Dear Editor,

Family distress and domestic abuse could be significantly reduced or erased if relationships were founded on the recommendations of Ephesians 5:28, which says a man should love his wife as his own body, for no man hates his own flesh, but feeds and cherishes it.

Such inseparable love implies a marriage, and although it’s true that violence and abuse do occur under marriage contracts, marriages generally tend to avoid the bitterness and violence or ‘batta-bruising’ that occurs in most informal relationships — barring, of course, business and expedient marriages.

Marriage may not be the sole solution to domestic violence and family disputes since tribulation in the flesh is an expected feature of the union, but the responsibility and respect that surround the institution would make it less likely for a man to abuse his wife, or vice versa, within its covenant.

Vows can be broken, but at least there is a level of integrity and respect between those who have taken the vows. On the other hand, a common-law union is just as it implies — common. No concrete expectations or commitment to love and cherish; it’s an open-ended contract, where another is welcomed in if one or both sides fall apart. Abortions thus become much easier as deception, heartbreak, and betrayal, for no one has any measure of grounding or obligation to any cause or promise.

Therefore, marriages forged from a truth-love connection are more likely to reduce domestic violence.

Homer Sylvester

h2sylvester@gmail.com