Divorce law

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33653, 1 October 1974, Page 16

Divorce law

Sir, —Jesus says (in the Revised Standard Version, Matthew 19-9), “Whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries an-

other, commits adultery.” How does “Concerned Christian” account for this? Jesus was referring to the practice of divorcing a wife for trivial reasons, thereby abandoning her to starvation, as in those days a husband had complete control of his wife’s wealth. Things have changed. I would recommend a reading of G. B. Shaw’s Preface “Getting Married” to anyone doing so. He says among other things that, “the sole and sufficient reason why people should be gi anted a divorce is that they want one.” If there are children involved a divorce is unpleasant but to force two people to remain married is sure to create a bad environment for bringing up children. They are much better off with divorced parents.—Yours etc., ANNETTE McCALLUM. September 28, 1974.

Sir, —In these days of supposed awareness of each person’s freedom of choice, it seems surprising that there remain people whose horizons are so narrow that they assume every husband and wife were married because of Christian beliefs. Of New Zealand’s law-abiding citizens, many are non-Christians to whom marriage has nothing to do with Christianity. The law recognises a civil marriage, performed by a registrar, in which “till death us do part” is not included, neither are other promises man, thinking people cannot, in honesty, pledge. So surely, it is unjust to bind nonChristians with rules based on doctrine adhered to only by Christians. Are not two happy people, apart, more valuable than two miserable people together “till death us do part”? — Yours etc., LOUEEN Y. WEIR. September 28, 1974.