Runboard.com
You're welcome.

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

 
James Jaeger Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Twenty First Century Marriage Agreement, a Proposal


At some point it may make sense to develop a new Marriage Agreement for over 50% of all marriages end in divorce and there seems to be much unnecessary strife between men and women.

Further, it makes sense to try and develop a new Marriage Agreement in the alt or Netherworld because, after all it's this world that is currently the most free from institutions and the stigmas of current society.

The below work-in-progress is a proposed new Agreement. Your comments and suggestions are welcome and may be incorporated.


PROLOGUE:

During the Age of Church and State, when the King wanted his Harem to be as large and disease-free as possible, life-long marriages made sense -- at least for the King. They also made sense for the pastor and preachers that needed to increase their donor base. Yes the only way for the Church to really profit was for it to go into partnership with the State, and together, decree Sex to be the object of Satanic activity.

After all, were the King's Subjects to be freely !@#$ each and all -- as pre-agrarian society had been doing for 195,000 years -- the King's harem would be dismally infected with all manner of Satanic, sexually-transmitted diseases. What then would give the King his pleasures when taxing and slaughtering other Kingdoms became boring? Thus were born the "!@#$ Laws."


THE !@#$ LAWS:

The !@#$ Laws decreed that there shall be no !@#$ unless prior consent was given by the King. Thus the acronym, [sign in to see URL]., comes from the royal command: Fornication Under Consent of the King.

The !@#$ Laws, in effect, conferred a "license to !@#$," much the same as the modern-day driver's license confers a "license to drive." The Subjects of the Kingdom simply paid a small fee to the King's treasury and they were granted a license to !@#$, hence inevitably bear children because there was no birth control. This became what's known today as the "Marriage License" -- the right to !@#$ in the eyes of the King, now known as the state.

But !@#$ in the eyes of the King would soon prove to be insufficient. After all, males and females had been !@#$ as organisms for the past billion years -- AND !@#$ as an organism called homo sapiens the past 195,000 years. Given this, many of the King's subjects revolted. "Why do I need a '!@#$ license' when we have been !@#$ for thousands of years?" Cries like this went out from every bedroom window every night through out the Kingdom. To the King's "!@#$ Laws" the subjects would say "!@#$ you" -- meaning that that they had the right to !@#$ "you" or me or anyone they wanted without a license. Thus, the origin of the phrase "!@#$ you" is no derogatory chant at all but merely an expression of one's right to freedom.


THE CHURCH CUMS TO THE RESCUE:

It soon became evident to the King that his Harem was going to suffer. If he could not pair up his Subjects in the bonds of Marriage, pursuant to his new !@#$ Laws, how could he ensure that every man in the Kingdom fucked only one (1) of his royal women?! And make no mistake, all of the women in the Kingdom WERE the King's women, his property. The King only lent them out. And he lent out the women that were only good for "babymaking." The rest -- the most choice, sexy, hot women -- would remain in his Harem, disease-free and ready to !@#$ the King, and all his officers, at the slightest command or hard-on.

Unfortunately, no matter how many heads the King chopped off, men and women continued to !@#$ each other without authorization, without consent. The King's Harem was now down to but a handful of diseased, scrawny women and the King was royally pissed. Even his officers and soldiers were getting restless. After all, if the King expected his soldiers to fight wars, the least he could do is give them a piece of diseased-free pussy once and while. Yes, the King's Army was about to engage in the in the Pussy Revolt of 1372 when suddenly the King got an idea: he would summon his buddies in the Church.

The Church at this time was having its own problems: not enough God-fearing donors. Thus, when the King summoned the Pope he had a deal made-in-heaven to offer. And the deal went like this: if you tell your parishioners that they'll burn in hell were they to !@#$ outside my Marriage Agreement, the Kingdom will share !@#$ license revenues with the Church. This will supplement the Church's donations and the King and his soldiers will benefit with a more disease-free Harem.

So the deal was struck. The Church would lend a hand to the Kingdom. And as part of the deal, it was agreed that the terms would never be written down or discussed at any time by any person. It was to be a secret, verbal pact between the Church and the State. No historic record would ever be made or kept under punishment of death. Further, any and all manner of disinformation and "authorities" would be encouraged to come forth and confuse the issue and the deal. This is why YOU have never heard of this secret pact between the Churches of the world and the Governments that rule the people of the World to this very day.


TODAY'S PRO-MARRIAGE AGREEMENT:

Since the King and the Pope made their deal, the modern-day Marriage Agreement has not changed much, except that billions of men and women have been brainwashed into accepting it as a normal way of life. Worse, they have accepted that some creature that lives in the sky -- God -- will come down to Earth and punish them for !@#$. And the punishment will be even worse if they !@#$ without a license, a !@#$ license or what's today known as the Marriage license, duly certified by a slave of the State or a eunuch of the Church.

Even though modern-day anthropologist tell us that homo sapiens is descended from the bonobo and not the chimpanzee, and that men and women are not only NOT monogamous -- but have been hyper-sexual for over 200,000 years -- the !@#$ Laws prevail in today's repressed society. Any woman who thus likes to !@#$ -- especially !@#$ more than one guy at a time -- is branded a "slut" or a "whore". At the same time any guy who likes to !@#$ is labeled a "cheater" or an "asshole."

But where have all the harems gone? And if there is no King how could there even BE any harems? The answer to this riddle is: everywhere. Everywhere are harems; everywhere except on the marriage bed. Today, the !@#$ Laws have been translated into the Vice Laws, anti-Prostitution Laws that forbid men and women from short-term !@#$. But what does this mean and how did it happen?

Under the Vice Laws, also known as anti-Prostitution Laws, males and females may NOT charge for sex. This state edict disadvantages mostly the woman because it's a sellers market for women.

Under the Marriage Laws -- i.e., the former !@#$ Laws -- the male pays all the female's expenses in exchange for exclusive access to her pussy. This advantages mostly the woman because of the presence of the anti-Prostitution Laws.

Given these considerations it should be easy to see that the Church and the State have been selfishly manipulating men and women for thousands of years. Consider these other manipulations:

The current Marriage Laws grant married couples special tax benefits that unmarried couples don't get. AND in order to be considered "married," the couple has to consist of one male and one female. This is changing in many places, but this has been the basic situation for a long time.

The current Marriage Laws make divorce often an expensive and onerous ordeal. Lawyers and courts benefit greatly by the dissolution of a household, but so do a thousand other industries when every communal object in a married household suddenly must be duplicated for two single people living in separate apartments or condos. If you don't think the real estate industry and the condominium industry back the current Marriage Laws, think again.


Continued:




Last edited by James Jaeger, 1/22/2019, 1:37 pm
1/21/2019, 6:55 pm Link to this post PM James Jaeger Blog
 
James Jaeger Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: PROPOSAL


THE QUESTION OF MONOGAMY:

At the same time the Marriage Laws are manipulating citizens with all manner of revenue-generating schemes, the anti-Prostitution Laws foster the Marriage Laws and guarantee a revenue stream from the Institution.

In short, since men and women are NOT biologically monogamous, it is NOT possible for a man and a woman to fulfill the Marriage Agreement which requires them to be monogamous for the duration of their lives. This makes the Marriage Agreement a contract of adhesion because Society forces an impossible agreement upon the man and the woman under penalty of ostracism. And in the case of those who believe in religion -- under the duress of burning in hell.

Thus, millions of men and women around the world believe they will burn in hell if they try to !@#$ more than one man or woman before or after their marriage. This is the legacy of the !@#$ Laws -- the deal struck between the King and the Pope, the Church and the State.

And forget being monogamous till death parts a married couple -- anthropologists now tell us that the average pair-bonded relationship is 3 years -- just long enough for kids to learn to walk. And this has been true for the past 200,000 years. Thus, possessive !@#$ out there take note: when your man looks at another !@#$ -- it's nothing you have any genetic right to get angry about. That is unless you have him bound up by that nice little pussy-biased Marriage Agreement we discussed earlier.

And this brings me to a major point: the modern-day Marriage Agreement is used as a "justifier" for divorce. It's used by both sexes, but especially women, because women are more likely to suffer in silence and endure their marriage vowels. This, however does not mean they are any less suppressed than the male, it only means they are more willing to suffer. This however, builds up tremendous hostility and resentment toward the male and is thus the cause of much of the stress between men and women in today's Society.

The Marriage Agreement thus fosters stress and hostility between men and women who are only obeying genetic codes set forth in their DNA over hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years. In other words:

YOU are being punished for your DNA.

YOU are being punished for the sexual expression of your DNA.

The CHURCH and the STATE are profiteering off your misery.

If this isn't Society committing grand-bigotry I don't know what is.




THE ANTI-PROSTITUTION LAWS:

If the CHURCH and the STATE were to butt-out of the personal affairs of men and women -- decriminalize prostitution -- men and women would figure it out on their own. They would reach a natural equilibrium. They would be happier. Marriages would last longer because much of the reason for their failure would be removed.

All men and all women are different and have different sexual desires, kinks and proclivities. It's thus a miracle if two people can be matched up at all. Add in the Church and the State attempting to dictate a one-size-fits-all legal system and moralistic and it's no wonder we have the chaos we have. The Church and the State have no right to dictate terms between a man and a woman's sexuality.

If a woman wants to sell her body into long-term bondage (marriage) or short-term bondage (prostitution), she has that right. The State nor the Church have any right to dictate or bias the term.

Therefore the Church and the State have no more right to decree prostitution illegal than they do to decree marriage legal.

The reason the State has decreed prostitution illegal is because of the Marriage Lobby and the Political Lobby.

Prostitution is thus criminalized so that men are in essence forced to get married. If sex is not available on-demand, or a la cart, the males of Society must purchase it wholesale, i.e., under terms of the Marriage Agreement. Given this, we are still not much more advanced than the days of the King with this !@#$ License and Harems.

Today, however, all women are in the harem but they may be freely accessed by any male in the country. Why do you think it's call a !@#$-try.

Under today's unspoken !@#$ Laws, the female may not charge for sex because the State does not want her to have any economic advantage over the male. Were she to have economic advantage, she would not be so easily coerced into the Marriage Agreement and become the male's property.

Of course, the Church has served the State by spinning and obfuscating these economics for centuries. The Church spins marriage as a loving arrangement between a man and a woman, an arrangement where they are licensed to have as much "free" sex as they desire. And as long as they do not eat the apple from any other trees -- i.e., !@#$ anyone NOT licensed by their Marriage Agreement -- they will NOT burn in hell.

Every little girl -- and every little boy -- from their earliest age is indoctrinated into this belief system. It pervades all of Society and every !@#$-try. There are no other options. This was really the first phase of globalization.

Other options or lifestyles are considered weird, alt, off-beat, degraded, anti, kink, bad, evil, blah blah blah. Yes the Church earned its donation from the State. And it gets this donation to this very day. Why do you think churches have tax-exempt status under section 501(c)3 of the "Citizen !@#$ Laws" today known as the "IRS Code"?


THE NEW SEX DEAL:

So here we all are in the 21st Century. And we all arrived here by !@#$, so keep that in mind as I develop my next points about the Institution of Marriage.

In short, the Marriage Agreement is not irrelevant -- as some extremists like to spout -- it simply needs a re-write. It needs to be updated and take certain things in to consideration like we don't have Kings ruling over us any longer and we live in to and past our eighties. We also have the cures to most of the diseases that ravaged the King's Harem and Kingdom.

So with these things in mind, the new Marriage Agreement I propose should maintain all of the spiritual values a couple in love or lust wants, while at the same time not be so slanted against our biological nature.

Again, anthropologists have determined that homo sapiens is NOT related to the chimpanzee. We are related to the bonobo. Bonobos are promiscuous and chimps are monogamous. Now get real ladies, which better describes your husband or boyfriend: promiscuous or monogamous, bonobo or chimp? And while you're gleefully contemplating the males in your life, realize that YOU are no different. You are just as promiscuous and non-monogamous as your hubby or boyfriend. You just have been conditioned by society -- and its !@#$ Laws down through the centuries -- to hide and control your promiscuity better than the male. Just like you hide and control your farts better than males. You also know how to suffer quietly and handle pain better than males. But in the end, you are no different. How could you be when your DNA is basically the same as the male's? The only differentiating factor is therefore the environment you were brought up in -- i.e., the brainwashed you received since you were a tiny little girl.

So, given both the male and female of today's society, and every society, for the past 200,000 years are both promiscuous and NOT monogamous -- how is it that we all allow such an insanely unrealistic Marriage Agreement to govern our existences -- a contract of adhesion concocted by horny, blood-thirsty Kings and their evil, co-conspirators in the Church?



Continued:



Last edited by James Jaeger, 1/21/2019, 7:19 pm
1/21/2019, 6:59 pm Link to this post PM James Jaeger Blog
 
James Jaeger Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: PROPOSAL


THE SHORT TERM MARRIAGE:

The Marriage Agreement of the 21st Century takes our true nature in to account. So let's state some principles and start building the Agreement from the ground up.

Given the easily observable facts of divorce, infidelity and pornography -- we need to change the deal between males and females so they can once again make each other happy. We need to get rid of the !@#$ in the Church and State that are sticking their noses into people's personal affairs and making men and women miserable.

Men and women should not have to turn to drugs and dogs for happiness.

People that want sex should be able to have it whenever they want and people that do NOT want sex should be able to have as many drugs and dogs as THEY want.

I therefore propose the concept of the "Short Term Marriage" or the STM. Short Term Marriage is a deal between men and women that is somewhere between "death do we part" and "wham bam thank you mame."

Since marriage is really just long-term prostitution -- and prostitution is short-term marriage -- there should be a deal for men and women that offers terms that are appropriate for people at different stages of life. To illustrate where I am going with this, please allow me to iterate the basics bluntly:

Sex before kids should be called "making love." Sex after kids should be called "recreational sex" or "!@#$."

People that want to have kids should get married and "make love."

People who don't want kids, or have raised their kids, should be able to engage in "recreational sex."

Neither the church or the state should be involved. If men or women want to charge for recreational sex, that is their right.

The STM Agreement should thus spell out the terms of a relationship that is desirable and pragmatic. Let us begin with this rationale:

Sociologists tell us that the average human being has sex with 6 partners over the course of their lifetime and the average sex-life of a human being is about 40 years.
Simple math thus tells us that each of the 6 sexual relationships lasted for about 7 years (40/6 = 6.7) Thus the STM Agreement should be 7 years, with options to renew.

If the average sex life of an individual is 40 years, we could reasonably divide this into two 20-year parts and call them:

Part 1 - Kids
Part 2 - Post Kids

The first 20 years should be dedicated to family, fidelity, stability, proper rearing of kids. Sex could and should be referred to as "making love."

The second 20 years should be dedicated to recreational sex, swing parties, orgies, and any and all modes of kink, lifestyle sex. Sex could and should be referred to as "!@#$" or "play."

The Marriage Agreement for those who want to have kids should be 20 years long -- not until death. Marriage until death KILLS most people. They may not admit it, but most have died spiritually well before body death. Given this, the CHURCH, the STATE and the brainwashed SOCIETY don't let them admit it. Thus most people live in a silent, spiritual contract of adhesion, "justified" by a chemical compound know as "love."

After the term of a normal 20-year Marriage, the Agreement should automatically convert to the Short Term Marriage Agreement, the STM Agreement discussed above. This means that the expectation of sexual exclusivity under the standard Marriage Agreement would automatically convert to a contract of non-exclusivity.

With this one little contractual innovation, we could totally wipe out sex as a political weapon. No more waste of public taxes and time on non-public, personal humiliations like Bill & Monica, Elliot Spitzer or Judge Canavaugh. The married man -- after staying loyally married for 20 years, supporting a wife and raising the kids in a responsible manner -- would now be free to !@#$ the !@#$ out of any and all pussy cross the land and planet as much and as many times as he in his sole discretion deemed necessary. So would women AND they could get paid for it. AND they would not be subject to being called "whores" or "sluts" or anything derogatory.

In fact the term "slut" -- along with the term "womanizer" -- should be made illegal. Any man or woman, church or politician that used such term on a man or woman in his or her STM Agreement would be castrated or have their pussy sewed shut.

Any man or woman, church or politician that used such term on a man or woman BEFORE his or her STM Agreement ended would be praised and rewarded by society if the charge were true.

Once a man or woman is into the first term of their STM, they could continue the original marriage for the rest of their lives or they could terminate it after any one of the 7 year terms.

People who were new to each other -- looking to play but not have kids -- could enter into "dating agreements" the term of which could be one of the 7 years terms of the STM or some other deal, as discussed below.

So as a nod to past Kings, we have divided the human lifespan into what could be two 20-year Sexual Kingdoms: Kids and post Kids. The purpose of sex being different in each Kingdom, current Society recognizing the changing needs and desires of both the male and female as they go through life.

No one will argue that we are all witnessing these needs and wants everyday dramatized in the news and among our neighbors, family and friends. Yet no one offers solutions; everyone sits around and gawks.

I have at least taken a stab at it and have tried to offer some solutions. We need something other than stupid dichotomies MARRIED and SINGLE. MONOGAMOUS and PROMISCUOUS. LOYAL and CHEATER. SLUT and LADY.

We need agreements that more closely reflect human realities and needs.

No man, can or wants, to !@#$ the same woman for a lifetime. Neither does any woman.

On the other hand, no one wants families broken up due to !@#$ when there are under 18 year old children. No one wants to see women going broke or poor just because they are over 40. No one wants to see women dancing with each other while men sit in the corner all night. No one wants men so sexually desperate they have to force sex on women. No one wants men and women fighting or doing anything other than making love or !@#$.


Continued:


Last edited by James Jaeger, 1/21/2019, 7:19 pm
1/21/2019, 6:59 pm Link to this post PM James Jaeger Blog
 
James Jaeger Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: PROPOSAL


GENERAL RELATIONSHIP OPTIONS:

Therefore, as further refinements to the standard 20-year Marriage Agreement and the 7-year Short Term Marriage Agreement, I propose various "Dating Agreements" between 1 day and 7 years. These Agreements could be exclusive agreements or non-exclusive. Off the top of my mind we could have the following arrangements.

One Night Stand (ONS)

Week End Romp (WER)

Week Long Trip (WLT)

One Month Vacation (OMV)

One Month Affair (OMA)

Six Month Affair (SMA)

Yearlong Sweetheart Romance (YSR)

7-Year Short Term Marriage (STM)

20-year Standard Marriage (TSM)

The names will change, but you get the idea. Open up male-female relationships so men can propose more than a hook-up, a date, an engagement or a marriage.

A man could propose to a woman: "Hey, how about we do a WER and if that works out I propose we go to an MTA with a view towards an STM for a term or two. If at any point things don't work out we could simply go to a $50 per-occasion FWB over the long-term."



SPECIAL BONDING OPTIONS:

Now that we have the basic outline of our Sexual lives -- Kid Kingdom and post-Kids Kingdom, lets take a look at some refinement in the male female deal - how we bond.

The smallest unit of bonding -- other than the kiss, the back seat quickie or an hour with a hooker -- could be said to be the 1-night stand.

Let's thus start with this and work our way back to the "death-do-us-part" Agreement with all its scary provisions.

Any modern Marriage Agreement should have as options the following:

1) Duration;

2) Consecutive or cumulative;

3) Option to renew, extend or cancel;

4) Orgasm guarantee;


A 1-Night Stand, or ONS, is just that, the couple get together for one night at her/his house or a hotel and !@#$ all or part of the night. This Agreement is great for the male or female that just wants to test out his or her playmate and possibly move on. The problem with the 1-night stand -- and the problem there has always been with the 1-night stand -- is usually either the man or the woman wants to have another "stand," either the next night or the next weekend. Inevitably someone goes without and there is resentment. Women are always afraid that the male will get "clingy" and the male will often feel that the woman will get "possessive." And these two negative things WILL happen.

This is why the ONS -- the 1-Night Stand is impractical and unworkable and should be scrapped along with the !@#$ Laws and the current Marriage Agreement.

If, as we have considered previously, male and female homo sapiens are promiscuous and NOT monogamous, then !@#$ for only one night and then calling it quits seems inconsistent to say the least. Add to this the factor that anthropologists say men and women are not only promiscuous but "hyper sexual," a 1-Night Stand seems more ridiculous than ever.

If anthropologists say we are not only NOT monogamous BUT promiscuous, AND even HYPERSEXUAL how are two promiscuous AND hyper-sexual beings going to just !@#$ for 1 night and be happy? They are not. They will not be happy and they will leave all manner of physical issues unexplored and on the table, more accurately the bed. He will always wonder if he licked her clitoris sideways instead of up and down whether she would have enjoyed it more. And she will always wonder whether she should have swallowed his cum, perhaps he would like her more. All of these issues can be solved by experiment over longer terms as it takes a certain amount of time to fully explore the human body.

Given this a 21st Century Marriage Agreement should give the hyper-sexual couple the contractual option to !@#$ for 2 nights on the WeekEnd Romp or 7 days on the Week Long Trip, and this should be consecutive or cumulative, depending on which option is selected.

With the WeekEnd Romp the couple can go away to a hotel on a Friday afternoon, party and then !@#$ each other's brains out all Friday night and then again all Saturday night. With the cumulative option selected, the couple can be assured of !@#$ at least twice within the term of a WER. And, if the couple is having fun, but isn't ready to advance further, they could execute their option to extend the WeekEnd Romp to another WeekEnd Romp or many WERs.

When the couple is ready they can select their option to terminate or advance to the WeekLong Trip, consecutive or cumulative, with options to renew or not. The WLT is like the WER only its term is 7 days. Whatever options the couple selects, they can be assured the element of predictability in that they are going to be together for at least 6 nights and 7 days. AND they guarantee sex to each other, with or without the Orgasm Guarantee. This plan will assure the couple will have a greater likelihood of getting to know each other than they could in shorter plans or in today's ad hoc, insane, if not nauseating and immature, dating world.

After a Week Long Trip the couple will know whether they want to execute an option to repeat or step up to the OMV, or One Month Vacation -- a 30-day adventure into each other.

Again with the OMT, the same principles apply. The nights can be consecutive or cumulative and they can be used over a 1-month term or any term the couple wants to set. The Orgasm Option can be set or relaxed. A man and a woman may simply want to guarantee that they will get together at least 8 times in the year, perhaps every major holiday and a few birthdays -- so they stay in shape and don't get old. And 21st Century Marriage Agreements make nice gifts.


PACKAGE DEALS:

Once a small contractual building block is determined in the 21st Century Marriage Agreement and put into practice, larger and larger contracts can be designed. For instance:

3-weekend stand;

21-day non-consecutive value pack;

50-mutual/consent days per year contract;

!@#$-blowjob swap pack;

The Dear John last !@#$ Special.


Additional arrangements, could be:

1-year !@#$ & friendship contract;

3-year !@#$ & friendship contract (with or without option to renew);

10-year or 1500 !@#$ (which ever comes first) contract;

18-year !@#$ + child contract (all expenses paid);

18-year friend + child contract (share expenses 50-50).



DIVORCED PEOPLE:

In today's world there are a lot of people that have tried the standard Church & State Marriage of Adhesion and it has left them empty and miserable. Some have kids and some do not. Some say their kids are the only thing of joy that came out of the marriage.

These unhappy divorced people say they WANT a new relationship, but they don't want to get married or HAVE a relationship. Relationships are too much hassle.

And after having kids many want freedom. They get accustomed to the freedom living alone can bring and they want that freedom more than companionship. Many men and women feel this way.

All this independence is fine but here's the problem: no one gets much sex.

And when the state has fucked its way in there and made sex illegal for those who are even willing to pay for what little is available, it's a blatant violation of the free market principles and personal liberty.

Again, if men or women want to charge when they consent to sex, they should able to do that because there are millions of people that don't want relationships, or to get married. And many of them are broke because we live in a society that is being rap_ed and pillaged by fiat currency-issuing central banks.

After 50 and/or after kids many women are past menopause so the problem of unwanted pregnancy is no longer extant. These women can and should be able to enjoy sex whenever they want but they have been brainwashed by religion to feel that sex outside of marriage or a long-term relationship is evil. So again we have State in there !@#$ up the male-female relationship and sexual freedoms -- and we have the Church doing the same. This is why the State and the Church are despicable, if not outdated institutions. Not only have they murdered millions of human beings over the centuries, they conspire to destroy the sexual freedom of this world to this very day. That human beings subscribe to these monsters is a testament to how gullible people are.



HAPPIER, LOVED AND FUCKED MEN AND WOMEN:

A civilization is as happy as it is loved and fucked. If the women get all they want, while the men don't get laid, it's not a happy civilization. If the men !@#$ women and then dump them or treat them like !@#$, it's not a happy civilization.

Since it's obvious that males and females on the planet, at this time, have no idea how to treat each other, it's time to bring out the training wheels. The training wheels consist of the 21st Century Marriage Agreement which replaces any all earlier contracts and !@#$ Laws, whether expressed or implied, written or oral, as such may pertain to the subject matter hereof.

Help perfect the Institution of Marriage, a good and worthy institution for raising kids, but somehow the devil has gotten into it. This is where men and women should start the dialogue, making their needs known and working out agreements that make each other happy. Every other human activity does this; why can't men and women?

At the very least the church and state should leave relationships alone and let them evolve and explore as they wish. Male-female relationships have been around for over 200,000 years. Governments and the church have only been here for 5,000. Thus, who is wiser: timeless men and women or fictitious groups that think they know better?


Originated: 15 March 2018
Supplemented & Revised: 21 January 2019



Last edited by James Jaeger, 1/29/2019, 4:51 pm
1/21/2019, 7:00 pm Link to this post PM James Jaeger Blog
 


Add a reply





You are not logged in (login)
Back To Top