As a fellow who celebrated his 38th wedding anniversary last week, I was particularly interested in Connecticut Judge Howard Owens' opinion about long marriages.Owens delivered his views at the conclusion of the Jim and Ann-Lorraine Nantz divorce trial. Nantz, who Owens believes is "our nation's most prominent sportscaster" (Sorry, Al Michaels) was ordered to give his now ex-wife about a million a year, a home and condominium in Connecticut, half of all their joint assets and accounts, continued beneficiary status in his $3 million life insurance, and $70,000 to join any country club she desires. Nantz retains their home in Houston, a luxury condominium in the Deer Valley ski resort in Park City, Utah, and the rest of his $7 million a year earnings from his CBS salary, endorsements and other gigs.
But again, what struck me was the judges' opinion of longevity in marriage. Contending that Nantz' 29-year old girlfriend has nothing to do with the matter, Owens agreed instead with Nantz who contended that "Lorrie" Nantz hadn't kept up proper interest in her husband's career. She didn't attend all the events he wanted her to nor did she provide enough "emotional support." For her part, Mrs. Nantz said that she attended as often as possible, but that those continual events (Nantz travels extensively around the country) were not her main focus in life. Raising their daughter was.
Said Owens, "In fairness, for most of the years he prioritized his family obligation and put his wife and daughter Caroline first. As frequently happens in marriages of lengthy duration, the parties do not have the same interest and ardor for their spouses' endeavors."
In other words, Mrs. Nantz should have racked up more frequent flyer miles. And maybe she should have let him hang in the living room that big oil painting of himself accepting a "Man of the Year" award.
And Mr. Nantz? Well, by golly, he gave it a pretty good run. After all, his family was Priority #1 for quite a bit of the marriage anyhow. Before his career really took off. Before he had a best-selling book. Before he found a later model dating partner.
How sad. Marriage is supposed to be (and can be) about sharing, loving, forgiving and showing forbearance towards one another. And done right, two people move closer together, not farther apart. Love over time thus becomes more beautiful, more productive, stronger -- an invaluable resource for not only partners and children but the general culture as well.
But when ego, career advancement, a love for money and position (not to mention roving affections) are allowed priority status in one's life, when these things assume the place that should be reserved alone for one's spouse, the pure and ennobling love of marriage cannot survive.
And neither can the culture. For though a secular judge can come along and divide the spoils, he cannot repair the broken hearts nor the damage done to children and extended family and friends. And with each sacred vow that is broken, the moral structure that underlies a secure and healthy nation is broken a bit more too.
The old saw from Abraham Lincoln is that a nation divided against itself cannot stand. True enough. But neither can a nation of divided families, divided loyalties, and divided consciences.
