The World According To Bob

Bob Allen is a philosopher and cyber libertarian. He advocates for the basic human rights of men. Bob has learned to cut through the political nonsense, the propaganda hate, the surface discourse, and talk about the underlying metamessage that the front is hiding. Bob tells it like it is and lets the chips fall where they may. If you like what you read be sure to bookmark this blog and share it with your friends.

Name:
Location: United States

You can't make wrong into right by doing wrong more effectively. It's time for real MEN to stand up and take back our families, our society, and our self respect. It is not a crime to be born a man. It is not a crime to act manly.

Thursday, February 02, 2006

The meaning of marriage

Someone asked how bob views "marital rape" in a comment on one of the previous posts. Well to understand "marital rape," one has to start by gaining a clear understanding of marriage, an understanding sadly lacking today. Many people today mistakenly think that marriage is a Christian institution, or some kind of government benefit program. Others view marriage as a collection of some kind of "rights." Confusion and misunderstanding regarding the institution of marriage now dominates our society. That confusion is not surprising. For the past century and a half there has been organized opposition to marriage that frequently seeks to destroy the age old tradition of marriage by obfuscation, corruption, dissolution, and disregard.

Marriage has been, for thousands of years, and in virtually every society and culture, the sexual union of a man and woman that creates children and thereby forms a family. The oldest known written laws, the Code of Hamarabi, predates Christianity by a couple of thousand years. It contains a great deal of codified law about marriage and the rights and obligations of the parties involved. In pre-Christian Europe the Celts recognized several kinds of marriage, each one distinct from the others by whom would pay to support the children. In the first kind of marriage both man and woman were rich and equally supported the family. In the second kind only the man was rich and he would support the family. In the 8th or 9th and last kind, the female is a whore and the man has no responsibility for her child at all. Notice that a child of a whore is a "marriage" between her and whatever man happened to father her child. Marriage is the sexual union that produces children and creates family. Even before Celtic or Babylonian cultures marriage existed in prehistoric tribal societies, and still exists in virtually every remaining tribal society today.

When Europe became Christian and the old pagan laws were replaced by Christian laws, marriage laws were adopted into Christian law. The same is true for virtually all religions. While they each have variations on the theme, they all sanctify and protect the sexual union of male and female and encourage the creation of children families. There have been a few notable exceptions, religions that discouraged marriage and sexual union to create families. The Shakers was one in America, but without children the last Shaker died some years ago. Some religions sanction polygamy and some do not, but in all marriages there is a sexual union between a man and a woman that creates children.

To understand marriage we need to understand what marriage is and what marriage is not. Marriage is the sexual union of male and female that creates our children and our families. Marriage is NOT a religious rite although all successful religions sanctify and honor marriages with religious ceremonies. Marriage is NOT a collection of legal or tax benefits, although most successful societies encourage the production of the next generation of the society by promoting marriage. Every society that wants to have a future must encourage and promote marriage sufficient to ensure the creation of enough children to continue the society.

In the middle of the 18th century, feminist lesbians gathering at Seneca Falls, NY, declared that "Marriage oppresses women!" To the feminists lesbians, they need men only to provide sperm, and then, they believe, they can raise the children by themselves. By themselves, of course, means that men must be forced to provide money, food, shelter, and all the necessary things of life, but only as male slaves divorced from families. Single momism, lesbians with laboratory Frankenstein kids, are their vision of a future. For a century and a half feminists have worked hard to obscure the language, lobbied for easy divorce, so-called "child support" laws that enslave men to pay women, and "DV" laws that allow women to turn husbands into criminals whenever her emotions are having a hysterical fit.

Feminists today are joined by the Gay/Lesbian agenda that jealously wants to be valued even above the "breeders" who have decent families they can never create. The gay agenda has invented the false term "gay marriage" as if somehow marriage is merely a collection of legal "rights." The whole idea of "gay marriage" is a contradiction because marriage is the sexual union that creates children and families, a sexual union which gays openly reject. In order to pretend that gay perversion is as valuable as families, gays have sought to destroy the very meaning of marriage, and at a time when most people are already confused about the meaning of marriage by more than a century of organized feminist anti-marriage attacks.

Despite all the attacks by lesbians, gays, and feminists, real and only marriage remains the sexual union of male and female that creates children and makes families.

In some cultures the man and woman are selected by their relatives or tribal leaders. In western culture the couple must find and select each other. In some cultures they do not recognize a marriage until a child is produced. That was true in many parts of Christian Europe until fairly recently. Where the marriage was sanctified by law and church prior to conception, Christian law has long allowed the marriage to be annulled, or to be declared never to have happened when no child results from the union. When a couple is joined in marriage law across all human cultures the woman promises to participate in sexual union with the husband, and to bear and raise the children who result from that union. The husband promises to provide sexual service to the wife so that she may bear her children, and to protect and support her and their children. Those are virtually universal legal and moral vows of marriage, and the legal requirements of each party under millennia of codified and religious law.

So what is Bob's view of "marital rape?" There can be no such thing. The crime of "rape" requires a lack of consent. A wife has sworn her consent before her priest or a judge, before her family and witnesses, signed legal documents attesting to her consent, and filed those legal documents with the state. When she says "I do" to enter into marriage and be a wife, she is accepting her obligation to participate in sexual congress with the husband and to bear the children which result therefrom. From then on it's her legal duty and obligation, freely consented to and accepted. If she no longer consents she must get a legal divorce, which ends her legal consent. So-called "marriage rape" laws deny the very meaning of marriage, and absolve the wife of the meaning of her marriage vows. To even discuss "marital rape" is to accept feminist anti-marriage dogma as background, an acceptance that you won't catch Bob ever doing. Bob does not condone forced marriage, but once she swears her "I do" as wife and sexual partner of her husband, and accepts the benefits of his support and protection, then she has a duty to abide by her sworn "I do." She can not be raped by her husband, because she has consented to sex with him for the duration of their marriage. The state, by acknowledging and accepting the marriage documents, affirms her status as sexual breeding partner of the husband. For the state, or anyone, to come along later and accuse the husband of "rape" or "sexual crime" for his congress with his wife is the worst kind of misandrist abomination.

To understand why "marital rape" or "gay marriage" are patently false contradictions one only needs to understand the age old meaning and purpose of marriage. Marriage is the sexual union of male and female that creates children and makes families. It is a blessed state that is the future of our society, and we all have a strong vested interested in securing and perpetuating strong healthy families for our next generation.
Bob

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

If a female is forced into an arranged marriage, she does not really give her consent to sex.

Amongst Muslims, a girl's father can force her through beatings, intimidation, to marry a Mohammad Atta, if he so chooses. Girls who protest are often murdered by irate, irrational males in the family. It's called an "honor" killing.

Even with a wife consenting to sex, civilized society maintains elements of compassion and common sense. If a drunken husband is brutalizing her, no Judge would hold the wife to her promise to provide sex. It's not her duty to satisfy a vicious beast who inflicts pain and terror. (One man in the 1800s raped his wife right after she gave birth, slimy gore and all).

Sorry to disappoint, bob. Civilized society does not tolerate cruelty. What a shame we can't slide back to the Dark Ages.

February 03, 2006 1:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When a husband must resort to forcing sex (like a kid grabbing candy), that marriage no longer exists. It is now a prison.

You don't force somebody to have sex.

February 03, 2006 4:06 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous: Bob really enjoys it when a stupid cunt starts foaming at the mouth and spewing those old tired feminazi hate lies. Pound sand, bitch! ROFLMAO!!!!
Bob

February 04, 2006 10:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Marriage has been, for thousands of years, and in virtually every society and culture, the sexual union of a man and woman that creates children and thereby forms a family."

So marriage is sexual intercourse
but only if a child results?
I don't understand this definition of marriage. Maybe it could be explained better.

February 04, 2006 1:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is no rape in marriage. It is called forced sex, an act of selfish cruelty.

Hey bobby, do you think anyone is scared of you because you use obscenities?

February 05, 2006 3:59 PM  
Blogger Peter O'Neill said...

Only in today's PC times could anyone seriously argue that a husband should be sent to jail for having sex with his wife. It's just a sign of how far we have managed to remove ourselves from nature, history, reality and any kind of common sense. Wome thrive in a society of rules and creature comforts (ironically created by "patrichal" men in their misguided desire to protect the women in their lives. If feminists have done any good in society, it is to gradually undermine men's instinct of protectiveness toward the opposite sex. Maybe now we can finally see women for what they are: mercenary, manipulative, self-absorbed, materialistic sluts who are only interested in what men can do for them.

February 05, 2006 8:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

peter, do you like creature comforts? good health? clean water,safe food, good transporatation? If not go to Afghanistan. you'd be happier. Maybe intelligent women don't want men. or need you.

February 06, 2006 10:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob has articulated what Marriage has historically meant prior to the grand social experiment foisted on us a few decades ago. That the Privledged FemNags in the West are terrified that Men have wised up to our Fourth Class status. We come behind their children, their friends,and their pets. Men have said Nuts to marriage.

Most religions especially Christians, Jews,Buddhists,and Hindus have ethical standards that state Husbands must show love, tenderness, kindness, and respect for their wives the Mother of their children.

As this has eroded we see the result of No-fault Divorce imposed on us by the FemNags and their blood sucking allies in the Legal Profession. Little Nixmary who was recently murdered in NY. Her mother has 4 children from 3 different Fathers.
Biological Fathers are the primary protectors in the West of their Children. With their removal from Families, children are at the mercy of Predators. This is what passes for Sanity with the Feminists who dispise Children and "Breeders".

khankrumthebulgar

February 07, 2006 4:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually Bob, you'll find the Seneca Falls Convention happened in the middle of the 19th century, quite awhile AFTER the Revolutionary War.
By the way it's pretty amusing to see a feminist calmly and civilly addressing a compelling argument to you... and then to see you totally fly off the handle, start cursing, and accuse her of "spewing hate lies" and being "mad raving enraged." Don't you see that it's you who can't control himself? And has it ever occurred to you that the feminist you're addressing just might be a man too?

April 11, 2006 6:47 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Dear "anonymous."
Before you go on-line and display your deliberate feminazi ignorance you would be well advised to do a little reading in real life and not just the "women's studies" hate propaganda you probably have been taught. The Seneca Falls convention was in 1848 and the Civil War was in the 1860s. Perhaps your math skills can't handle subtraction of large numbers. From Wikipedia.com: "Feminism became an organized movement in the 19th century as people increasingly came to believe that women were being treated unfairly. The feminist movement was rooted in the progressive movement and especially in the reform movement of the 19th century. The utopian socialist Charles Fourier coined the word féminisme in 1837; as early as 1808, he had argued that the extension of women's rights was the general principle of all social progress. The organized movement was dated from the first women's rights convention at Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848."

It would be a change for a feminist to actually address any factual or rational argument. Rampant hysteria (a well gendered term), ad-hominem insults, hate lies, and factual nonsense such as you just posted are all I ever see from the feminists. Considering how far "women's studies" is from solid academic work at most universities it is no wonder that young Ms. Feminazi can only think with her cunt. As for "might be a man," these days so many men were deprived of their father's teaching and influence, and raised entirely by misandrist feminists, that there are many foolish men who pander to the feminists hoping for a few crumbs.
Bob

April 11, 2006 9:00 PM  
Anonymous Tim said...

February 05, 2006 8:10 PM
Anonymous said...

peter, do you like creature comforts? good health? clean water,safe food, good transporatation? If not go to Afghanistan. you'd be happier. Maybe intelligent women don't want men. or need you.


Dear "anonymous,"

You are a despicable, worthless, feminist piece of garbage. You are too stupid and evil to see what is so obvious to anyone with a brain: that today's feminist-influenced society has done tremendous damage to women. And the worst is yet to come.

It is patriarchy that upholds the rules and values necessary for societies to exist and thrive. It is patriarchy under which women were protected and revered.

Despite your psychotic, man-hating vindictiveness, Peter is exactly right: what we are seeing today in modern western women - the mercenary, manipulative, self-absorbed, materialistic behavior - is what they really are in the raw, absent traditional male controls and restraints.

The women's movement not only removed these traditional controls on female raw behavior, they also destroyed the desire in men to revere and protect women.

And for that, women in the western world are destined to pay a horrible price.

May 05, 2006 2:22 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home