When I was in divinity school, way back in the last century, I remember taking a survey class on the Hebrew Scriptures. As a course covering a vast and complex subject, there was a lot to try to squish into one semester. One of the more memorable discussions, following a couple of lectures, focused on how we understand these ancient stories, written so many years ago and in such a remarkably different context. Should the stories be understood as literal truth, as in God creating the world and the universe, in seven distinct days or as charming myths from the creativity energy of an ancient people? Or was there another way of approaching these old stories, a way that not only brought meaning to us these many years later, but helped bridge a line of connection?

I remember considering the creation stories (there are two of them) from the beginning of Genesis. One of the more memorable moments was to notice the truth contained in the second story, in Genesis 2 and 3. The truth was not in the details of the progression of Creation. Instead, there was a vital element of truth in the ways through which the human beings relate to God and to each other. It was rather humbling to discover that human beings really haven’t change so much, despite the advancements in civilization and the march of evolution. After engaging in transgression, as it was then is still the case, the man shifts the focus of blame to the nearest woman.

When Adam is caught having eaten from the tree that he wasn’t supposed to eat from and then blames it on his wife, those of us who gathered in that class found it amusing. While we may consider the story more myth than truth in the details, there was this nugget that has continued to be true throughout a long span of time. I no longer find it funny. At all.

I can’t help but wonder if that story was either written by woman or influenced by a woman, a woman trying to highlight a problematic component of human behavior. Was there a woman attempting to use this story to call out men, beseeching them to take responsibility for the things they do rather than blame their wives, or at least to share responsibility, especially when it comes to the communal nature (and property) of married couples? If that had been the original intent of the story, it obviously failed.

Here we are in the 21st century with men of significance still blaming their wives. Isn’t it time to do this differently?

In recent days, we’ve heard from two prominent men eager to shift blame to their wives— Senator Bob Menendez and Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. In both cases, it is certainly possible that the wives were the ones to engage in the problematic behavior. Still, the swift response to blame the wife when wrongdoing is made public is, in my mind, not acceptable. We must find a way to shake off the Curse of Creation, an entirely different perspective on what could be labeled “original sin.”

Even if Justice Samuel Alito didn’t have anything to do with the waving of that flag upside down in front of his own house where he lives (and the other flag at his vacation property) and even if it really was the work of his wife, the fact that he was so quick to blame his wife in his public response ought to make him ineligible to serve on the Supreme Court. It’s not that I wish to invoke a sort of chivalry, requiring that men take on blame as part of a twisted honor code. The issue here is the sense of treating one’s wife as a handy sponge ready to absorb the messes of life.

As we see in the Creation story of Genesis 2 and 3, it’s important to appreciate that just because Adam conveniently found a ready blame buddy doesn’t mean he gets away with his transgression. God lays down justice for both, a justice that ripples through the generations. Adam may have thought that by shifting blame, he would be spared from consequences. But, blaming the wife brought no nifty escape route. There should not be an escape route for Justice Alito, or any other man. It’s time to do this differently.