Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dfwgator; KrisKrinkle; Gondring
Nuclear families are a necessity for economic stability, if we denormalize families, that will only lead to a further expansion of the welfare state.

Exactly right.

Kris & Gondring, if you "get govt out of the marriage license biz," then you've got to simultaneously shut down the entire welfare system.

Since the govt is involved in being the "back-up" safety valve system for broken families, it has a vested interested in overseeing the front-end "commitments" & covenants & Points of accountability not be denormalized into an "anything goes" society.

If you get the govt out of the marriage biz, that includes divorce courts, holding spouses/parents (deadbeat dads) accountable, and just let them all fend for themselves re: what they can get from private aid.

29 posted on 07/31/2011 4:37:36 PM PDT by Colofornian (Friends don't let friends drive drunk on Joe Smith sentimentalism to an outer darkness destination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Colofornian; dfwgator; KrisKrinkle; Gondring; FromTheSidelines; Godzilla; Jim Robinson

Let’s ask the boss.

Jim, what is your opinion on those who have, the past two days shown up on the polygamy threads either in favor of polygamy or of abolishing legal marriage altogether (KrisKrinkle; Gondring; fromthesidelines; possibly others)?

Does FR have an official stand on this topic?


36 posted on 07/31/2011 4:57:50 PM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
Gee, there's so much here, but at least you're thinking.

“Exactly right.”

I don't believe it's “exactly right” that it would necessarily “only lead to a further expansion of the welfare state”. They'd just have to develop different laws and rationale for those laws, in order to accomplish the same goals without expansion.

“Kris & Gondring, if you “get govt out of the marriage license biz,” then you've got to simultaneously shut down the entire welfare system.”

1. I don't see why.

2. Do you think that's a bad thing? A lot of Conservatives think Government should be less involved in that kind of thing anyhow, that charity should be private.

“Since the govt is involved in being the “back-up” safety valve system for broken families, it has a vested interested in overseeing the front-end “commitments” & covenants & Points of accountability not be denormalized into an “anything goes” society.”

1. There used to be such a thing as a “Bastardy Bond” by which the father had to ensure that the support of those born out of wedlock did not fall to the government. I don't recall exactly how that worked though.

2. The government is already involved in being the “back-up” safety valve system for broken families, including families in which the father or fathers never really took part. Some say the government facilitates broken families and doesn't recognize or heed the vested interest of which you write.

3. I do not advocate an “anything goes” society. Similar to what I wrote above, they'd have to develop different laws to accomplish the same goals regarding children, property rights, responsibilities, and accountability of those involved (to include deadbeat parents).

47 posted on 07/31/2011 5:38:32 PM PDT by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson