To Save the FAMILY, Abolish Marriage - as a legal class or status

Don't get me wrong. I happen to be a Christian who believes in marriage as a religious institution. However, legislators and religionists often speak of saving marriage and ending "out-of-wedlock" births.


A state legislator recently wrote: "Our laws need to favor childbirth and child raising within marriage, and disfavor divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing." and "We of course also have to look at the tax code, which penalizes married couples."

Wrong. Legislators and true church folk should know better. We don't need laws to favor child raising "within marriage" but rather within or without marriage, by FAMILIES. And we already have those laws. We just need to ENFORCE the fundamental right to be a parent. Wake up. It's the 21st Century.


I like to watch old movies. There are probably thousands where at some point in the movie a couple gets married by a justice of the peace or a ship captain, that is, by a government official (The African Queen, for example, a ship captain).

Does anyone ever ask the question: Why do two people in love require the state to hold their hands and be the third party to their union or start of a family? What good has that done for families?

When are we going to grow up as a species and kick the state out of our most personal and private relationships, whether it's married or co-habitating "unmarried" couples? Who is anyone to cast aspersions on what any couple decides to call their relationship? Do unmarried couples have less rights to parent their children than married couples? No.

Marriage is a religious institution. Family, except for adoptive parents, is a biological institution - of Nature - and parents may or may not decide to be married in a church. That's their business. So let's speak of families and parental rights, not marriage, in regards to the law.

Families need protection, not marriages. Protecting families will, however, protect families of married couples. The state has no business requiring marriage licenses, regulating, granting tax benefits to, or punishing family members who decide to split up. But it does have a legal duty to ENFORCE the fundamental, constitutional right to be a parent to one's children.

This talk about saving marriage is ridiculous. If you really care about families, use the word FAMILY, not marriage, because not all parents decide to hold themselves out as married, AND SHOULD NOT NEED TO in order for their parental rights to be enforced.

Government officials should never need to utter the words married, marriage, or wedlock, etc. any more than they should use the words Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Catholic, Methodist, or atheist.

We don't need tax benefits for families because sharing living space is already an advantage enjoyed by families. Tax benefits only let government into our private lives. All we need from government is enforcement of the right to parent, which enforcement is the primary disincentive to the break up of families, and all the benefit families need from government. Neither parent will then be able to profit by breaking up a family when neither parent has committed any crime deeming him or her unfit to parent, as happens daily in our "family courts".

THE PROBLEM: The game family courts play is simple: First dupe a parent, usually the father, out of his fundamental, constitutional rights to due process, equal protection, presumption of innocence and the right to be a parent. Forced unequal custody is the engine creating and perpetuating litigation and fees for attorneys and psychologists as desperate parents throw money at the problem. Sole custody "awards" also mean "child support" orders, one basis upon which states receive federal grant money. Additionally, the Violence Against Women Act promotes false accusations against men. Every state already had criminal statutes against assault prior to VAWA, and men and women commit assault in domestic situations in nearly equal amounts.

See: Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting

For a list of violations of rights and crimes committed by family court judges:



1) End federal funding such as VAWA and Title IV-D of the Social Security Act that promotes family destruction

2) Equal Parenting for fit parents unless they agree otherwise: no parent deemed unfit except upon conviction before a jury of peers, no more unequal custody rulings by a single judge.

3) Trial by jury in all cases that involve the Fundamental, Constitutional right to be a parent with standard of proof as beyond a reasonable doubt because denial of parenthood is no less serious than incarceration

4) State-of-the-art electronic recording of all family court proceedings: Cameras and voice-to-text software to automate transcripts in all courtrooms and allowing parties to use their own electronic recording equipment in court as check on court recordings. There are cases where records have been altered.

See: “Deconstructing America”

5) End the diversion of legal proceedings into witch hunts using court ordered psychological "evaluations" of fit parents.

ADDITIONALLY, The Family, needs an absolute divorce from government regulation and licensing requirements, which is a relic of centuries of collusion between church and state from which our First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is suppose to liberate us.

The Law evolves. Both the Family and the Church are too sacred for any government involvement, even if this requires an end to all tax benefits and exemptions for both families and churches. The problem with churches is that their tax exempt status prevents them from speaking out on the most important issues, like family law. Family, like sunshine, air, rain, mountains and beaches, and other blessings of God, or Nature, if you prefer, are benefits we already enjoy, so long as government gets out of the way of that enjoyment and enforces laws to protect these blessings.

Ending state licensing and regulation of ALL marriages and civil unions will moot any arguments for same sex marriage. We need to divorce government from all marriages. What any couple does in privacy is no concern of government and requiring a license to do it is absurd, infantile, and just plain silly nonsense. Whatever rights or benefits same-sex partners now seek via civil unions or marriage should require neither.

The state has no business regulating personal relationships, except for enforcement of the God-given, fundamental, constitutional right to raise one's own biological children, establishing parental rights - adoptions - for orphaned or abandoned children, and requiring true deadbeat parents to pay child support.

We don't need marriage contracts and thus the divorce industry - a modern institution of slavery based on denial of the right to be a parent. If you really want to save the family, let's abolish the institution of marriage - as a legal class. Many lawyers will object to losing part of a body of law to litigate. Too bad. Get them out of the business of destroying families.

See: "No-Fault" Is Not The Problem, But Slavery