Junior Ganymede
We endeavor to give satisfaction

“The purpose of child support is to replace marriage.”

July 11th, 2013 by Vader

Comments (10)
Filed under: Deseret Review,There are monkey-boys in the facility | Tags: , , ,
July 11th, 2013 14:52:05
10 comments

Adam G.
July 12, 2013

Yes, that’s its purpose. A very clarifying remark.

But it doesn’t succeed very well at its purpose. Child support is a poor substitute for marriage.

One could equally say that hometeachers and priesthood leaders serve as a substitute for a father and husband in the home, and one would be right, but they are not a wholly adequate substitute.


Zen
July 12, 2013

No, I don’t think we can equally well say that. One was meant to supplement and support the family while the other was intended to make marriage unnecessary. Women reap all the benefits of marriage, and being single, while men are still responsible for providing for woman and children.


Adam G.
July 12, 2013

Zen,
I’m not sure what you’re saying. When a woman is divorced, her hometeachers and priesthood leaders are supposed to step in and provide blessings and temporal assistance that normally would be provided by the father, no?

Anyhow, I don’t think that a child support check is “reaping all the benefits of marriage.” The presence of a good, redoubtable man is more than the paycheck he provides.


Agellius
July 12, 2013

That blog is something.


Vader
July 12, 2013

Isn’t it, though, Agellius? Another post was a bracing reminder that, with rare exceptions, God hates divorce. Perhaps the club management here should consider adding the blog to our blogroll.


Man SL
July 12, 2013

“Perhaps the club management here should consider adding the blog to our blogroll.”

The force is strong with this one.


Zen
July 14, 2013

I have been a single father, with full time custody for over 12 years now and I am eternally thankful for good examples in my wards, for my daughters. I am not a mother and I never will be, but the help I have been given is priceless.

That said, the auxiliaries and members of the church are not meant to replace missing parents, just to help where needed. The distinction is crucial.

The function of so many family-based laws, is not to simply help, but to replace and destroy. I can not think of many cases where govt interference has improved the family. Most of their interference has my deepest loathing.


twiceuponatime
July 14, 2013

“I don’t think that a child support check is “reaping all the benefits of marriage.” The presence of a good, redoubtable man is more than the paycheck he provides”

Trust me – plenty of women, in the church even, decide that child support + home teachers + lots of emotional support from the Relief Society, while not great, is “good enough” and beats having to actually do the hard work of a marriage relationship.

It’s not just me – I found a whole underground of divorced LDS men going through the same issues. A worthy man may be above the price of diamonds or something, but a lot of women seem to prefer the cubic zirconium of child support plus aid from the church, and it’s only getting worse.


Adam G.
July 15, 2013

Plenty of women, in the church even, are fools.

Their folly is a kind that our society tries to exacerbate.


Edmund Burke
July 15, 2013

The effect of liberty to individuals is, that they may do what they
please: we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we risk
congratulations, which may soon be turned into complaints.

Leave a Reply