Are more restrictions on marriage really needed?

It's easy to see where Sen. Mark Christensen is coming from.

According to the latest data, there were 12,315 marriages in Nebraska in 2005, and 5,975 divorces.

That's about on track with the rest of the United States, but it's still not something to be proud of.

To try to counter the trend, the freshman senator from Imperial introduced LB696, considered by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, which would impose a 30-day waiting period and a $100 fee on couples who have not had eight hours of marriage education classes.

Those who did attend the classes, which would have to be taught by church officials, clergy, marriage counselors or other qualified instructors, would get by on the present $15 fee and no waiting period.

They would learn things like conflict management in marriage, communication skills, financial responsibility and parenting skills.

There would be an "out" for people with terminal illness, imminent transfer to a combat zone or other compelling circumstances, who could have the $100 fee and 30-day waiting period waived by the county clerk.

There are plenty of reasons to create conditions where as many people as possible are involved in a good marriage, according to experts.

For one, recent studies show that both men and women benefit from marriage, not just women as implied by earlier studies. Husbands generally are healthier if married, while wives are financially better off.

For another, cohabitation typically does not provide the benefits in physical health, wealth and emotional well being that marriage does, according to David Popenoe, professor of sociology at Rutgers University, and co-director of the National Marriage Project.

Cohabitants in the United States are more like singles, he said, because they tend not to be as committed as married couples, and are more oriented toward their own personal autonomy and less to the well-being of their partner, he said.

So, if there are so many advantages to being married, is it the state's role, and is it in society's interest, to make it more difficult to tie the knot?

We think not.

That, and the additional layer of bureaucracy and expense it would create, should be enough to leave the proposal on the drawing boards.