Gospel of Inclusion.

[JPC sr]

Ferrous Canus, and Stupidus Giganticus.

I need people to be good fathers who support their family financially and emotionally reguardless of if they live with them or not so the children of the father do not end up in jail and my tax dollars are then paying to house, clothe and feed them!

So long as you keep trying to have others to serve your own intentions then you will always be on the wrong side.

No matter have right one is, then it is still wrong to force their intentions onto others.

Families and parents must live and proceed under their own given circumstances and the laws that take custody away from one parent and the unjust laws of child support that denegrade the separated parents and cheapen the children will forever by wrong as they are now.

I want the USA to start protecting parents and defending families which is not happening now.

 

[godsbutterfly]

So long as you keep trying to have others to serve your own intentions then you will always be on the wrong side.

No matter have right one is, then it is still wrong to force their intentions onto others.

Families and parents must live and proceed under their own given circumstances and the laws that take custody away from one parent and the unjust laws of child support that denegrade the separated parents and cheapen the children will forever by wrong as they are now.

I want the USA to start protecting parents and defending families which is not happening now.

So what we need is a law that forces couples to remain married and allows partners to commit adultery, mentally, verbally and physically abuse each other and/or their children thereby preserving the sanctity of the family?

 

[JPC sr]

Ferrous Canus, and Stupidus Giganticus.

So what we need is a law that forces couples to remain married and allows partners to commit adultery, mentally, verbally and physically abuse each other and/or their children thereby preserving the sanctity of the family?

I would prefer to see a law that makes the adultery with a married person to be illegal.

The person outside the family that comes in and adulterates the marriage is the true criminal.

Like Monica Lewinski was the true criminal in the Clinton marriage as that woman tried to destroy that family but after her dirty work was done and exposed the adulterous woman walked away as if she did no wrong, link HERE.

So in the USA if some outside adulterer violates a family then the USA will grant a easy divorce and that is American law.

Like divorce is the prize or reward for some outsider violating a marriage.

We as a society need to create laws which would protect the marriages and defend the family units.

 

[~mellabella~]

sooo...what you're saying is...

I would prefer to see a law that makes the adultery with a married person to be illegal.

The person outside the family that comes in and adulterates the marriage is the true criminal.

Like Monica Lewinski was the true criminal in the Clinton marriage as that woman tried to destroy that family but after her dirty work was done and exposed the adulterous woman walked away as if she did no wrong, link HERE.

So in the USA if some outside adulterer violates a family then the USA will grant a easy divorce and that is American law.

Like divorce is the prize or reward for some outsider violating a marriage.



We as a society need to create laws which would protect the marriages and defend the family units.

You don't think that both parties are guilty? Just the outsider of the affair?

 

[godsbutterfly]

I would prefer to see a law that makes the adultery with a married person to be illegal.

The person outside the family that comes in and adulterates the marriage is the true criminal.

Like Monica Lewinski was the true criminal in the Clinton marriage as that woman tried to destroy that family but after her dirty work was done and exposed the adulterous woman walked away as if she did no wrong, link HERE.

So in the USA if some outside adulterer violates a family then the USA will grant a easy divorce and that is American law.

Like divorce is the prize or reward for some outsider violating a marriage.

We as a society need to create laws which would protect the marriages and defend the family units.

That still would not prevent further adultery from recurring within the marriage nor does it deal with the issues of repeated abuse. The spouse who is committing adultery is betraying their partner and the vows they made before God.

 

[JPC sr]

Ferrous Canus, and Stupidus Giganticus.

You don't think that both parties are guilty? Just the outsider of the affair?

The outsider adulterer is MORE guilty then the married person because the outsider is violating the marriage and the family unit.

Even if we said the married cheaters were more guilty (which they are not) then for governmental laws the gov must remain neutral inside the marriage and protect the marriage and the family from outside immoral attacks as in an outsider adulterater.

The gov laws now put blame and force against a married spouse that cheats and so now we have gov laws that break up marriages and laws that divide families and that is absurd.

So attaching "guilt" is a minor issue compared to protecting the families and defending the marriages and that means we need laws that attack the outsider adulterer.

 

[JPC sr]

Ferrous Canus, and Stupidus Giganticus.

That still would not prevent further adultery from recurring within the marriage nor does it deal with the issues of repeated abuse. The spouse who is committing adultery is betraying their partner and the vows they made before God.

It appears you are saying that based on our society as it is now today and not how it would become if the laws were corrected to protect the family units and defended the marriages.

That would be a big change for the better if we made laws like that.

The cheating spouse now and their adulterous partners have the law protecting their dirty deeds. The worse thing that can happen is the marriage gets a divorce from the other spouse that has already been cheated once and the laws cheat the other spouse again. Then the adulterer is free to marry or to find another family to destroy.

That is our American society that gives privledge to the outsider adulterers.

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

By sticking with the example of the President Clinton family,

then if the law were to punish the outsider adulterer woman like give Lewinski jail time,

then everyone in the world would now know that if they cheat on Hillary then they too would go to jail and therefore that marriage would be more secure and unthreatened.

Now any woman can hit on the husband (Bill Clinton) and if he falls then it is their victory to destroy that marriage through their aduterating that family and many Republicans would cheer it on.

The same would be true in common society.

If a spouse cheats then the offended other spouse would have a legal means of protecting the marriage and the family unit against the outsider adulterer whether it is a male or female or homosexual intruder.

It is absurd that the person living in the town with everyone knowing that they cheated and the married couple can only get a divorce or live under mockery and scorn because our present laws protect and defend the adulterers and not the families.

Also I saw this info about step-family abuse link HERE and our society need to help the real family and stop promoting divorce and separations.

What we have now of easy divorce, then taking custody away from one parent, then ordering child support claiming that a real parent pays the thieves, and children being confused.

We could do better then that, but we need to do it fast.

 

[godsbutterfly]

By sticking with the example of the President Clinton family,

then if the law were to punish the outsider adulterer woman like give Lewinski jail time,

then everyone in the world would now know that if they cheat on Hillary then they too would go to jail and therefore that marriage would be more secure and unthreatened.

Now any woman can hit on the husband (Bill Clinton) and if he falls then it is their victory to destroy that marriage through their aduterating that family and many Republicans would cheer it on.

The same would be true in common society.

If a spouse cheats then the offended other spouse would have a legal means of protecting the marriage and the family unit against the outsider adulterer whether it is a male or female or homosexual intruder.

It is absurd that the person living in the town with everyone knowing that they cheated and the married couple can only get a divorce or live under mockery and scorn because our present laws protect and defend the adulterers and not the families.

Also I saw this info about step-family abuse link HERE and our society need to help the real family and stop promoting divorce and separations.

What we have now of easy divorce, then taking custody away from one parent, then ordering child support claiming that a real parent pays the thieves, and children being confused.

We could do better then that, but we need to do it fast.

But I am still asking you what of the spouse who is physically, sexually, mentally or verbally abusing their spouse and/or child? Is that supposed to remain a shameful secret to protect the guise of a "family"? That's not a family! That's a sick and twisted nightmare. What about that scenario?

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

But I am still asking you what of the spouse who is physically, sexually, mentally or verbally abusing their spouse and/or child? Is that supposed to remain a shameful secret to protect the guise of a "family"? That's not a family! That's a sick and twisted nightmare. What about that scenario?

I guess the divorce itself will never fully go away,

so under a situation like that then a divorce and a restraining order too would be required and I agree with that.

But I do not like mis-using claims like that to mis-justify easy divorces based on the capricious whims of one spouse.

If we are going to dig up and search out reasons for easy divorce then there are many to be found.

Thus the idea must turn to protecting and prolonging the marriage and the family units.

I use to believe that cheating was the best reason for divorce but if the law were to make adultery (by an outsider) to be against the law then that is a viable and realistic ulternative.

Many people really like Hillary Clinton and her endorsement became BIG-TIME after she stood firm and saved her marriage and she saved her family from that home wrecker woman and that is the biggest root of her popularity to this day.

Saving a marriage is a strength while a divorce marks a failure.

So for us to build a sound society again then we need to give strength to families and to marriages so they can stand too against the immoral attacks from outsiders.

 

[godsbutterfly]

I guess the divorce itself will never fully go away,

so under a situation like that then a divorce and a restraining order too would be required and I agree with that.

But I do not like mis-using claims like that to mis-justify easy divorces based on the capricious whims of one spouse.

If we are going to dig up and search out reasons for easy divorce then there are many to be found.

Thus the idea must turn to protecting and prolonging the marriage and the family units.

I use to believe that cheating was the best reason for divorce but if the law were to make adultery (by an outsider) to be against the law then that is a viable and realistic ulternative.

Many people really like Hillary Clinton and her endorsement became BIG-TIME after she stood firm and saved her marriage and she saved her family from that home wrecker woman and that is the biggest root of her popularity to this day.

Saving a marriage is a strength while a divorce marks a failure.

So for us to build a sound society again then we need to give strength to families and to marriages so they can stand too against the immoral attacks from outsiders.

It's either divorce them or kill them and we can't exactly legalize murder either no matter how deserving the abuser might be. I do agree many people give up on marriages too easily. I meant my vows when I said them but when the time comes that your physical and mental well-being and those of your children are in danger and your spouse has already left you cannot maintain a relationship that way.

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

It's either divorce them or kill them and we can't exactly legalize murder either no matter how deserving the abuser might be. I do agree many people give up on marriages too easily. I meant my vows when I said them but when the time comes that your physical and mental well-being and those of your children are in danger and your spouse has already left you cannot maintain a relationship that way.

I do not speak about your particular marriage and not my own either,

but many if not most cases of abuse against the spouse or against the children link HERE come out of the perverted ways and laws of our present system and society.

If the laws were improved then our social situations would improve too.

The pressure and stresses that now exist could be lowered and spouses would have options that save their marriage.

Like the abuses in domestic violences today are often from persons on their second or third marriages and so they carry "rebound" baggage link HERE. And many spouses cheat because of their human weaknesses and not any real dishonest betrayal. And very many people refuse to get married because the marriage is a legal threat and marriage is being openly scorned in many ways. Even child-birth is degraded with orders that they better be able to afford the baby, or else get an abortion because our society and gov has made parenting into a type of crime.

The role of government is not really obscure. In a Capitalist system as the USA has then gov is not to be run like a business by promoting profit and growth as that is an improper gov function under Capitalism. The Capitalist gov is to minimize conflicts and discontent in the Country so that the public sector can proceed without calamity.

Marriage is a social and religious institution and the gov has taken over the Institution of marriage instead of protecting it and now the gov has turned marriage into a mess.

And a divorce / separations are hostile acts and the gov has tried to limit the conflicts of divorce like a fool, so now the USA has easy divorce and laws that steal the children from the parents and unjust thievery as child support.

The gov's one and ONLY answer to marriage is divorce and thus the American families are suffering under our misguided laws.

We can either improve these or else let the next generation suffer under it too, and I want to change it soon.

 

[MMDad]

Hey quarter wit!

Marriage laws are state laws, not federal laws. You are running for the wrong office if you want to change them.

 

[hvp05]

I do not speak about your particular marriage and not my own either

Yeah you are. You are still angry that your wife divorced you and found someone with whom she found a true, mutual love. And you consider her second husband to be the "adulterer" of your marriage, even though, realistically, your marriage was several years dead.

The role of government is not really obscure.

This is true - only not why you think it is. As MMDad just said, the federal government is not ordained with the powers to control marriages. It really is a shame you don't understand the office you're after.


And Jimmy, why don't you explain the dichotomy in your belief that the government should stay out of child support enforcement (because you want families to guide themselves), while you want the government to get into illegalizing adultery (because families need protection). That doesn't seem to have come up yet, and I'm sure some of your new friends would enjoy learning that as well.

 

[This_person]

I would prefer to see a law that makes the adultery with a married person to be illegal.

The person outside the family that comes in and adulterates the marriage is the true criminal.

Like divorce is the prize or reward for some outsider violating a marriage.

We as a society need to create laws which would protect the marriages and defend the family units.

Why do you neglect as secondary the personal responsibility of the married person?

To use your oft-used Clinton issue, Bill was the one who swore an oath to his betrothed to be honest and faithful and upstanding. HE violated that oath. By your thoughts, the person who did NOT swear to uphold the marriage is more responsible than the person who SWORE to uphold the marriage. That's like making the shopkeeper responsible for someone stealing his wares - because he had good wares to steal. It makes no sense.

Do you understand that people are responsible for their own actions?

 

[This_person]

Hey quarter wit!

Marriage laws are state laws, not federal laws. You are running for the wrong office if you want to change them.

Jimmy, MMDad brings up an excellant point here. Do you understand that what you're proposing as the primary plank in your platform is not even achievable by becoming a US Representative?

You are actually trying to become a US Representative, right? You're not just using this as a platform for trying to shore up support for some other run for some other office later, being dishonest to the people and disrespectful to the process, are you?

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

MMDad brings up an excellant point here. Do you understand that what you're proposing as the primary plank in your platform is not even achievable by becoming a US Representative?

Of course I know that marriage is under State laws.

This is a "Religion" thread and we are discussing side issues.

My platform for my US Congress campaign is still the same as it is told on my campaign website, link HERE.

Marriage law reform is not one of my primary platform issues but it is still very important to me.

Why do you neglect as secondary the personal responsibility of the married person?

By your [words], the person who did NOT swear to uphold the marriage is more responsible than the person who SWORE to uphold the marriage. That's like making the shopkeeper responsible for someone stealing his wares - because he had good wares to steal.

It is not like that at all.

The shopkeeper is like the marriage and the thief is like the adulterer.

Under the present divorce laws if an outside adulterer violates the marriage (steal from store) then the divorce laws say the store can close down - or the marriage can break up.

Your "responsibility" claim is just that you are determined to blame the victim and not the perpetrator.

If we continue to punish the spouse and divorce the family unit and do nothing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to the outsider thief adulterer then we are destroying our own society by these misguided laws.

The outsider that adulterates a marriage is the thief in the store that we fail to punish.

 

[~mellabella~]

Your "responsibility" claim is just that you are determined to blame the victim and not the perpetrator.

Funny, I thought the victim was the spouse who was cheated on. Its poetic justice then, in your eyes?

 

[godsbutterfly]

Of course I know that marriage is under State laws.

This is a "Religion" thread and we are discussing side issues.

My platform for my US Congress campaign is still the same as it is told on my campaign website, link HERE.

Marriage law reform is not one of my primary platform issues but it is still very important to me. It is not like that at all.

The shopkeeper is like the marriage and the thief is like the adulterer.

Under the present divorce laws if an outside adulterer violates the marriage (steal from store) then the divorce laws say the store can close down - or the marriage can break up.

Your "responsibility" claim is just that you are determined to blame the victim and not the perpetrator.

If we continue to punish the spouse and divorce the family unit and do nothing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to the outsider thief adulterer then we are destroying our own society by these misguided laws.

The outsider that adulterates a marriage is the thief in the store that we fail to punish.

And how often is "The Shopkeeper" not to be held accountable for allowing "The Thief" into the store? Why should a spouse have to risk their life thru the fear of sexually transmitted diseases such as Aids, HIV or HVP (Human Papiloma Virus that can cause cervical cancer) because the other spouse cannot seem to resist the urge to cheat over and over? Not all cheaters are concientious and considerate - Imagine That!

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

Funny, I thought the victim was the spouse who was cheated on. Its poetic justice then, in your eyes?

I do not know what is meant by "poetic justice" but if that means to minimize the blame game then I will be a poet.

So yes the other spouse has been cheated on, and the child(ren) are also injured, so are the extended families, and I add that our society is harmed by the cheating and it is a problem for gov to address and not just to push the writ of divorce as the ONLY solution.

Everybody is harmed as a victim after an act of adultery but the divorce is a second way of harming us all a second time.

By your figuring it was Hillary Clinton that was the victim and I agree, but it was Hillary that saw the true enemy in the adulterous woman and Hillary did not play the "victim" and she saved her marriage and she preserved her family unit.

I am saying that we need to give that option to our general population so then the victim spouse can turn to the law to prosecute the outsider adulterer and then save their marriage and preserve their families too.

Afterwards the word would get around that if anyone cheats on her then they too would go to jail or other punishment such as money damages and then the whole town would learn fast.

Being given a divorce is not a prize, and after an outsider violates a marriage then the divorce is a second violation and not vengeance at all.

Such a change at first would hurt those now that believe adultery of married people is fair game - so let them hurt.