Replies

To all that say the state's involvement is essential for the institution of marriage, consider this: Right now as a direct result of the state's involvement in marriage, there are hordes of men who refuse to marry. They will not commit, they will not marry, and if they have children it will be out of wedlock. You might not like it, but its a fact. The state's meddling has created a no win situation for married men in this country and the predictible result is a marraige boycott. That is far, far more of a threat to marriage than any gay couple could ever be. You see, married gays won't prevent heterosexuals from marrying but unjust divorce laws sure will.

Well, I have my own "relationship prophylactic" which I have applied to my most recent dating relationships -- since I have joined the OPC, I have only (seriously) dated fellow Orthodox Presbyterians, such as my Ruling Elder's daughter, my Teaching Elder's Daughter, etc. (the occasional, casual dinner-date excepted).

I'm theoretically willing to date any Calvinist Christian, even Reformed Baptists with whom I differ on theology (since all Calvinists take the Law of God seriously); but except for fellow Calvinist Christians, I'm not likely to "call her back" past the first date. It's not worth it.

Adherents of Calvinist Christianity offer me a "theological guarantee" that they take their Religion more seriously than the Laws of the State -- and that's what I need. Just as "gridlock" has found himself a good woman who will be faithful to him (and he to her) within the Canon Laws of Episcopal Christianity, so I likewise look forward to someday finding my own "Help-Meet" and "Church-Mate" within Presbyterianism or Baptistry. Because it would be irrational suicide for me to accept anything less.

I am a young, financially self-sufficient American Male with a desire to father and train Children within a good marriage. The Laws of Caesar offer me NO PROTECTIONS WHATSOEVER. A vindictive woman could, with the Blessings of the God-State, take my house, my paycheck, my children, my assets, and legally destroy my reputation on her own whim. And my chances of successful Legal recourse against such an onslaught? Statistically, less than 10 percent. Even if I did nothing wrong (restraining orders, which can permanently ruin a legal reputation, can be issued against divorced husbands immediately upon request, with no proof whatsoever).

I'm currently brokering an account for a devoted Father who loves his son like his own breath, is available for him immediately, whenever, business be damned and has (if money counts for anything) already set aside deep six figures for his son's education -- meanwhile, the poor boy comes back from his Adulteress Mother's flop-house covered in burns and bruises. And the Father is still having to fight for Basic Custody, because women are so favored in State Divorce Law. "Patriarchy"?! Yeah, right -- Cry me a FReeping river!!

I cordially envy "gridlock" for finding himself a good woman whom he can love and trust within the canonical standards of the Episcopal Church -- and I hope I can likewise find a good Reformed Baptist or Presbyterian woman for myself. Because I am willing to depend on a Woman who is faithful to the Laws of the Church -- but I'd be a naive fool to trust in the Laws of the State.

I might as well just find a woman who hates me and is willing to destroy my reputation... and buy her a house every ten years.

Under current State Law, financially self-sufficient single American men should view State-Licensed Marriage the way that Jews view Adolf Hitler.

Yeah, Private Contract is obviously too "libertarian" and "utopian", even if it was good enough for Abraham and Sarah. Let's all "Hail, Caesar!!"... after all, he's done such a great job with the Institution of Marriage.

Best, OP