Thursday, July 13, 2006

Jerry Brady Introduces Marriage Protection Plan

Today, Jerry Brady announced his plan to encourage and strengthen traditional marriage in Idaho.

To read the entire story visit this link. This story was also covered by many other news outlets in Idaho including
The Post Register and Local Channel 3 News.

Brady’s Marriage Protection Plan will utilize funds from President Bush’s faith-based initiatives for families and marriages.

“Faith-based initiatives provide great potential to strengthen our families,” Brady said, adding that he believes that voluntary marriage education workshops could eliminate thousands of divorces in Idaho within the next ten years," said Brady.

I've had the chance to see Jerry and his wife, Ricki, together on a few occasions. It's really encouraging to see that the two of them still have that special spark that they probably began their marriage with.

Although it wasn't always easy, Jerry did say that his marriage, like many others, took a lot of work.

Jerry's plan would empower faith-based groups and other qualified institutions to teach the skills needed to have a successful marriage. After that -- it's up to the newlywed couples to work together to forge a lasting union.

Anyhow, read the article yourself. I think that it really shows that Jerry is in touch with what is truly important in life.


Chaucer Arafat said...

Seems necessary... (per capita, Idaho currently has the 5th highest divorce rate in the nation).

Cocnerning the seminar in the article, I thought one of the stats was a little dubious...too blue-sky. It reads:
"The statistics documenting the program’s success are incontrovertible: prior to the course, two-thirds of participants declare satisfaction in their marriage. After just 10-hours in the seminar, that number jumped to 93 percent!" Card stacking? Of course when you ask people who are basking in the recent glow of a 10-hour positive marriage affirmation, they are going to be happier. Let the pathos fade...(not that I am against happiness in marriage..i just doubt that a marriage-panacea exists). But incontrovertible? Lets try "convincing." People's opinions don't readily constitute empirical facts.

But it is a good message: keep it together. Don't let frivolous matters weaken your bond.

Andrew Clark said...

This whole marriage debate is a peice of absurd politcal manuvering. The government should not be involved in people's lives. Let men and women govern thier lives as they want to. I do not think that my laws or my tax money should be going to force others to think the way that I do on marriage. If you want to change the ethics of the nation, go talk to people and convince them of your view, but taking money from us and/or making laws to inforce your view is unethical. I do not support either side in this issue.

Chaucer Arafat said...


although i agree with some of what you said, it isn't exactly germane to the article in question.

And I don't know if it would be too tenuous of an assertion to say that there are societal benefits (economic as well) that stem from solid marriages--what constitutes a valid marriage is another debate altogether. This isn't tax money down a rat hole...

But, I think your sentiment about marriage as the political hotspot of 2006 is true. Its the old political dollar waiting on a dime...

Jessica said...

Faith-based initiatives=crap.

Didn't the Church reject faith-based initiative funding?

JamesP said...

Hmmm, interesting and thoughtful take, Jessica.

Do you call everything you don't agree with crap?

RightDemocrat said...

The family is the basic building block of our society. I am certainly in favor of anything that promotes marriage and family stability.