The Case Against Marriage
Posted on | January 2, 2012 | No Comments
Well, not so much against marriage in general – but strongly against government’s involvement in it. Proponents of same-sex marriage claim that all they want is the same endorsement from the state that opposite sex couples get. Perhaps they should consider how negative that impact can be.
Taken into Custody: The War Against Fatherhood, Marriage, and the Family is a book I have not yet read, but I have heard the author speak in interviews and I know his story well.
By allowing the “State” to determine the rules of marriage, you also grant them control of divorce. By allowing the “State” to determine the rules of divorce, you are guaranteeing that profit, power & control will take precedence over common sense and expediency…and decency.
So called Family Courts have become instead anti-Family courts. A divorce proceeding can be brought by anyone (in a majority of cases, the wife) for any reason (or no reason at all). Divorces are always granted, there is no chance of contesting the action anymore. “No Fault” has increased the incidence of divorce exponentially. The unwitting victim, who may have been blindsided by the action, is then at the mercy of a court system with very few checks OR balances.
Many a man has had his children ripped away from him, had his income garnished, thrown out of his home, even been thrown in jail. Is there any other court system in the U.S. where a person can have everything taken from them without ever even having a wrong alleged?
Should a woman desire to inflict even greater pain and hardship on her former mate, she need only claim abuse; of her children, of herself, of the most heinous kind. Should the father have the resources to fight such allegations, he may eventually clear his name – but there is NO penalty to the woman for making such claims. The big winner is a court system that has collected outrageous fees requiring an innocent man to prove his innocence against unsupported charges brought by a woman with literally nothing to lose by smearing her husband. Too often anger and greed lead these women to ignore the pain they inflict on their children and a man they once at least claimed to love, and the anti-family court system rewards them for it.
We are at a point where the reasons for matrimony and procreation being sponsored by the state have evaporated. Women no longer need to be protected by the corrupt and bloated bureaucracy, men are no longer the sole bread-winners, both parents should be given equal consideration in custody arrangements.
I have written extensively in the past about the scourge of paternity fraud, a problem exacerbated by the circus that we refer to as “Family Court”. No support agreement should ever be entered into without a paternity test – or an informed decision by the father to waive such proof. The court should not be bankrupting men to pay for children that aren’t theirs, born to women they may not have even met.
I have written about the need for any couple considering marriage to execute a pre-nuptial agreement. Other than enforcing that or a standard nuptial contract, the government should NOT be involved when a couple decides to enter Holy matrimony.
We don’t need a Constitutional amendment to “protect” traditional marriage, we need only to remove the government and their profit motive from the equation altogether. If churches want to marry a couple of consenting adults, let them – but don’t expect or require consent from the state. If a couple of consenting adults want to enter into a civil contract of commitment, let them – but don’t expect or require consent from the state.
In short, the state should no longer participate in the forming or dissolution of any marital union in any of its forms. I’m sure the divorce lawyers can find some other specialty that will require their special skill-set.
Comments
Leave a Reply