Hi evlwhtguy,
I have no judgement of you. I agree with much of what you have said and I posed the question because I also think the stigma on occasion may have an indirect benefit. Regarding the vicious child abuse claim for a single mother it is a bit harsh and all encompassing for my sanction.
I do however believe using good judgement is essential for young women.
And not being responsible for actions is now taught to many young women. Media promotes promiscuity before even knowing the sex partners name , all the time.

And how come when I type a reply, it doesn't go
next to the letter I am replying to?

Yes; and it is important that there still be some means of having a marriage legally recorded, as
children can result from it, and they need to be raised in some kind of structured environment, and
that they be cared for, and not run through the streets unsupervised, committing crimes or be-
coming themselves the victims of crime.

The good old boys network. What if couples worked to make their relationships or marriages better? There is a reward to a great relationship!

Shack up honeys are actually promoted these days. It is in fact cruel, to stigmatize an innocent child due to an accident of his birth over which he had no control. However when this stigmatization results in less fatherless children society as a whole is better off as there will be greater happiness and stability in society. Unfortunately the modern welfare state has also removed almost all the negative aspects for the Single mother and child...they won't starve for instance....Also single motherhood is actually celebrated,. The single mother is viewed as a heroine instead of the vicious child abuser she really is....yes that is right I said vicious child abuser. What bird in the wild would lay an egg without first making a nest [ie preparing adequately] If you have children and have nor prepared adequately by securing something more than a sperm donor, YOU ARE A CHILD ABUSER. A Father is an essential preparation for having children. The only "Single Mothers" who have any sort of nobility, equal to Married mothers, are widows. A close second are Divorcees. They didn't purposely have a child without a father....but they perhaps lacked in the skill of selection of the man. Rape victims are also in this category....They should probably think about adopting the baby out.

Too damn bad if you don't like my hierarchy here or my value judgment that a Father is a requirement. Our society has been hollowed out precisely because we have gotten too far away from "Traditional Values" Almost all those harsh "traditional Values" and arcane rues have a reason for being there.

Alabama is run by lawyers for the most part and you will note that this bill takes care of them, they couldn't care less about marriage except for what they will be getting out of it. If a lawyer's fee could not exceed 1% of a divorce settlement there would not be as many divorces. And then there's the fee to pay the government to do something that you want to do in your life. I dread the day when we have to have a license to go to the grocery store.

Yes. Same sex marriage. I couldn't care what people do with their sexuality. The govt should be asexual that is to say all are equal based on a heart and a brain what you do with consenting adults is irrelevant. that is part of the hypocrisy of the leftist's . their ideas are supposedly based on a collective equality for all. The redefining of Marriage to include all is so inclusive yet it opposes or excludes some others ideals.
But that is not how the world works. The weak get weeded out in nature. The strong thrive. Humanity is part of nature , but we are carrying a heavy load of non producers . What us the tipping point?

If I were reincarnated I would wish to return to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh,
husband of Queen Elizabeth II,
Patron of the Patron of the World Wildlife Foun
Kissing cousins hmmmm. The result of inbreeding can be viewed in the Kakistocrats .

I was wondering about the stigma attached to some actions. Certainly the child has no control over his conception but the parents do. Does the fear of being stigmatized cause people to be more mindful of their actions? A lot of kids born to single moms now-a-days.
Today I hear very little of illegitimate children.

You are so right.

There was a legitimate reason to scorn illegitimacy....a woman wouldn't want her child scorned this way so avoided at all costs the status. In point of fact....THAT IS A GOOD THING. The more legitimate births there are...the better for society as a whole.

I can see that they will have problems with the wording of the law. The law requires that the marital partners not be related....The question will be raised..."Why?" If marriage is not for procreation...IE same sex can get married.....why the prohibition on relatives????? I am not proposing this....just playing Devils Advocate in pointing it out.

Instead, probate judges would simply record civil contracts of marriage between two individuals based on signed affidavits.

Lead the way I'm with you.

Sen. Greg Albritton (R-Bay Minette) filed Senate Bill 20 (SB20) in February. The legislation would abolish all requirements to obtain a marriage license in Alabama. Instead, probate judges would simply record civil contracts of marriage between two individuals based on signed affidavits.

The yin and yang of family. Party on Herb.

Tell me more about that "(or more)" you inserted above. Is that an option in the US today, not that I'm really interested or concerned, just curious? One is more than enough, at least one at a time. In fact the third's been a charm for me, just like the old adage.

Just sign on the dotted line, folks.As long as a marriage ceremony is still an option I can see no difficulty and much convenience to this. However, if one of my grand children decide on co-habitation, they had better have some sort of ceremony. Two points: I love a family party #1. Especially if everyone gets along. #2 I love a family party, especially if no one gets along.

I believe this to be the key...

"In practice, the state’s role in marriage would be limited to recording marriages that have already occurred. As pointed out in an appearance on the Mike Slater Show, under the proposed law, it would be much like buying a house. You don’t have to get a license to buy a house. You just record the deed once the transaction is complete."

So to get any government or private benefits from being married, just show them your marriage "deed of trust".

It makes sense to me to let any two (or more) adults marry if they feel like it.

However, because marriage affects the legal rights of some individuals (whether by creating community property, or just the right to visit your spouse in the hospital and to manage his affairs should he become unable), it is a good idea for marriages to be registered so that their existence or nonexistence can be readily determined. If the state no longer operates such a registry then something like the rather haphazard system we now have to register the ownership of land would need to be created as a substitute.

At least some states have made it the law that "no child is illegitimate." California is one. It makes sense to me; the main result is that every person can inherit from both parents even if he was born out of wedlock. The Vikings and Welsh have had this in their laws since long before Christianity -- which is why those countries use patronymics rather than family surnames. It means you can't tell from someone's name whether his parents were married or not.

Unfortunately, some of the states which say "no child is illegitimate" also automatically assume that if the mother was married, then her husband is the father (and thus liable for child support should they divorce) even if a DNA test proves the child isn't his. That's going too far and needs to be repealed.

...and the revolution to liberty and freedom continues...

I haven't read the article so please forgive me if this is answered there. But if the State has abolished the marriage license, what if any effect does this have on how the courts will handle divorce?

Brilliant solution to another political problem that exists on because of previous political intervention in something where politics has no rightful place, until...

a child is involved. Then what would be an appropriate libertarian legal structure to address that situation without overstepping the justifiable role of law in the matter?

That's how you rock a fiddle.
I looked Doug Kershaw up to see if once worked in a sawmill. No.
He's a Cajun who learned to speak English at the age of 8. By then he had already mastered the violin. He can play a variety of other instruments.
I long, long ago heard the Southern accent has its roots in French-speaking settlers.
On my mother's side I'm related to French folks the Brits kicked out of Canada.
It would have been cool if my ancestors belonged to those who split away south down the Mississippi to become Cajuns in Louisiana..
But no-o! Mine just had to settle in such places as New Jersey and Connecticut instead.
Evidently, my ancestors had no influence on dialect at all.
I have some maternal side cousins who talk just like Connecticut Yankees do.

Man that guy can burn a fiddle he almost cuts it in half. Dingy liggy lo.