The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1877-1885, 1884-04-23
JESUS WAS MISTAKEN.

JESUS WAS MISTAKEN.
We know that monogamy was not prac
tised at the beginning, and that 1t has
been only the outcome OF an increase OF
civilization. | do not believe in marriage
as a sacrament | believe that our entire
life should be sacred, true and holy.
believe in lifting life to the highest con
ceivable level. But there is no ground
for treating the marriage relation other
wise than as a civil contract. The State,
as such, has no right in regard to the
marriage relation, more than any where
else, to interfere in religious matters or
beliefs. Beyond the question Of a civil
contract the State has no need to go. Men
and women should be perfectly free to
enter the contract, but ths State should
see to it that the rights of the contract
ing parties are securely guarded. This
the State fails to do. There is no con-
tract so loosely guarded as is this contract
of marriage. A Il an can shift response
bility in regard this contract far more
easily than he can hat of a business con-
tract or any matter involving money.
When the contract is entered into. the
happiness of lives is at stake. The entire
power of the law should be used to guard
the rights of the child. who is brought to
life by the parents, without any v~olition
of his own. These rights should be most
stringently and studiously guarded. How
is in the State of Massachusetts,? In
1856 there were only two causes of di-
vorce on the statute books; to-day there
are nine. Does this indicate the growth
of immortality in Massachusetts,? During
the last decade there has been
Az INCREASE IN DIVORCES
not only in Massachusetts, but through
out New England. Does this indicate
an increase of immortality? Idonot be-
lieve it. A divorce does not necessari-
ly mean an immoral act. The increase
in divorces may mean a condition of af-
fairs which has existed for a hundred
years. 1t may be- an attempt to cure
an evil that has existed fer generations.
We must examine the cause. nnd out if
the broken home was broken by the di-
vOrce, or had been broken for twenty
years. There has been a growing free
dom on the part Of women a growing
ability to support themselves. 1t has
been alleged that the growing freedom
of women, their admittance to employ
ments once exclusively filled by men,
has been one of the chief causes of the in
crease by ofdivorce. Very likely. In the
case of a dissipated husband, who is only
a burden on the wife and family, it
would be far better to have a separation.
The welfare Of the children does not al
ways demand that the home shall re-
main unbrokcn. In a case like that
mentioned, their welfare would be in
creased divorce of the parents. When,
then. ought divorce TO allowed? Mar
riage is the bond of mutual i0ye and self
respect between man and woman. There
are many men and women in our coun-
try bound together simply by a legal
bond who should properly be separated.
When true marriage ceases to exist, the
husband aud the wife are better off apart.
and
H LAW SHOULD SET THEN FREE.
Both husband and wife would exercise
more tender care, if they knew that
upon that point turned the continuance
of the marriage bond. What, then.
should be done by the State? There
should be a uniformity in marriage laws
throughout the country. 4 couple might
be married in New York and not be
married at all in Boston. There should
be a uniformity in the laws oe divorce.
There is much l~ooseness in these laws.
There is too much opportunity for fraud
10 procuring divorce. The laws regula-
ting marriage should be more regular.
There should be no such thing as a pos
sibllity OF being married for the fun of
it, as have sometimes actually been
done. The difficulty of marriage should
be increased at the outset. so then sOme-