The state is just as much involved in your divorce and any matters of abuse and spousal/child support if you get married.
We are not like the Islamics where a woman is a slave subject to beatings or murder by her husband's whim.
It is also the business of the state, since you got a birth certificate for your child, to assure you are accountable for child neglect/endangerment.
Marriage, like medical practice and legal practice requires a license - - AND ONCE YOU SIGN FOR IT, IT IS EVERY BIT THE STATE'S BUSINESS WHAT YOU DO...
Interesting point. Thanks for mentioning it and for explaining it so well. I certainly would not (and did not) argue that the state had no interest in crimes, child neglect and all the rest, within a marriage. The law does not authorize one spouse to harm the other or the children, even under color of a "private" medical decision.
The Schiavo litigation turned more on guardianship; marital status remained a private matter. All the Schindlers could do was plead for Michael to give Terri a divorce, which, of course, he refused. As long as he was the guardian, he prevented Terri from suing him for divorce! (I suspect a guardian ad litem could have fixed that, and that may be why Judge Greer would not allow a serious GAL.)
My opinion, incidentally, is that Terri's still-unexplained injuries were the result of an assault by Michael. He lost his only alibi with the autopsy report, and he has told too many different stories about what happened that night, none of them plausible.
Marriage, like medical practice and legal practice requires a license - - AND ONCE YOU SIGN FOR IT, IT IS EVERY BIT THE STATE'S BUSINESS WHAT YOU DO...
Interesting.
Do you see any limits to the State's power to control what happens between husband and wife in their marriage?