Hello Friend,

If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.

It will be the most efficient use of your time.

And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.

Thank you for visiting and have a great day!

Another Marriage topic.

jonwon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
51
People on here already know my stand on marriage, but i have just read something posted on the No-Mamm web blog that called out to me and i wanted to share it with the enlightened men on this forum.

I totally agree with what this person says and i would suggest if any man is being pampered to get married in the western sphere, to simply show his partner this post and maybe she will open her eyes and agree.


This is a post made by a christian Vicar:
5 Reasons Why Christians Should Not Obtain a State Marriage License by Pastor Matt Trewhella

Every year thousands of Christians amble down to their local county courthouse and obtain a marriage license from the State in order to marry their future spouse. They do this unquestioningly. They do it because their pastor has told them to go get one, and besides, "everybody else gets one." This pamphlet attempts to answer the question - why should we not get get one?

1. The definition of a "license" demands the we not obtain one to marry. Black’s Law Dictionary defines "license" as, "The permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission, would be illegal." We need to ask ourselves- why should it be illegal to marry without the State’s permission? More importantly, why should we need the State’s permission to participate in something which God instituted (Gen. 2:18-24)? We should not need the State’s permission to marry nor should we grovel before state officials to seek it. What if you apply and the State says "no"? You must understand that the authority to license implies the power to prohibit. A license by definition "confers a right" to do something. The State cannot grant the right to marry. It is a God-given right.

2. When you marry with a marriage license, you grant the State jurisdiction over your marriage. When you marry with a marriage license, your marriage is a creature of the State. It is a corporation of the State! Therefore, they have jurisdiction over your marriage including the fruit of your marriage. What is the fruit of your marriage? Your children and every piece of property you own. There is plenty of case law in American jurisprudence which declares this to be true.

In 1993, parents were upset here in Wisconsin because a test was being administered to their children in the government schools which was very invasive of the family’s privacy. When parents complained, they were shocked by the school bureaucrats who informed them that their children were required to take the test by law and that they would have to take the test because they (the government school) had jurisdiction over their children. When parents asked the bureaucrats what gave them jurisdiction, the bureaucrats answered, "your marriage license and their birth certificates." Judicially, and in increasing fashion, practically, your state marriage license has far-reaching implications.

3. When you marry with a marriage license, you place yourself under a body of law which is immoral. By obtaining a marriage license, you place yourself under the jurisdiction of Family Court which is governed by unbiblical and immoral laws. Under these laws, you can divorce for any reason. Often, the courts side with the spouse who is in rebellion to God, and castigates the spouse who remains faithful by ordering him or her not to speak about the Bible or other matters of faith when present with the children.

As a minister, I cannot in good conscience perform a marriage which would place people under this immoral body of laws. I also cannot marry someone with a marriage license because to do so I have to act as an agent of the State! I would have to sign the marriage license, and I would have to mail it into the State. Given the State’s demand to usurp the place of God and family regarding marriage, and given it’s unbiblical, immoral laws to govern marriage, it would be an act of treason for me to do so.

4. The marriage license invades and removes God-given parental authority. When you read the Bible, you see that God intended for children to have their father’s blessing regarding whom they married. Daughters were to be given in marriage by their fathers (Dt. 22:16; Ex. 22:17; I Cor. 7:38). We have a vestige of this in our culture today in that the father takes his daughter to the front of the altar and the minister asks, "Who gives this woman to be married to this man?"

Historically, there was no requirement to obtain a marriage license in colonial America. When you read the laws of the colonies and then the states, you see only two requirements for marriage. First, you had to obtain your parents permission to marry, and second, you had to post public notice of the marriage 5-15 days before the ceremony.

Notice you had to obtain your parents permission. Back then you saw godly government displayed in that the State recognized the parents authority by demanding that the parents permission be obtained. Today, the all-encompassing ungodly State demands that their permission be obtained to marry.

By issuing marriage licenses, the State is saying, "You don’t need your parents permission, you need our permission." If parents are opposed to their child’s marrying a certain person and refuse to give their permission, the child can do an end run around the parents authority by obtaining the State’s permission, and marry anyway. This is an invasion and removal of God-given parental authority by the State.

5. When you marry with a marriage license, you are like a polygamist. From the State’s point of view, when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, but you are also marrying the State.

The most blatant declaration of this fact that I have ever found is a brochure entitled "With This Ring I Thee Wed." It is found in county courthouses across Ohio where people go to obtain their marriage licenses. It is published by the Ohio State Bar Association. The opening paragraph under the subtitle "Marriage Vows" states, "Actually, when you repeat your marriage vows you enter into a legal contract. There are three parties to that contract. 1. You; 2. Your husband or wife, as the case may be; and 3. the State of Ohio."

See, the State and the lawyers know that when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, you are marrying the State! You are like a polygamist! You are not just making a vow to your spouse, but you are making a vow to the State and your spouse. You are also giving undue jurisdiction to the State.

When Does the State Have Jurisdiction Over a Marriage?

God intended the State to have jurisdiction over a marriage for two reasons - 1). in the case of divorce, and 2). when crimes are committed i.e., adultery, bigamy. etc. Unfortunately, the State now allows divorce for any reason, and it does not prosecute for adultery.

In either case, divorce or crime, a marriage license is not necessary for the courts to determine whether a marriage existed or not. What is needed are witnesses. This is why you have a best man and a maid of honor. They should sign the marriage certificate in your family Bible, and the wedding day guest book should be kept.

Marriage was instituted by God, therefore it is a God-given right. According to Scripture, it is to be governed by the family, and the State only has jurisdiction in the cases of divorce or crime.

History of Marriage Licenses in America

George Washington was married without a marriage license. Abraham Lincoln was married without a marriage license. So, how did we come to this place in America where marriage licenses are issued?

Historically, all the states in America had laws outlawing the marriage of blacks and whites. In the mid-1800’s, certain states began allowing interracial marriages or miscegenation as long as those marrying received a license from the state. In other words they had to receive permission to do an act which without such permission would have been illegal.

Blacks Law Dictionary points to this historical fact when it defines "marriage license" as, "A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry." "Intermarry" is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as, "Miscegenation; mixed or interracial marriages."

Give the State an inch and they will take a 100 miles (or as one elderly woman once said to me "10,000 miles.") Not long after these licenses were issued, some states began requiring all people who marry to obtain a marriage license. In 1923, the Federal Government established the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act (they later established the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act). By 1929, every state in the Union had adopted marriage license laws.
 

jonwon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
51
What Should We Do?

Christian couples should not be marrying with State marriage licenses, nor should ministers be marrying people with State marriage licenses. Some have said to me, "If someone is married without a marriage license, then they aren’t really married." Given the fact that states may soon legalize same-sex marriages, we need to ask ourselves, "If a man and a man marry with a State marriage license, and a man and woman marry without a State marriage license - who's really married? Is it the two men with a marriage license, or the man and woman without a marriage license? In reality, this contention that people are not really married unless they obtain a marriage license simply reveals how Statist we are in our thinking. We need to think biblically. (As for homosexuals marrying, outlaw sodomy as God's law demands, and there will be no threat of sodomites marrying.)

You should not have to obtain a license from the State to marry someone anymore than you should have to obtain a license from the State to be a parent, which some in academic and legislative circles are currently pushing to be made law.

When I marry a couple, I always buy them a Family Bible which contains birth and death records, and a marriage certificate. We record the marriage in the Family Bible. What’s recorded in a Family Bible will stand up as legal evidence in any court of law in America. Both George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were married without a marriage license.They simply recorded their marriages in their Family Bibles. So should we.
 

joekerr31

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
3,396
Reaction score
111
Age
49
lets all shave our heads, move to mexico and all drink kool aid. :rolleyes:
 

azanon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,292
Reaction score
41
jonwon said:
People on here already know my stand on marriage, but i have just read something posted on the No-Mamm web blog that called out to me and i wanted to share it with the enlightened men on this forum.
When you were undertaking your quest to form an objective opinion on marriage, what articles or books did you read that were in favor of marriage and why did you reject these opinions?

Anyone with mediocre debating skills and an agenda can make a convincing argument; even for a wrong position.
 

jonwon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
51
azanon said:
When you were undertaking your quest to form an objective opinion on marriage, what articles or books did you read that were in favor of marriage and why did you reject these opinions?

Anyone with mediocre debating skills and an agenda can make a convincing argument; even for a wrong position.

Yes agreed, including you!

I have no intention of getting into anything with you azanon, i think we have flogged that dead horse to 'death', even though it was already dead, i think, well i know, i for one have no intention to keep whacking it.
 
Last edited:

azanon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,292
Reaction score
41
jonwon said:
Yes agreed, including you!

I have no intention of getting into anything with you azanon, i think we have flogged that dead horse to 'death', even though it was already dead, i think, well i know, i for one have no intention to keep whacking it.
I agree its been flogged to death. Thanks for pointing that out. So why do you keep starting more and more posts on the same subject? If anyone's whacking this one, its definitely you.
 

jonwon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
51
azanon said:
I agree its been flogged to death. Thanks for pointing that out. So why do you keep starting more and more posts on the same subject? If anyone's whacking this one, its definitely you.
Because all my post are anti-marriage, simply due to the state fuc*ing things up, if we remove the state intervention and get back to grass roots, it may mean something again.

That was the point of the post, i guess though its wasted on most guys simply due to them conforming to any slave state control they can get, a marriage state licence amongst other things is only tying yourself to state control, which has no place in what is fundimentally and all rights a spiritual agreement which was founded by religion.

Any other form of marriage is simply signing over to the state, granted there are some advantages for being married to the state, but there far and few between, going back to grass roots may entice people to embrace a life partner again, but with increasing state control it seems to be only getting worse.

Marxisist state is what some are calling it, which incidently will be my next reading mission.

Anyway Az, i did not want to debate this, especcially with you, your one of the few guys who have made it work, but your rosy marriage outlook from my point of view can be poison to the weak minded AFC, since he may jump in the deep end with the average western women, i am only posting that marriage is not something that most men would be wise to take up, there are exceptions to the rule, hence you but those exceptions sometimes dont realize there example may be a poor guide for others, at least my approach if a man does decide he knows exactly what he is letting himself in-for, hence a better choice of life partner if he so does choose to get shacked up, but in all intents and purposes i see most married guys are oblivious to the wanten destruction in the feminzed western sphere, there is a term for them and by default it is true, there labled mangina's not that i am implying you are, but i hope you see my point.

Regardless if people dont like my posts, i will still post them because they mean something for me, they may mean something for others also, but as someone else stated, this wont change because there are too many 'yes sheep' about, but i can still get frustrated over how totally and fuc*ing utterly we are being more and more controlled, but most people dont see it, well i do and i know some others here do also, it is to them that i post these things, not for you sorry!
 

azanon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,292
Reaction score
41
jonwon said:
Anyway Az, i did not want to debate this, especcially with you, your one of the few guys who have made it work, but your rosy marriage outlook from my point of view can be poison to the weak minded AFC, since he may jump in the deep end with the average western women, i am only posting that marriage is not something that most men would be wise to take up, there are exceptions to the rule, hence you but those exceptions sometimes dont realize there example may be a poor guide for others, at least my approach if a man does decide he knows exactly what he is letting himself in-for, hence a better choice of life partner if he so does choose to get shacked up, but in all intents and purposes i see most married guys are oblivious to the wanten destruction in the feminzed western sphere, there is a term for them and by default it is true, there labled mangina's not that i am implying you are, but i hope you see my point.
I feel the same way about this as I do with Luke Skywalker giving advise on sex. If you're neither married nor divorced, I think the wise approach is to listen and learn only with regards to this topic. Sure, there is some value to evaluating something from a theoretical and hypothetical perspective, but this isn't the Big Bang theory. There are actual people who are either married or have been married, so I just think you can't beat a first-hand perspective. So, in the interest of not leading anyone astray, AFC or not, why not leave this one to the ones with the best perspectives?

I don't mind your posts at all. Just realize that I hold your opinion on this specific issue as I think you should hold my opinions on skydiving, considering I've never sky dived before. Point being, I'm not trying to be personal here. I don't have first-hand perspectives on everything either. But I do on marriage.
 

jonwon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
51
azanon said:
I feel the same way about this as I do with Luke Skywalker giving advise on sex. If you're neither married nor divorced, I think the wise approach is to listen and learn only with regards to this topic. Sure, there is some value to evaluating something from a theoretical and hypothetical perspective, but this isn't the Big Bang theory. There are actual people who are either married or have been married, so I just think you can't beat a first-hand perspective. So, in the interest of not leading anyone astray, AFC or not, why not leave this one to the ones with the best perspectives?

I don't mind your posts at all. Just realize that I hold your opinion on this specific issue as I think you should hold my opinions on skydiving, considering I've never sky dived before. Point being, I'm not trying to be personal here. I don't have first-hand perspectives on everything either. But I do on marriage.
MMM, i have been married and divorced, so whats your point, here we go again whacking that dead horse, your conclusions are reasons enough why i have no intention of getting into any form of debate with you, no offence, but take a step back and you maybe will be able to see my point and yes agreed having none married guys state those things is hard to digest, but experianced guys dd wiaght to it, but i suspect in your mind the fact i have been in a divorce will be reason enough to dismiss my post? (actually sperated for 3 years now, divorce is simply a joke formality, has was marriage)

Hence to me your thinking seems very 2 dimensional as is most married men (I can almost predict what your going to write with about 90% accuracy), anyway i have posted this, to you even, too many times and i wont post them again, i may link in a picture of a dead horse being flogged though.
 

Charm

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 18, 2003
Messages
1,278
Reaction score
11
Age
40
jonwon, allow me to be personal here since azanon is refusing to be. You sound scared of making another commitment like marriage and you are using this "state screws marriages up" as your excuse. I think you want to make the commitment again and you are seeking for an argument that illustrates a justification that you could than hold onto instead of holding onto the fear that you have so deeply gripped fingers into. God bless you in being able to overcome this obstacle soon.
 

bigjohnson

Master Don Juan
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
2,442
Reaction score
37
jonwon said:
... if we remove the state intervention and get back to grass roots, it may mean something again.
I agree with this 100% - the State shouldn't be in the relationship regulation business, should it?
 

ThunderMaverick

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 19, 2004
Messages
1,946
Reaction score
70
Age
42
I think alot of people are throwing in Kool-aid jokes and what not because the article has overbearing Christian overtones. Regardless of that Jonwon is 100% correct in his standing. Marriage licenses are totally unconstitutional and unfair. If most people knew what they were getting into they wouldn't go out and get marriage certificates. I don't want the government involved in my union between another person or my children. It's like something out of a sci fi horror film.

I'm not a Christian anymore, but regardless the article is correct. Go out and let the government marry if you want. After all it's worked for most people in this country, right?

Edit: And yes, the government is a huge player in screwing marriages up.

I've never been married but I'm looking at the legal, constitutional aspects of it. It's not a good deal, IMO.
 

bigjohnson

Master Don Juan
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
2,442
Reaction score
37
Fortunately you can modiy the marriage contract to a large degree by getting a solid pre-nup.
 

aliasguy

Master Don Juan
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
757
Reaction score
5
Charm said:
jonwon, allow me to be personal here since azanon is refusing to be. You sound scared of making another commitment like marriage and you are using this "state screws marriages up" as your excuse. I think you want to make the commitment again and you are seeking for an argument that illustrates a justification that you could than hold onto instead of holding onto the fear that you have so deeply gripped fingers into. God bless you in being able to overcome this obstacle soon.

-
-
Why is avoidance of commitment so commonly called "fear" of commitment? Someone looks over the lay of the land, decides he doesn't want to live there, and people start calling him "afraid" of commitment.

Classic shaming tactic.
-
-
 

WaterTiger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
35
Location
Wine Country, Ca
If you get married in church (temple, mosque or whatever) then the ceremony is religious. But when you divorce it's a civil/legal procedure of the court. No other religious ceremony has any legal ramifications.

Shouldn't the religious marriage be a religious divorce?
You know, drag the friends and family back to the church & have the preacher get up and say something like: "We are gathered here to witness the divorce of Sue and Bobby. She ran up $7,400 on his credit cards and he slept with her best friend as revenge. I now pronounce you EX'S!"
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
3,960
Reaction score
36
Yes the "State" is now our Guardian - the church is an extension of the long arm of the "State" - This is part of The Matrix!! However, in matters of the heart, we fall under the divine realm - the "State" has no power over the divine!!
 

jonwon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
51
Charm said:
jonwon, allow me to be personal here since azanon is refusing to be. You sound scared of making another commitment like marriage and you are using this "state screws marriages up" as your excuse. I think you want to make the commitment again and you are seeking for an argument that illustrates a justification that you could than hold onto instead of holding onto the fear that you have so deeply gripped fingers into. God bless you in being able to overcome this obstacle soon.

As AlisGuy said.

When i went into marriage charm, i had little idea what i was letting myself in-for, my marriage and seperation went rather smooth compared to most guys, but the fact i was now seperated and soon to be divorced (i walked out), I had to do alot of de-programming to walk out of a bad situation, alot of de-programming has stuck with me and i have added to it over the years and the conclusions i have made based on research and 'experiance' has led me down this path, i dont have any rosy tinted specs on.

Yes a large part of it is 'state control' LMS summed it up perfectly and watertiger, justifying a state marriage licence because of 'divorce' is the same has justifying a pre-nup, hence whats the point in 'marriage'? You have already doomed it to failure (but sadly essential in this day and age, which is rather fuc*ed up in-itself), so in reading statements like this all it confirms to me is the institution in this day and age is nothing more then a playground ideal.

Granted my marriage did not work and i am glad it did not and in a way i am glad there are ways to get out of the contract (contract between two people, can you even believe this cra*) when things go tits up, but saying that, there was no reason to get married, none what-so-ever, it was simply a 'social' expectiation, like two point four children a nice house and a picket fence, but the more i researched the more i realized the concept means something totally different, especcially when there are so many institutions that make money out of divorce and marriage.

My post is a way to show there is no reason to get married, its a big fuc*ing farce, but the snipet from the preacher reached me deep down, it took away the farcickle nature of modern day marriages and replaced it with something far deeper that no state should ever be involved in, that is why i posted it and goes to show you, you dont need a conventional marriage licence to feel what the couples feel when they get married in his church, i know which i would rather have, then the 'social' ideal of two point four children and a picket fence.

I am simply showing people that; yes i made a mistake in my life, i followed the crowd, like a sheep, conforming to the social pattern of life. Now i have learned to go my own way, hence 'charm' when i do meet her or if i meet her, it wont be to conform to some social state control, it will be to conform to 'me' control, hence conventional marriage can kiss my ass, that preacher and others like him would be the 'only' reason i would ever do it again, his statements go far deeper then 'conventional' hence it has at least some meaning, i am not religious, but marriage IS a religious institution any thing else is a 'contract' with your partner and the 'state' hence fuc*ed up, in that there is no marriage just a costly playground romance.

State marriage licence contracts are in all respects nothing more the conforming with state control, they should have no place in marrying, plus people who feel the need to bind another to a state control contract, i do wonder, i was blind to this now i am not, but why the hell would i want to 'bind' another person to me, through 'state' intervention, if i 'loved' a person i would not want them to be shackled to me through the 'laws' of the land, i dont need a 'slave' and i dont want a women who needs one too. (no married person gets a state licence knowing the above, but when all is said and done, your getting a contract (not marriage in its true form) to bind another to you through the state laws, if that is not a form of slavery i dont know what is, this to me should have no place in the unity of man and women or husband and wife).
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
3,960
Reaction score
36
jonwon said:
...but saying that, there was no reason to get married, none what-so-ever, it was simply a 'social' expectiation,
You are wrong here! You are taking leaps and bounds! "Social expectations", on a mass scale, are based on the natural order of things!! So it is only natural to seek a mate to build a family!! And this implies a mate who complements your nature as a man, whereby humanity can be extended, and enhanced, through the propagation of your genes!! Do you understand the significance of this???
 

jonwon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
51
Last Man Standing said:
You are wrong here! You are taking leaps and bounds! "Social expectations", on a mass scale, are based on the natural order of things!! So it is only natural to seek a mate to build a family!! And this implies a mate who complements your nature as a man, whereby humanity can be extended, and enhanced, through the propagation of your genes!! Do you understand the significance of this???

Yes i do, but you dont understand my post.

One does not need to get married to have what you posted, not in the watered down version that is so easily, breakable in this western sphere.

Marriage is nothing more then a fashion statement, a social expectaion to conform to a 'rule', there is no rule with what you described, hence that meaning has been lost, not be me, i just avoid the destruction, the concept has been lost by the elite intervention for the purpose of 'profit' hence to tell people to tie into a system that benifits the state is something i can not do.

Now take a couple who are together because they have a sense of belongingness, that’s a different story, but they don’t need to get married to 'prove' that to you, me or the fuc*ing state.

Also lets not even add in this added variable of the feminized western sphere, why by marriage is a biased institution, so what better way to get 'married' then have a partner i.e women who will not force you to conform to state laws, who loves you for you no matter, death do you part, likewise for a guy. But like allot of people getting married, they do it for the wrong reasons, for the label and the fashion accessory, hence its nothing but a media materialistic farce, that has no meaning.

Your ideal is perfect LMS, but sadly that concept can only be embraced when 'two' people come together and choose, in this day and age, to get married and get a state licence to me is only encouraging what should be a union of 'family' turn into nothing but extra stress on the couple in terms of state intervention, this is not 'love' this is materialism at its highest, hence yes the destruction of the family unit.

Marriage is a part of the problem, it has lost its meaning, granted some here make it work, but they will make the 'family' unit work without that ideal, until marriage becomes a complimentary of the family unit, instead of the 'law' 'big brother' social normality, i wont embrace it, simply because there is no point.

I am hope thats cleared things up and i will never ever choose a mate who expects me to conform to the 'state' laws of marriage, i am seeing a few girls, the one i would probably keep as the keeper would be the one who can state ' i dont need to be married to show how much you mean to me, marriage does not suite men and i love you too much to tie you down to a biased system', which i would tell her, i would give her that commitment but i wont honour it with a state law 'contract', if it ever comes to pass.
 
Top