Hear the audio version here (segments older than 3 weeks may be unavailable)

When we talk about the "war on marriage," the natural tendency is to assume that we're referencing the homosexual movement and its attempt to undefined marriage, thus obliterating any meaning to the institution.  But the truth is that is but one battle (albeit a large and extremely important one) in the larger war.

Paul Wilson writes about another front in the conflict:

The mainstream media's campaign against traditional marriage sunk to new depths on NBC's October 11 "Today." Anchor Ann Curry teased a nearly seven-minute piece on the rapid increase of single women in society by touting "a new spin on romance, dating, and what some are calling the end of traditional marriage."

 

 

And that was just the opening.

 

NBC Correspondent Jenna Wolfe gushed: "A new report says more women are choosing to be single and loving every minute of it."

 

Translation: Men are not needed for a modern, educated woman to be happy and fulfilled. Get rid of the useless deadbeats.

 

Denigration of men was sprinkled throughout the segment. Wolfe quoted "author and single woman" Kate Bolick: "A major factor [in the rise of single women] is the rise of women in the workplace. As women have climbed ever higher, men have been falling behind. So instead of marrying down, women choose to be single and successful."

 

Translation: Chances are any guy you meet isn't as professionally successful as you. Why bother with the loser long-term?

 

NBC brought Bolick onto the show, where she argued: "Today marriage is an option, it's not a necessity, the way it once was."

Well gee, Kate, I guess that would depend on why you think it ?once was' a necessity?  If your argument is that women in our culture are now capable of financially supporting themselves independent of men, then I suppose the statement would be correct.  But the presupposition that underlies that assumption is a pretty dim and weak view of the purpose and intent of marriage. 

When you see marriage as what it is - the integral relationship in society's most important part, the family unit - then it's just as necessary today as it was yesterday.  The role that a woman plays in the home is still a vital cog in the wheel of family, as is the role that a man plays.  That doesn't mean that single parent families are doomed to fail.  It does mean that the nuclear family works best - for spouses, for children, for society - and therefore is what we should strive to promote.  Instead, the left seems intent on championing and celebrating everything but traditional families in the false hope that their overcompensation for what they dub the "modern family" will somehow make it work just as well as the traditional, nuclear one.  It doesn't, and they won't.

That isn't just because God says so (though that should be enough for us), but because mountains of sociological data that we have compiled continues to preach the same message: if you want to weaken your culture and bring on innumerable far-reaching problems, simply remove the role of a father or mother from the majority of your nation's homes.

Activists like Bolick, and the pathetic media that trumpets their foolish recommendations, convince themselves that they are somehow empowering women by proving the uselessness and needless nature of man.  They aren't.  They are, however, weakening family bonds, and as a result are weakening our culture.

It isn't a crime to be a single woman.  It isn't wrong to be a single woman.  Just like it isn't a crime or wrong to be a single man.  The world - and yes, the church - has seen magnificent accomplishments from those who did not have the obligations of an immediate family.  But there is something wrong with championing singleness to the point that you imply there is something painfully old-fashioned and antiquated about celebrating the nuclear family.

That is the direction we're going...and our society is the poorer for it.  If you don't believe me, look around.