On Marriage

[Age]

Even by your low standards, AGE, this post is looney.

WHY, EXACTLY?

you, OBVIOUSLY, did NOT ANSWER the previous OPEN CLARIFYING QUESTION I posed, and ASKED you. So, WHAT you are REFERRING TO here NO one KNOWS.

Do you STILL want to CLAIM that one who has NOT CHOSEN to have children but has been RAPED, and has BECOME a parent has MORE 'responsibilities' than most "others"?

If yes, then I STILL suggest that 'the adult one' who RAPED "the other" TAKES ON 'ALL responsibilities', and RELINQUISHES ALL 'following responsibilities' of "the other". AGAIN, unless, OF COURSE, "the other" CHOOSES otherwise.

If you DISAGREE WITH 'this', then I would suggest that it IS 'you', "alexiev", who is Truly LOONEY, and APATHETIC.

Why don't we just hand over all children to rapists?

For OBVIOUS reasons.

Maybe -- just maybe -- children are better off being raised by non-rapists.

WHY did you even SAY and WRITE 'this'?

Or don't you care about the welfare of children?

If you had read EVERY thing I have SAID and WRITTEN here, then you would ALREADY KNOW the ANSWER to this QUESTION.

By the way, what, EXACTLY, made 'you' go down this line of QUESTIONING anyway "alexiev"?

Thank goodness I haven't read everything you've "SAID and WRITTEN". A more disagreeable task would be difficult to imagine.

However, just to humor you (and any lurkers unfortunate enough to have read your post), "TAKES ON ALL responsibilities" includes feeding, educating, and caring for children.

If that is what the one who was raped Truly WANTS, then who are 'you' do 'you' ARE, EXACTLY, to SAY or CLAIM otherwise?

Do you really think rapists are the best people to do this?

If you had ACTUALLY READ, and UNDERSTOOD, what I SAID and WROTE here, then you would NOT be asking me this QUESTION here.

If you don't think they are, why did you write what you wrote?

MOOT.

Oh, and by the way, if you were NOT YET AWARE some people who have raped "another" have ended up 'parenting' FAR BETTER than "other" people who were, for example, VERY JUDGEMENTAL and, or VERY RELIGIOUS parents. But 'this' REALLY had/has NO bearing in what I was SAYING, QUESTIONING, and POINTING OUT above here.

[godelian]

The problems with marriage originally began when the government took control. The core adage concerning government involvement immediately kicked in:

There is no problem in the world that the government won't make worse.

The actual reason why the government in the USA took control was even truly insidious. They wanted to outlaw interracial marriage.

Unlike the Spanish and Portuguese colonies where the government was smart enough to stay out of people's bedrooms, and where interracial marriage was just a fact of life -- if they happen to live together some of them will obviously sleep together -- the British and former British colonies insisted on enforcing their obnoxious white supremacist views.

In a speech in Charleston, Illinois in 1858, Abraham Lincoln stated, "I am not, nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people. I as much as any man am in favor of the superior position assigned to the white race".

British colonial culture was so much ahead at the vanguard of institutional racism that the Nazis copied most of their racial ideas as ready-made recipes from the USA.

Under state control, the very idea of marriage became the epitome of evil, and in more than one way.

Nothing good could ever come from the very people who were instrumental in designing and fuelling Nazism, centuries before the Fuhrer came to power in the German Reich.

The contemporary divorce-rape system in place is merely one of the many vile exponents of Statist depravity. Everything about Statist marriage is wrong. Not just its divorce. No amount of "fixing" could ever solve the problem, given the fact that the system is rotten to its core.

Therefore, I reject, repudiate, reprobate, and utterly condemn Statist marriage, and I will at all times keep the Nazis out of my bedroom.

[Walker]

Therefore, I reject, repudiate, reprobate, and utterly condemn Statist marriage, and I will at all times keep the Nazis out of my bedroom.

You're still gonna be on the hook for palimony. Probably not if you're a woman, though.

[godelian]

Therefore, I reject, repudiate, reprobate, and utterly condemn Statist marriage, and I will at all times keep the Nazis out of my bedroom.

You're still gonna be on the hook for palimony. Probably not if you're a woman, though.

I have moved to SE Asia.

They have never introduced that kind of things outside the West.

Just like personal income tax, in theory, they may even have divorce r-pe on the books but in practice, it is not implemented.

Ultimately, the problem is not even the western government.

The problem is the men in the West who accept that kind things, because they have no sense of justice and certainly no sense of honor. They could also just be cowards, for all I know.

It is dangerous to live in a country where the men are dishonorable cowards. The government will expect to get away with things that would cause a murderous reaction elsewhere.

The divorce r-pe system would never take hold in, for example, the Middle East, because otherwise the severed arms and legs would soon start flying around in the air. A middle eastern man would rather die as a martyr than to go along with the bullsh-t.

In fact, the war in Afghanistan with the Soviets started when the communist regime tried to introduce marriage "reforms" in 1979. The Afghans kept killing Russian soldiers for 10 years until they eventually left. Later on, they kept decimating American soldiers for 20 years until they also wisely ran away.

If only one American man out of ten thousand chose to blow up the court house instead of paying alimony to a cheating ex-wife, the divorce r-pe system would no longer even exist.

Instead, they all accept it, they refuse to do their duty, and that is why you would also have to pay it.

Again, I live in a country where the dead bodies would pile up in the streets, if the government tried to do that. That is the reason why I will never have to pay it.

Freedom and justice come at a cost. These things require a lot of dead bodies to stay in place.

[jasonlava]

I hear your frustration and concerns about the divorce system, and it's clear you value principles of justice and honor. Living in a culture with different perspectives on these matters can indeed be a significant adjustment. It's true that societal norms and responses to such issues vary across regions.

While your observations about the Middle East highlight a different approach to certain reforms, it's important to navigate these complexities with care. Each society has its unique dynamics.

If you ever feel overwhelmed or need support adapting to your new environment, consider seeking out local communities or expat groups who might share their experiences. Sometimes, finding like-minded individuals can provide a sense of solidarity. Wishing you strength as you navigate these cultural differences

[LuckyR]

Freedom and justice come at a cost. These things require a lot of dead bodies to stay in place.

I'm trying to understand your opinion. Your preferred type of government is one party authoritarian rule, right? Because freedom and justice ends up killing too many people.

[godelian]

Freedom and justice come at a cost. These things require a lot of dead bodies to stay in place.

I'm trying to understand your opinion. Your preferred type of government is one party authoritarian rule, right? Because freedom and justice ends up killing too many people.

I do not choose amongst governments but amongst populations.

The kind of government a country ends up with, depends on what kind of population lives there.

A good type of population will end up with a less obnoxious government. A bad type of population will end up with a repressive and outright horrible government.

For example, a country with a divorce-rape system is clearly populated by a bad type of population. The local men are obviously just a bunch of dishonorable cowards. If you choose to live there, you will inevitably also end up getting divorce raped by their government.

So, the solution is to stay away from living in the midst of a bad population because otherwise you will have to deal with a bad government.

This may sound like victim blaming. It undoubtedly is. I despise people who choose to be victims and who refuse to do anything about it. If someone can be oppressed, then he inevitably will. The solution is to stay away from people who choose to be victims because otherwise you will also become one.

[Sculptor]

Freedom and justice come at a cost. These things require a lot of dead bodies to stay in place.

I'm trying to understand your opinion. Your preferred type of government is one party authoritarian rule, right? Because freedom and justice ends up killing too many people.

I do not choose amongst governments but amongst populations.

The kind of government a country ends up with, depends on what kind of population lives there.

A good type of population will end up with a less obnoxious government. A bad type of population will end up with a repressive and outright horrible government.

For example, a country with a divorce-rape system is clearly populated by a bad type of population. The local men are obviously just a bunch of dishonorable cowards. If you choose to live there, you will inevitably also end up getting divorce raped by their government.

So, the solution is to stay away from living in the midst of a bad population because otherwise you will have to deal with a bad government.

This may sound like victim blaming. It undoubtedly is. I despise people who choose to be victims and who refuse to do anything about it. If someone can be oppressed, then he inevitably will. The solution is to stay away from people who choose to be victims because otherwise you will also become one.

This is shockingly naive

[godelian]

This is shockingly naive

Possibly, but for the time being, it works.
- no divorce rape courts
- no personal income tax
I don't know of any country outside the West that terrorizes their population with these things. By the way, they did not exist in the West either just a bit more than a century ago.

In the 250,000 C14 years of human history, these things did not exist anywhere at all.

Hence, I really don't see why I would have to put up with these things.

[godelian]

I hear your frustration and concerns about the divorce system, and it's clear you value principles of justice and honor. Living in a culture with different perspectives on these matters can indeed be a significant adjustment. It's true that societal norms and responses to such issues vary across regions.

While your observations about the Middle East highlight a different approach to certain reforms, it's important to navigate these complexities with care. Each society has its unique dynamics.

The West has lost its technological edge in military matters. The other side has simply caught up.

In the meanwhile the West behaves as if it still had the ability to force its views onto others. The Taliban predictably deported NATO from Kabul airport. That was clearly just the beginning of the reckoning.

I do not believe in a peaceful approach to someone who insists on trying to force you.

On the contrary, it took millions of dead German bodies and their crushing defeat to stamp out the infuriating arrogance of the German Reich.

In my opinion, the West now needs the same cure.

There are obviously exceptions, but in general, I consider the average man in the West to be a dishonorable coward.

Let these men now prove that they are willing to risk their lives and die for the feminist doctrines that they think that they can impose onto others.

I live in SE Asia now. So, I will happily watch the shit show from a distance.

[Alexiev]

There are obviously exceptions, but in general, I consider the average man in the West to be a dishonorable coward.

Let these men now prove that they are willing to risk their lives and die for the feminist doctrines that they think that they can impose onto others.

I live in SE Asia now. So, I will happily watch the shit show from a distance.

And I consider you a moronic dweeb. I guess that makes us even, except that I'm right and you're wrong. Your lack of knowledge about divorce law proves your ignorance. (I'm sure you prefer the Muslim rule where the man need only say "I divorce you" three times and the women have no authority whatsoever. You're the type who lacks the courage, charisma, and strength to assert any authority unsupported by sexist laws and customs.)

The Taliban are willing to die for their sexist, autocratic, and repressive doctrines? Does that make them right? Of course not.

One good thing: you don't live anywhere near me. Perhaps you can oppress Asian women, as is your seeming desire. I doubt it, though. Even the most submissive women wouldn't put up with the likes of you.

[godelian]

And I consider you a moronic dweeb.

Thanks, I should probably feel flattered!

I'm sure you prefer the Muslim rule where the man need only say "I divorce you" three times and the women have no authority whatsoever.

You could also just ghost the spouse (or other romantic counterpart).

This is actually the most common formalism for breaking up in modern times.

Most relationships nowadays end by ghosting and blocking the person from all social media. The requirement to pronounce a talaq basically means that Islamic law does not allow ghosting. Mosaic law also does not allow it:

Deuteronomy 24:1. When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens, if she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, that he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her away from his house,

Still, if the man finds you indecent, it is literally his God-given right to put an end to the sexual contract.

You're the type who lacks the courage, charisma, and strength to assert any authority unsupported by sexist laws and customs.

I do not not need to be more Catholic than the Pope or to do more than is strictly required by God's law. Seriously, why would I?

The Taliban are willing to die for their sexist, autocratic, and repressive doctrines? Does that make them right? Of course not.

Yes, of course, it makes them right.

For me to take someone's views seriously, this person must put skin in the game. Otherwise, it is just too easy. I only respect real effort. Therefore, I do not care what someone votes for. It is simply too easy to fill out some mere paperwork. That is why I only care about what you are willing to risk your life and die for.

Perhaps you can oppress Asian women, as is your seeming desire. I doubt it, though.

Since you are so masculine, combative, argumentative, and confrontational, and since you so easily resort to using shaming language, are you sure that you can actually keep a man? If you are pretty, you can obviously attract one for a short time, but will he also want to stay? If you ever talk like that to him, like you are talking to me, and he has options, he will be gone in no time. I am quite sure that you will not be able to resist the temptation forever. So, it is just a question of not even much time before he leaves you.

[Sculptor]

This is shockingly naive

Possibly, but for the time being, it works.
- no divorce rape courts
- no personal income tax
I don't know of any country outside the West that terrorizes their population with these things. By the way, they did not exist in the West either just a bit more than a century ago.

In the 250,000 C14 years of human history, these things did not exist anywhere at all.

Hence, I really don't see why I would have to put up with these things.

No it does not work.
If you do not know other countries with tax and divorce then this is because you have not looked.
Taxation has gone is step with progress; schools, roads, public services. And every country has it.

[godelian]

Taxation has gone is step with progress; schools, roads, public services. And every country has it.

Taxation is obviously universal. Personal income tax is not. The USA introduced personal income tax only in 1913.

Furthermore, which country outside the West sends a tax return form to every resident in the country?

In half of the world, there is not even a postal system capable of achieving that feat. It also requires an address database with an entry for each resident. In half of the world, this database does not even exist, if only, because a large part of the population are undocumented subsistence farmers or urban informal-economy peddlers.

There are already 23 countries that officially do not levy any income tax. Furthermore, most countries in the world are deemed "fragile states". They are simply not able to levy an income tax:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... ates_Index

Any country with a "fragility index" above 50 does not try to levy income tax, even if they have it on their books. They tax large-company employees with a salary tax, but that is where their efforts stop.

Only 45 out of 179 states have a fragility index below 50. So, there are 134 countries out of 179 to choose from, if you don't like divorce-rape courts or income tax.

In all these years of living outside the West, nobody has ever sent me a tax return form to fill out. I still need to receive the first one.

I only live in so-called "fragile" countries. I simply cannot stand the other countries.

Concerning "progress", I do not see what progress governments have ever produced.

The existence of public-school indoctrination camps? With their drag queens promoting gender confusion to four-year-old toddlers?

By the way, there are magnificent highways all over SE Asia. Apparently, they manage to build them without resorting to terrorizing their population with an income tax. For some of them, they charge a toll fee. But then again, I have no problem paying for something that I actually want to use. Why should anybody pay for highways that he does not use?

The government is never the source of progress, even though it certainly claims credit for it.

The technology that has improved our lives (or sometimes made it worse) is a gigantic global intangible that transcends individual countries and that gets produced by individuals, companies, and markets that function perfectly fine without income taxes or divorce-rape courts.

I am typing this comment on a Xiaomi phone. In what way does this Chinese company benefit from some arbitrary guy getting divorce-raped in Canada? How would that lead to better Android phones?

[Sculptor]

Taxation has gone is step with progress; schools, roads, public services. And every country has it.

Taxation is obviously universal. Personal income tax is not. The USA introduced personal income tax only in 1913.

And this gave the potential for all those public services; free schools, improved roads, fire service, police, coastguard ad infnitem.

Tell me which countries do not have Personal Income tax?