think that all that is needed of people is a willingness to follow their feelings when they crop up. I think that if humans were as open as chemical elements they would never suffer any guilt, fear, insecurities, etc., about having sex with any number of people during their lives. I think that if people were as willing to follow the dictates of God and nature, meaning they create, maintain and break bonds with their partners as life itself naturally dictates, then the general psycho-emotional health of the whole world would escalate to unprecedented levels of joy and love.
Author Robert Heinlein wrote about this lifestyle extensively and in great detail in his masterpiece “Stranger in a Strange Land” (especially the newer unedited edition containing his original manuscript in its entirety).
From my perspective, it just seems absurd for someone to expect just one person to fulfill all psycho-emotional-physical needs at any given time, much less expect that one person to continue to do so for the rest of one’s life. That would be about as ridiculous as expecting just one fruit or vegetable to supply every last nutrient needed to ensure perfect physical health for the duration of one’s life. Eating only one form of food would cause life to be short and full of suffering due to malnutrition, but incredibly boring at least as far as the taste buds are concerned.
And in the case of human relationships, how much more so would our very souls be undernourished whilst beset with eventual overwhelming boredom? Don’t believe it? Just look around. All the evidence one needs to prove this is to examine the way we behave in relationships. I write these words only a few years after the national divorce rate reached 50% and it has only been climbing since then. Some with comedic minds have asserted that divorce is the cure for marriage. In my lighter moments, I agree. But I would also postulate that divorce is the natural result of attempting to legally immortalize something that is by its very nature ephemeral, of restricting something that by its very nature is free-flowing, of trying to limit and codify something that is by it very nature is limitless and outside the realm of human-created laws.
In the face of such unnatural actions, divorce seems only natural. Divorce seems to me to be a natural result of the soul’s desire to liberate itself, to be free to love unrestricted any and all whom it wants to freely love.
It seems to me that billions of people around the world are leading unhappy lives (at least where love is concerned) all because of a prevailing belief that we must restrict ourselves to just one person our whole lives.
Just an opinion…but that sounds idiotic to me.
The simplest analogy I ever read in regards to the idiocy of marriage went something like the following. Imagine that you have a friend, a best friend. You love your friend and value your friendship. So one day you go to your friend and convince him/her to visit a lawyer with you to fill out some papers and sign them, getting them notarized and sanctioned by the state hereby declaring legally that the two of you are friends and the only way both of you can end the friendship is to each get a separate lawyer to accompany you both to court to engage in a heated battle to end the friendship with legal documentation called Divorce, and then battle your friend for half of his/her possessions, blah, blah, blah, etc., etc., etc.
Isn’t it amazing how clearly absurd marriage becomes when we merely apply its legal characteristics to that of friendship? Just change the words “husband” and “wife” to “best friend” and the whole notion of marriage drops from its alleged lofty heights like a lead zeppelin.
When I examine it carefully, it just seems to me that marriage is a mistake, an error perpetuated on a population unconsciously afraid of its own mortality, so it feebly attempts to create something that seems immortal, permanent.
Maybe the reason the divorce rate is so high and constantly increasing is because it is God’s Will that we learn once and for all the blunder we have been making for eons.
