Both issues have a single etiology-the state’s control over and interference with the institution of marriage. As such, we must seek the authors of the idea that the state was the proper trustee or conservator of marriage. Otherwise, as long as the state controls marriage,it will never be restored as a durable and clearly defined arrangement, because there is nothing in the history of government to suggest it that it will ever become a model of restraint, respect or constancy.

Clearly, the idea of state regulation of marriage originated with two old adversaries, Henry the Eighth and Martin Luther. Both, for different reasons asserted state primacy over marriage. Henry wanted a divorce, even though he never apparently thought much of the restraints of marriage, seeking the divorce to pacify an object of adultery, and then became the father of temporary marrriage, taking and disposing of wives at whim, and subjugating church to state generally. Luther imprudently redefined marriage as subject to state regulation in one of a myriad of theological novelties.

Now, some five centuries later, we see the accelerated unravelling of marriage in ways neither of hese men could imagine. Marriage is often foregone, easily dissolved and devoid of meaning because of the assertions of these men that it was a simple contract, with numerous clauses justifying it’s dissolution.

Unfortunately, to examine this requires asking a great many people, content with or dedicated to the rest of of the doctrines of these men to consider them as wrong-headed on such fundamental matter as to subject the entirety of their aassertions to critical inquiry.

the judge takes control of your entire procreative life and rearranges it for the benefit of those to whom you were formerly obligated

Hmm. Amend that to “entire procreative life up to that point” and you’re pretty much describing divorce and custody and child support now.

And “permanent ‘procreative responsibility report’”? Credit reports only list bankruptcies for 7 to 10 years based on type. So ‘permanent’ is a bit much for ‘equivalence’, if you’re going all hypothetical.

Potential spouses tend to find out about previous relationships as it is, anyway. (Not universally, I’ll grant, of course – even bigamy still happens. But then, creditors can still lend money to people who’ve declared bankruptcy, if they choose.)

Imagine that you have a marriage that you wish to escape and $50,000 of credit-card debt that you do not wish to pay — which claim do you imagine will prove more enduring?

Bankruptcy.