ariston andri ktaema sympathaes gunae.
--Hippothoon
Marriage laws are framed, not for or by the likes and dislikes of men and
women, but by the exigencies of social, often of political, economy.
Therefore
Men and women's likes and dislikes are obliged to conform to the usages
demanded by social and political economy: so
In Turkey women accept with a good grace the custom of a plurality of
wives; in Tibet men accept with good grace a plurality of husbands. In
the western world .. . . Humph!
Always will there be everywhere prevalent a latent hostility between the
likes and dislikes of men and women on one hand, and the laws enforced by
a social and political community on the other. This is why
Always there will be those who will try to "reform" the marriage state:
some looking only to the likes and dislikes of men and women, others only
to the advantages which shall accrue to the State. So,
Some there will be will always advocate a loosening of the marriage bond,
others who will seek to make it indissoluble. Both should remember that
The unit of the State is the family; therefore the State makes laws, not
to suit the tastes or convenience of the husband and the wife, but for
the good and preservation of the family. All of which, surely, is right
and proper, since
It is the business of the State to make laws governing the welfare of the
generations to come. In fine
The children--they are the pivot about which all matrimonial
controversies should turn.