Marriage will be used to destroy you.
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Family Bible Fellowship Forum Index -> Marriage/divorce
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Prakk



Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Location: Montana

PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2006 7:54 am    Post subject: Marriage will be used to destroy you. Reply with quote

I've been ridiculed for claiming that we need marriage contracts, and why. People have said, "That's a ridiculous scenario", and "that will never happen" to precisely these questions:
Quote:
"How would divorce be handled in polygamy? Could two 'spouses' oust a third? What about property ownership -- could three out of seven spouses own property jointly apart from the others? Can a spouse in one polygamous marriage enter into another polygamous marriage without the consent of all the spouses of the original and the new marriages? What about inheritance? Tax returns? Child support? Powers of attorney? Right-to-die decisions?"
I have raised ALL of these issues privately and said that if I could think of it, someone else could. A person armed with a lawyercould and would raise havoc. There millions of lawyers out there, someone did think of it. To be truthful, I probably wasn't the first person to do so. WE NEED MARRIAGE CONTRACTS. The original quote can be found here: http://kipesquire.powerblogs.com/archives/archive_2005_03.shtml

Keep this in mind, once "Polyamoury" is legal, and from a legal standpoint "COMMON LAW" MARRIAGE LAWS THAT EXIST ALREADY will be used to create marriages even though you may not have registered them with the state. Then divorce laws can be applied to them in the above scenario.

A scarey scenario. You just graduated from College, you roomed with 3 other guys in the same dorm room. You get married, you have kids and those three guys show up, claiming that you were married to them, and sue to gain custody of your children with your wife, because after all, Polyamoury is legal, they claim you were in a "gay marriage" with them, they sue to get your house, your kids, everything. It is not that far fetched. It in fact will happen unless we take steps now.

Here's another. Maybe you're a new Christian. You had an "affair" and your marriage nearly broke up. You found the Lord. You and your spouse reconciled. It's not over. The jilted lover claims "marriage". It's going to get really ugly.

Here's another. A "Clan" marriage of a corporate nature is created. These powerful rich lawyered up people go around deliberately having affairs, rooming with people, seeking occasion, and then claiming marriage. They then use the courts to pillage marriages of assets and children. They could even be a child porn ring or pedophiles looking for new victims.....

Hugh McBryde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
foc



Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:54 pm    Post subject: Re: Marriage will be used to destroy you. Reply with quote

No offense, hugh, but common law marriage laws have been dying a slow death for years now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TK



Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 699
Location: Northeast Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey-- i have a law degree-- i need to jump on that bandwagon! what a gravy train!

Not.


i dont think even america has sunk so far as to let those scenarios take place. although i wouldnt be 100% shocked, i must admit.

TK
_________________
"Were not our hearts burning within us? (Lk 24:32)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prakk



Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Location: Montana

PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 1:49 pm    Post subject: Obsessed are we? Reply with quote

foc wrote:
"No offense, hugh, but common law marriage laws have been dying a slow death for years now."
None taken, but if you want to talk to me, you know where and under what conditions. Stop following me around trying to stir things up.
TK wrote:
"i dont think even america has sunk so far as to let those scenarios take place. although i wouldnt be 100% shocked, i must admit."
Rather than wait for that to just "happen" wouldn't it be wise to prepare?

Hugh McBryde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Jim



Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 95
Location: Albany

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well if someone wants to destroy me through marriage then so be it. They can take it all as far as I am concerned. Its not like I am going to need anything in Heaven.

Razz

Jim
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prakk



Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Location: Montana

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:25 am    Post subject: I get it, give up. Reply with quote

Jim wrote:
"Well if someone wants to destroy me through marriage then so be it. They can take it all as far as I am concerned. Its not like I am going to need anything in Heaven."
Thanks for a window into your soul. You seem to be saying that nothing we do here is of any importance or consequence.

Hugh McBryde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Prakk



Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Location: Montana

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:34 am    Post subject: Of course, my idea was far fetched and insane. Reply with quote

I am of course a total wack job and am just making up frightening stories. Shocked
KATHLEEN HARRIS of Sun Media wrote:
May 31, 2006

"Multiple-wife marriages have been legally recognized in Canada to award spousal support and inheritance payments.

The former Liberal government long maintained that polygamy is criminal in Canada but documents obtained by Sun Media under Access to Information show that polygamous marriages have been recognized 'for limited purposes' to enforce the financial obligations of husbands.

Religious organizations say same-sex marriage opened the door to decriminalizing polygamy, and worry that formal recognitions of plural marriages will weaken the government's ability to defend the anti-polygamy law if it faces a constitutional challenge on religious grounds. A polygamist from Bountiful, British Columbia has warned he will fight for his constitutional right to have plural wives on religious grounds."
LINK ME BAYBEEEE !

Keep in mind that our more liberal justices are looking outside the country for legal precidents with which to advance their agendas. Wrong? Of course it is, but they do it anyway.

Hugh McBryde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Micah



Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 155
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess I am not understanding your point here. If I roomed with three guys in college how can they say we were married unless they have a marriage certificate with my signature and legally signed by a licensed individual to perform marriages? Could you please clarify. Thanks.
_________________
Luke 16:17 - It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prakk



Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Location: Montana

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:44 am    Post subject: Hi, my name is Bill, glad to meet you, I want a divorce. Reply with quote

It has long been thought by those of us watching this seriously from the sidelines, that the next step after "homosexual marriage" would be "bisexual marriage". The reasoning is as follows: Many Gays insist that they were "born that way", that the attraction they feel for the same sex is programmed into them geneticly, so that's the way God made them, so they should be able to get married.

Next step. If we as a society conclude that those with a "sexual orientation" should be allowed to express it through what is legally called marriage, then bisexuals should be able to do so. This means that a minimum of three persons need to be in a marriage, One being bisexual, or as it is indelicately put, "swinging both ways".

Next step. This is structurally a Polygamy. One man, two women, one woman two men, etc. The numbers barrier is hereby broken offering the structure of marriage to bisexuals because of their natural "orientation" just as it has been offered to Gays.

Those of us playing social prophets did not count on what has actually happened. A new term has been invented called "Polyamoury", this is really a Polygamy but "Polyamoury" means however many men and however many women relating to one another sexually in whatever way they see fit. Man on man, woman on woman, several men on one woman, several women on one man, several women and several men, etc. As long as they are of legal age and defined as "committed" to one another, so be it. This is now the NEXT STEP.

Combine this with "common law" marriage statutes or principles, and the court's proclivity in these days and times in any country to simply declare things to be true and let us deal with the aftermath. It is not a far fetched step to say that one day you might find yourself involved in a divorce proceeding with someone you merely roomed with. Thus I say that marriage contracts are a necessary legal defense. Some method by which we legally define the sort of relationships that we are in needs to be produced so that we can protect ourselves. Otherwise, if your spouse has an affair, you may someday end up in divorce court, getting divorced from someone you just met.

Hugh McBryde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
schoel



Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 292
Location: Parker, Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Rather than wait for that to just "happen" wouldn't it be wise to prepare?


I'm confused as to what action you are proposing and if taking that action would be consistent with the teachings of Jesus.

Question Is this a concern of protecting our stuff and $$?
Arrow Jesus said to let them have what they ask for and perhaps even more.

Question Is this a call to mobilize politically?
Arrow Jesus said that His kingdom is not of this world.

Question Is this an advocacy of government sponsored marriage licenses?
Arrow Jesus affirmed that marriage is God's institution and the government and it's marriage licenses seem pretty useless in upholding the sanctity of marriage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Micah



Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 155
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the clarification. I honestly don't see that happening, just for the mere fact that those who do such deeds are subject to the same standards. Meaning that they would be too fearful of that happening to them, so they would want to be protected by the law. I think man's selfishness would prevent that from happening.

Also, we do have a sort of marriage contract called the "marriage certificate". I think all we need to do is outlaw the "common law" marriages, which someone already stated is in the process of being accomplished.
_________________
Luke 16:17 - It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prakk



Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Location: Montana

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:08 pm    Post subject: The Rubicon is behind us. Reply with quote

schoel wrote:
" Question Is this a concern of protecting our stuff and $$?
Arrow Jesus said to let them have what they ask for and perhaps even more."
So, you propose to turn over your son in a custody battle to the former college room mate of your wife, who is a Lesbian , who is claiming that she is married to your wife by virtue of their past association?
schoel wrote:
" Question "Is this a call to mobilize politically?
Arrow Jesus said that His kingdom is not of this world."
Yes, it is a call to mobilize politically. Though His Kingdom is not of this world, there are several discussions of legal matters in the New Testament. We are for instance not supposed to take one another to secular courts, but we can, as Paul did in several such venues, defend ourselves there. I seek to get Christians to define what it is they think marriage is, and gain an allowance or "dispensation" from secular society to practice marriage in that way and only that way. The downside of this is the political trade off will be to open the door for others to define marriage they way they want to define it, from a legal standpoint. A scenario. You believe in heterosexual lifelong monogamy, you believe that contract can only be sundered by adultery during that marriage. You write a contract/prenup to that effect and enter into it with your prospective spouse. You publish a legal notice essentially saying, "speak now, or forever hold your peace", a sort of "title search" is initiated and the partners are bonded as eligible, your marriage is defined as simply open to you two only that have written the contract, suits to gain access the marriage, it's children or it's property are enjoined. You marry. You are thus protected. I seek to have the government RECOGNIZE that such arrangements can be made and be legally binding.
schoel wrote:
" Question Is this an advocacy of government sponsored marriage licenses?
Arrow Jesus affirmed that marriage is God's institution and the government and it's marriage licenses seem pretty useless in upholding the sanctity of marriage."
I fully agree. We opened pandora's box though when we submitted to the notion that Government in any way shape or form had anything to do with marriage.
Micah wrote:
"Also, we do have a sort of marriage contract called the 'marriage certificate'. I think all we need to do is outlaw the 'common law' marriages, which someone already stated is in the process of being accomplished."
Actually, until recently, all marriages were "common law". The marriage certificate at present is a contract to which new provisions are constantly added, and existing provisions taken away from depending on what suits the current political whim.

Hugh McBryde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Micah



Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 155
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:39 pm    Post subject: Re: The Rubicon is behind us. Reply with quote

Prakk wrote:
Actually, until recently, all marriages were "common law". The marriage certificate at present is a contract to which new provisions are constantly added, and existing provisions taken away from depending on what suits the current political whim.


The question is then, should we forcefully change that? I see no harm in trying to convice others to do what is right, but shouldn't we always keep in mind that we are not of this world? Should we spend time trying to force the world to be something that it never will be? I don't mind voting for the right causes and standing up for righteousnous, but I would be foolish to think this world is going to change for the cause of Christ since it stands under a curse. I think the best we can hope for is to convince others to the cause of Christ through our obedience and hopefully those individuals will be the future law makers.
_________________
Luke 16:17 - It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prakk



Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Location: Montana

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:48 pm    Post subject: I'm not forcing anyone, I want a barrier. Reply with quote

Micah wrote:
"I see no harm in trying to convice others to do what is right, but shouldn't we always keep in mind that we are not of this world? Should we spend time trying to force the world to be something that it never will be?"
I'm not proposing to force the world to be something it is not. I am in fact proposing something that will probably facilitate "Gay marriage" in a legal context. They could devise such agreements themselves and our country, egalitarean as it is, would insist that they be provided the same opportunities that we are.

All I seek to do is provide a legal umbrella under which those of us who wish to define marriage in a traditional heterosexual monogamous context, could do so. That would also allow some to define marriage (legally) in other ways. I for instance am an advocate of Polygyny as well as Monogamy.

Hugh McBryde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Micah



Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 155
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In my personal opinion I don't think we should facilitate sin at all. I think we should promote righteousness and let our righteous acts condemn the world. We shouldn't be in the business of compromising our standards, so that we can ultimately protect ourself. God is our defender and not some man-made law which will always be subject to change no matter what we do.
_________________
Luke 16:17 - It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Family Bible Fellowship Forum Index -> Marriage/divorce All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

BlueSilver_C 1.00 Theme was programmed by DEVPPL JavaScript Forum
Images were made by DEVPPL Flash Games