Go Be With Maria, Gov. Sanford. Itīs Only Moral, and Manly
With all the love in the air and all the comments about Mark Sanford on the web, I couldnīt help recalling something I learned long ago about love and marriage from Frederick Engels, in Chinese, in school in China where we studied basics of Marxism.
Engels wrote a book, in 1884, titled "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State." Based on his studies of human history, Engels laid out four stages of development of human family, from consanguine to monogamous.
When marriage was a political and economic act, for alliance or inheritance, even in the stage of monogamous family, there was no chance, Engels pointed out, for love to have the final word in the making of a marriage. At the same time, he said that monogamy was the only form of the family through which modern sex-love could develop.
Within that context, Engels went on to discuss a new moral standard with such development and penned the following, which I have remembered over the years:
"If only the marriage based on love is moral, then also only the marriage in which love continues."
A hundred and twenty-five years have passed since Engelsī book came out. Marriage and family have undergone many changes, and even taken on many forms. Engels should be happy if he could find out that today most people marry, if they do, for love, not for property or power. Their marriage is therefore moral, at least when they enter it. But thatīs only half of the picture. What about the other half, when love in their marriage no longer continues?
"Letīs Call the Whole Thing off," Sandra Tsing Loh, author and actress from Los Angeles, suggested in her essay with that title in the Atlantic magazine. Not believing that romance could be rekindled or that lifelong marriage was still relevant with todayīs life expectancy, she called off her own of 20 years after an affair.
Quoting a Rutgers study which found that only 38 percent of married people in America described themselves as happy, Loh said that the rest of us stayed married for various reasons, good reasons she called them, such as homeownership, children, and fear of loneliness. She gave as examples her dissatisfied married women friends.
I am not sure we are ready to call off marriage completely as Loh suggested. But I do think what Engels envisioned as moral marriage makes more sense today, as he continued in his book:
" if affection definitely comes to an end or is supplanted by a new passionate love, separation is a benefit for both partners as well as for society "
I wonder if Gov. Sanford, or Mrs. Sanford for that matter, has ever come across these writings by Engels. But it would be helpful if they did.
Gov. Sanford has definitely supplanted Jenny with Maria as both his love and soul mate, as he announced to the world. He also broke the trust in their wedding vow "I will love you and honor you all the days of my life," in Catholic fashion, as the New York Times found out. The moral base of their marriage is gone.
Jenny Sanford may have offered to forgive her husband if he really repented. But as the media has noticed, unlike other scorned political wives, Jenny has acted like she is fine, and will be fine I might add, in or beyond separation.
As for Gov. Sanford, I would like to offer these words:
Be manly. Dare to love and dare to take responsibilities for it. Crying, apologizing and babbling are wimpy. Quit your office, let your lieutenant governor take over, as Sarah Palin did, give Jenny her freedom and children your support, and go be with your Maria.
If you do so, you will be remembered as not only a one-time political star, but also a real-life romance hero, the kind Cristina Nehring, author of A Vindication of Love, said we badly needed. Or you would be just another cheating political husband who will never be able to restore his image in the eyes of his wife, children, constituents or all the women out there, including Maria.