Huh?  PCUSA agrees to ordain active homosexuals but declines to ordain homosexual marriages.

And the principle behind this would be what? 

This is "perspicacious" in Scripture how?

Hours after giving their blessing to ordaining noncelibate gays and lesbians, leaders of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) declined late Thursday to change the church's definition of marriage, in effect refusing to allow same-sex marriages within their denomination.


If the proposal had been approved, the church's definition of marriage would have changed from a commitment between "a woman and a man'' to "two people" and allowed church weddings in states that have legalized gay marriage.

The late-night decision to table the proposal and subject it to two more years of study caught many delegates at the denomination's gathering at the Minneapolis Convention Center by surprise, and there was a stunned silence as delegates absorbed the action.

One, Virginia Thibeaux of San Anselmo, Calif., said she was "devastated and disappointed" by the shelving of a decision on whether to change the church's definition of marriage. "It's the M.O. for Presbyterians to do more studying," she said.

Cindy Bolbach, the general assembly's moderator, said the proposal's failure indicated that delegates just weren't ready to make a decision on the marriage definition question, and "want to continue to talk about it."

Oh, it's the "more time to talk about it" principle.

Michael Liccione in the comments at Called to Communion offers this explanation:

I notice that the PCA has just approved ordaining actively gay and lesbian clergy while refusing to bless same-sex unions. As my friend and ex-colleague Kevin Staley-Joyce remarks: “The fact [that] this is an incremental compromise is evidenced by the logical incompatibility of the two decisions: If gay romance is not only ethical but healthy and appropriate for spiritual leaders, how can it not be enshrined in a church marriage?”


This whole kabuki dance is evidence that mainline Protestantism has simply lost a truly Christian understanding of sexuality as well as of ordination. Many of the more conservative Protestants, of course, still insist that sodomy is wrong and that same-sex “marriage” is an abomination. They say that stance is biblical. Indeed it is, if we assume that what the human authors meant then is what God means even now—an assumption that the leadership of mainline Protestant denominations increasingly rejects. But once it’s conceded that married couples may actively render infertile sexual acts that would otherwise be fertile, there simply is no logical barrier to holding that a sexual relationship can be good, even sanctifying, when the sexual acts are not the sort of acts that can lead to conception. That’s why resistance to same-sex marriage is slowly but steadily collapsing in the Mainline. The ordination of actively gay and lesbian clergy is only a stage in the dance.

Science Proves Catholic Doctrine.

In this case, it is social science proving Paul VI's predictions about widespread contraception were correct.

Here is the abstract of the paper From Shame to Game in One Hundred Years: An Economic Model of the Rise in Premarital Sex and its De-Stigmatization. According to the abstract:

Societies socialize children about many things, including sex. Socialization is costly. It uses scarce resources, such as time and effort. Parents weigh the marginal gains from socialization against its costs. Those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale indoctrinate their daughters less than others about the perils of premarital sex, because the latter will lose less from an out-of-wedlock birth. Modern contraceptives have profoundly affected the calculus for instilling sexual mores, leading to a de-stigmatization of sex. As contraception has become more effective there is less need for parents, churches and states to inculcate sexual mores. Technology affects culture.

Yes, as does ceaseless propaganda about the telos of human existence - sex.

But who cares, because it doesn't hurt anyone - except for the infidelity:

Below are compiled statistics on infidelity and marriage:


Percentage of marriages that end in divorce in America: 53%

Percentage of "arranged marriages" (where parents pick their sons or daughters spouses) that end in divorce: 3%

Medical field(s) with the highest divorce rate: psychiatrists and marriage counselors

Percentage of marriages where one or both spouses admit to infidelity, either physical or emotional: 41%

Percentage of men who admit to committing infidelity in any relationship they've had: 57%

Percentage of women who admit to committing infidelity in any relationship they've had: 54%

Percentage of men and women who admit to having an affair with a co-worker: 36%

Percentage of men and women who admit to infidelity on business trips: 36%

Percentage of men and women who admit to infidelity (emotional or physical) with a brother-in-law or sister-in-law: 17%

Average length of an affair: 2 years

Percentage of marriages that last after an affair has been admitted to or discovered: 31%

Percentage of men who say they would have an affair if they knew they would never get caught: 74%

Percentage of women who say they would have an affair if they knew they would never get caught: 68%

Those are some pretty amazing statistics, and suggest that we've reached a point where we are strangling our capacity to trust.  The last two numbers are telling - without the capacity to trust, we have become what Jennifer Roback Morse calls "Trust Bandits." 
 
Another word for that phenomenon is "sociopathic."

Most things will resolve themselves if you just ignore them.

Being "proactive" is for suckers.

Here's a great story about how this woman saved her marriage:

Two decades later you have the 20 acres of land, the farmhouse, the children, the dogs and horses. You’re the parents you said you would be, full of love and guidance. You’ve done it all: Disneyland, camping, Hawaii, Mexico, city living, stargazing.

Sure, you have your marital issues, but on the whole you feel so self-satisfied about how things have worked out that you would never, in your wildest nightmares, think you would hear these words from your husband one fine summer day: “I don’t love you anymore. I’m not sure I ever did. I’m moving out. The kids will understand. They’ll want me to be happy.”

But wait. This isn’t the divorce story you think it is. Neither is it a begging-him-to-stay story. It’s a story about hearing your husband say “I don’t love you anymore” and deciding not to believe him. And what can happen as a result.

And, maybe the best part:

It was Thanksgiving dinner that sealed it. My husband bowed his head humbly and said, “I’m thankful for my family.”

He was back.

And I saw what had been missing: pride. He’d lost pride in himself. Maybe that’s what happens when our egos take a hit in midlife and we realize we’re not as young and golden anymore.

When life’s knocked us around. And our childhood myths reveal themselves to be just that. The truth feels like the biggest sucker-punch of them all: it’s not a spouse or land or a job or money that brings us happiness. Those achievements, those relationships, can enhance our happiness, yes, but happiness has to start from within. Relying on any other equation can be lethal.

My husband had become lost in the myth. But he found his way out. We’ve since had the hard conversations. In fact, he encouraged me to write about our ordeal. To help other couples who arrive at this juncture in life. People who feel scared and stuck. Who believe their temporary feelings are permanent. Who see an easy out, and think they can escape.

My husband tried to strike a deal. Blame me for his pain. Unload his feelings of personal disgrace onto me.

Divorce - to put it bluntly - sucks. The grass is almost never greener. While most divorced folk have the face-saving instinct of explaining how much better they are now, when they are all alone, most will wonder what the heck good came out of it. What most people lack, when they are in the trenches, is the ability to see past this war to the peace that follows.

Then, on the other side, you have this story of four women who dealt with a two- Mmmm, three or maybe four - timing SOB as follows:

Three Wisconsin women are accused of tying up and assaulting a married man after allegedly finding out he was having affairs with each of them.

The women are each charged with false imprisonment, a felony that carries a maximum prison term of six years.

Calumet County prosecutors say 48-year-old Therese A. Ziemann of Menasha lured the man to a Stockbridge motel last Thursday. Prosecutors say she was soon joined by 43-year-old Michelle Belliveau of Neenah; 43-year-old Wendy L. Sewell of Kaukauna; and the man's wife.

Authorities say Ziemann punched the man in the face and applied Krazy Glue to other body parts. All four women allegedly fled with his cell phone, wallet and vehicle.

Prosecutors also plan to charge the wife.

While we would never endorse kidnapping and assault, nonetheless we have this to say about "the man": What a scumbag moron.

Hidden Costs of Divorce

Divorce can kill you.

Divorce has a lingering, detrimental impact on health that even remarriage cannot fully repair, a study suggests.

A Chicago study involving 8,652 people aged 51 to 61 found divorced people have 20% more chronic illnesses such as cancer than those who never marry.

The figure only drops to 12% for those who remarry, researchers write in the Journal of Health and Social Behaviour.

They say we start adulthood with a "health stock" that is kept or eroded depending on our marital experience.

Only those who are continuously married can expect the same rate of chronic health problems as the never-wedded, the study suggests.

Although people who remarry after a divorce or being widowed do tend to be happier as a result - being no more depressed than those continuously married and less depressed than those who never married - they gain little in terms of chronic health conditions.

People who remarried had 12% more chronic health conditions than those continuously married, which was slightly less than the 20% for the divorced or widowed who did not remarry.

Researcher Dr Linda Waite, a sociologist at the University of Chicago, said divorce or widowhood undermines health because incomes drop and stress develops over issues such as shared child care.

Stresses and strains

Whereas marriage tends to bring an immediate health benefit, in that it improves health behaviours for men and financial well-being for women.

But remarriage does not heal all.

She said: "Some health situations, like depression, seem to respond both quickly and strongly to changes in current conditions.

"In contrast, conditions such as diabetes and heart disease develop slowly over a substantial period and show the impact of past experiences, which is why health is undermined by divorce or widowhood, even when a person remarries."

Anastasia de Waal, of the think tank Civitas, said: "This research highlights the fact that whilst divorce has become much more common, it can take not just a tremendous emotional and financial toll, but also a heavy health one."

Christine Northan, a counsellor for Relate, said: "I'm not surprised by the findings. It's another reason to work hard to make marriages last, unless it is a very destructive relationship.

"It's a good idea if you can use a messy divorce to understand both yourself better and why the relationship did not work.

"If you do that, you will be in a better place to go into a second successful marriage.

"But if you are drawn to people who are toxic for you, then you may be better off staying single."

She said a surprising number of people unconsciously look for someone like their first wife or husband and that the chance of a second marriage ending in divorce was two-fold.

Economic malaise raises hope for melanin-deficient redheads

Economic malaise seems to be driving dating:

Credit the recession for staycations and bringing us more game-night parties at home. But also give it a shout for spurring more first dates.

Economic woes, it seems, unleash something practically primal in many of us who find ourselves without a partner: a hard-wired desire for companionship.

Some singles are now hunting for dates with the same fervor others are showing hunting for jobs. On matchmaking Web site eHarmony.com, membership is up 20 percent despite monthly fees of up to $60, and activity has soared 50 percent since September at OkCupid.com.

The Invisible Hand is at work - we're looking for bargains:

Still, Sam Yagan, the founder and CEO at OkCupid.com, sees the changing dating climate as a matter of dollars and cents.

The way he figures it, a man can spend $100 buying drinks at a bar trying to pick up a stranger and leave with little more than a cold shoulder. But, when he's in a relationship, a Saturday evening can be as simple as Thai noodle takeout, Netflix and some fun under the covers. All in all, Yagan said, that's "more bang for your buck."

It's more than just the recession. Experts say changes in behavior can relate to other world events - with upticks when news is bad.

And everyone is discounting:

A gentler tone is taking over, daters and observers say, with substance gaining over style.

For Mili Thomas, a 28-year-old graduate student in New York, that means she now spends time with men who didn't show up on her radar screen before the recession. Among them: a Ph.D. who would have been nixed because he lives in New Jersey and an employee at a marketing firm who wouldn't have made the grade because he is two years her junior.

"I figured this was the best possible time to explore other options since people's lives have been turned topsy turvy," she said. "I think everyone is more open to bucking convention given that 'the usual' has gone out the window."

Love and Economics


From Vox Day:

"Is marriage worth it? Well, I should say it increasingly depends on the sex and religion of the individual. In its present state-dictated form, marriage is very much worth it for women, it is a tolerable and necessary risk for religious men, and it is an incredibly stupid gamble for non-religious men. Was this man religious? If not, then you are not only dealing with whatever personal issues may or may not have been present, but also with the reality that you are asking him to stake his entire emotional and financial future on your passing fancies. That is problematic if you happen to be interested in men with IQs over 85.

As to the larger question, I don't know that it's entirely relevant. As a single mother, it very much behooves you to find a father for your child. That is more important than any questions of self-fulfillment or romantic stars, and anyhow, if you've had a long string of horrible relationships, it should be clear by now that the follow-your-feelings approach to acquiring a husband is probably not the optimal one. The good news, however, is that there isn't just one perfect man that you somehow have to find and curse the luck if he happens to have been born in Tibet where he's being raised to be a Buddhist monk sworn to celibacy and silence. More than a few of the three billion men on the planet are excellent potential husbands, the trick is to stop wasting your time on the non-starters. You shouldn't need 18 months to determine that a man isn't in the marriage market.

I really wish more men and women understood the concept of opportunity cost. Every day you waste with someone who has demonstrated that he is not a potential husband is one less day you have to meet a man who is. Don't seek to change them, accept and respect their perspective and move on. The other important thing is to refuse to let the ideal become the enemy of the real. The man you marry today will not be the man you are married to in a decade, just as you will not be the same woman. Remember that marriage and love are as much processes as states.

As for the gentleman who delivered the crushing blow, I think it might be educational to have a frank conversation with him. Ask him not to let you down gently and fall back on generalities as he has done, but to explain precisely why he doesn't see it working out. Make sure you let him know you're not trying to change his mind, you simply want to know in order to avoid making future mistakes. Don't argue, in fact, don't even talk, just listen to him. The purpose is not to salvage the dead relationship, but rather to help you make more intelligent decisions about your next one. Yes, breakups can hurt, but feelings always fade with time.

I think I can safely say, as someone who never thought about getting married and never wanted to get married, that marriage can definitely be worth it. While I happened to be fortunate rather than intelligent in finding Spacebunny, that doesn't mean that one can't approach the process in an intelligent manner. The greatest challenge, assuming you don't actually physically repel strangers with your looks, is that men are rightfully wary of gambling their future and family on momentary female whims. So, the more you make it clear that you will do anything and sign anything that helps reduce that unreasonable risk, the more likely it is that you will eventually find yourself in possession of a husband."

Discuss.

My thoughts. Vox is a libertarian Christian. He focuses on marriage as quintessentially a contractual exchange - sex for security. Or, perhaps, it is better to say that he perceives secular women (and men) in the marriage market as seeing marriage as a contractual exchange.

If one sees marriage as more transcendent, however, then marriage is more than contract. That requires some sense of a "sacramental" dimension to marriage, which in an essentially post-Modern, post-Reformation, post-Enlightenment world, there is no reason to expect.

For more on this, check out Jennifer Roback Morse's excellent "Love and Economics."