44: happily ever after

I'll admit it, I'm a Facebooker. I remember for the first assignment in Short Story Writing we had to write a humorous anecdote for Reader's Digest. I had no idea how to do that and flopped pretty badly.

Now my favorite activity is writing humorous-to-me Facebook statuses! (still not Reader's Digest worthy)

 

Do you ever wonder how things like centipedes make it into your bedroom? I do. What do they do, come in the front door, race on their hundred legs down the hallway, and beeline towards me? I don't get it. Ah, the wonders of life!

 

One oft forgets what clothes one truly has until forced to launder them by dint of busting-at-the-seams hamper. Whereupon a week of I-have-nothing-to-wear is regenerated into Cute-Cute-Cute.

 

Yes, painting my toenails currently trumps cleaning my disaster-stricken room for the simple reason that I cannot possibly forget to clean my room whereas I will very probably forget to paint my toenails.

Last month I did a first. I used the very annoying "Like this status" tagline:

 

Like this status if you're living your own "happily ever after" (ie. if you're happily married--boyfriends NOT allowed).

Now the purpose was to be encouraged by those who can validate by experience that God's design of marriage continues to be good. And so I didn't want singles to respond because that would defeat my purpose. I added in the comments section:

 

(and yes, I acknowledge well that you can be happy and single, but let us not redefine the phrase "happily ever after" like the homosexual activists want to redefine "marriage").

Because, I know that some content singles just will not be left out of "happily ever after," even if that phrase has traditionally referred to marriage exclusively.

Such a pushing in is reminiscent of those feminists who insisted on being on equal footing with men because they were not happy in their distinct and different roles.

But being happy as a single doesn't mean we have to experience the same kind of happy as a married.

I think it's reminiscent of homosexual activists who want to redefine marriage to include same-sex couples.

We don't have to redefine "happily ever after" to include us. Shouldn't a content single be completely confident in who she is in her unattached state, and even in her "marriage to God," so that she doesn't have to steal from the the distinct glory of God's design of marriage?

I share opinions like this because God's design is worthy of being exalted and lifted up as good, regardless of whether or not I ever experience it.