Read the whole thing.
…Now, all through up until the 1970’s, marriage was still viewed as a legal contract. It was a given that both parties had an obligation to uphold such a contract just as within any other economic or legal contract.
If you wanted to leave you still could. No-one was stopping you. But, as with any contract, if you breeched your contract you would be the one that was penalized for it.
If you wanted to leave and receive the benefits from the marriage, or rather, be compensated for the breech of contract of the other party, you had to prove they were at fault in order to sue for compensation. This makes sense, doesn’t it?
Therefore, there were many things which constituted “fault.” Adultery, alcoholism, mental insanity, cruelty, physical abusiveness amongst a host of others all constituted “fault.” If you were at fault, you could expect to lose your rights as set forth in the contract. But even so, if there was no fault and you still wanted to leave, no-one was stopping you. You were not put in jail for leaving, but you were found to be at fault for “abandonment,” and therefore lost all of your rights as set forward in the contract – and you would be liable for any “damages” caused by your “fault.”
That seems fair to me. All contracts are set forth in this manner. That is why they are contracts. A contract says that if you behave in such and such manner and don’t deviate out of that behaviour, you will be compensated with a guarantee of this and this behaviour from the other party. Step out of these guidelines and you will be legally liable, stay within them and your rights will be guaranteed….
I think a lot of men in the manosphere fail to realize one thing about traditional real marriage vs. the new modern excuses. There can be no marriage without fidelity, this is a reason why ‘gay marriage’ doesn’t count, because they’re unfaithful. Yes, that goes both ways. You want to fuck around? Never get married. The decent woman who is worthy of marriage doesn’t deserve the pain, diminished social status (can’t satisfy her husband, something wrong with her or her selection) and STDs of a cheating husband, just as a good man doesn’t deserve a feminist. These differences in strategy (short promiscuous/long monogamous) are fine, but do not mix. A promiscuous husband is just as much of a liability as a cuckolding feminist, trying to reap the benefits of both strategies and tearing the social fabric apart.
It’s a commitment and a sacrifice and yes it is difficult, that is why longlasting marriages have value.
Understand the vows you take, “not to be entered into lightly”
“so I will be to you a loving and faithful husband.”
” I promise you my deepest love, my fullest devotion, my tenderest care.”
“And so throughout life, no matter what may lie ahead of us, I pledge to you my life as a loving and faithful husband.”