I’m not sure if this title line even exists in marriage vows any longer. I’m not really interested enough to look on the google, and it wouldn’t make any difference to me one way or another if this portion of the marriage vow went the way of honor and obey.
They’re just words, and although a voiced promise has some merit, the actual lifelong commitment to another person comes with caveats that are half assed implied, but to my knowledge, not included in marriage vows. Caveats like finding out five years into your union that your partner is keeping sex slaves in a storage unit down by the river.
That’s obviously fits into the for worse category, and is automatically grounds for a retraction of any promise you made at the altar. The problem with exceptions to vows of marital allegiance is that there are an endless number of situations that if listed as deal breakers would make the ceremony at least a few hours long. So we avoid mentioning our personal qualifiers because of unabashed optimism. And also for the sake of ceremony timeliness.
Although I’ve got to say that I would find it personally amusing to hear each participants promised fealty followed by a list starting with unless. That might actually make me go to the church part that I currently avoid like the plague. I’ll go to the party, but I don’t do the ceremony thing. My wife goes and she finds someone to go with and doesn’t even ask me anymore.
So, obviously her husband attending church marriages isn’t on her unless list. But I’m reasonably certain that sex slaves and a host of other felonies were and still are on her unlist.
I’ve just decided to repurpose unlist for general use, and so I’ll offer an apology to realtors and anyone who manages phone directories, who until this moment have had exclusive use of the word.
The word itself can be applied to any arrangement, and if we took a moment to be honest with ourselves I think we could agree that the concept is unspoken but recognised by just about everyone, and applicable to almost every situation. But, instead of providing an unlist prior to a social contract of any sort we prefer to do things the hard way in front of a divorce court judge. Or Judge Judy if we’re fighting over who gets the dog after an acrimonious parting of ways.
I assume that the presentation of an unlist is insulting in social contracts, and particularly in marriage. Because love, optimism and trust are basic to any marriage concept, even if overwhelming evidence exists that suggests a force majeure clause would be a fine idea prior to applying ones signature.
It’s actually odd that we can see the logic of an unlist clause when we’re dealing with money, but typically dismiss the concept when emotion is involved. Funny how money can make us practical and emotion makes us impractical. Some people do try to apply practicality to the social contract we call marriage. This practicality comes in the form of a prenuptial agreement. I think though that the agreement is exclusive to assets owned prior to the nuptials and doesn’t include an unlist for behaviour aberrations that one of the parties finds unacceptable.
And as I mentioned earlier, the presentation of a prenup is very often viewed as insulting and so it’s pretty much applied to money and not to post contract behaviour.
And now I’m going to alter the direction of this post and talk about the Americans.
The current statistics for American marriages state that 40% of first marriages will end in divorce. This statistic has apparently dropped from highs of around 50% in the 1980’s. The researchers list prenuptial negotiations as being the key factor in the downward decline. So, statistics would suggest that Americans are applying a version of force majeure to their social contracts. Those same statistics would also suggest that Americans have accepted divorce as a suitable outcome when a social contract has become untenable.
So then I have to ask why a divorce from politicians isn’t a common occurrence?
In the case of Mr. Trump, he has twice stood before the chief justice of the United States and vowed to preserve, protect and defend the American constitution. It really shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that he took those oaths about as seriously as he took all of his marriage oaths, and in short order he has violated the first, fourth, fifth. sixth, eighth and tenth amendments of the American constitution.
And the violations haven’t been singular or subtle.
And yet for some strange reason a population that’s comfortable with a 40% termination of a social contract hasn’t concluded that a divorce from the Donald is reasonable. These violations of his oath are specific to the constitution and don’t include the felonies he’s committed and been convicted of, and so I’m puzzled why Americans haven’t taken note and terminated their social and legal contract with the man.
Seems uncharacteristic is all I’m saying. Emotional as opposed to logical.
But in another month or so Americans are going to have to look inward and decide if they want to be logical. Because I really think that if the Democrats win the house that Mr. Johnson is going to refuse to seat them because of claims of election fraud. By then I also believe Don will have found a way to seize ballots as evidence of this supposed fraud, and everyone is just going to have to trust him to possess and analyze those ballots.
Because he’s the president and he wouldn’t lie about a matter that determines the survival of American democracy.
Right?
Plus he promised his volk five thousand dollars, so there’s that.
Of course that’s assuming that Tulsi hasn’t compromised the election machines already and Don and Mike have already assured that the Republicans are going to retain their majority. I say that because Donnie flat out asked his cult at his Texas Reichsparteitag to raise their hands and pledge to vote Republican and cheat like hell.
Because apparently the other side already cheats.
And at his same time, wee Johnson has stated on camera that the Republicans cannot and will not allow the Democrats to take control of the Congress. Which is an odd statement to make considering that decision is not Mike’s to make and rests with the American people who decided to vote.
So, I’m forced once more to ask the Americans a question.
What the fuck are you people doing down there?
Because it looks to me like the constitution of the United States is a force majeure. It also looks like he’s violated the unlist clauses over and fucking over again, and it’s time for a divorce. A divorce where Mr. Trump retains no custody rights to the American family. A divorce where the president is looking at custody in an entirely different light.
But I really think he’s going to find a way to void or rig the election results. I also think that like everything Trump that the justifications for his second coup are going to be without any merit except trust me, and that he’s going to get away with it.
I hope I’m wrong. I really hope I’m wrong, but the man wears an extra large diaper not only for incontinence but also to accommodate his balls, and as of yet Americans haven’t found a method to demonstrate that a well placed boot to said balls is in order.
A boot that’s going to need to be applied from people who demand that he be held responsible for failing to uphold the provisions of his social contract.
The courts aren’t going to do anything, and even if they do he’ll just ignore any order from that corrupted tortoise of an American institution. It’s actually stunning when you consider that Mr. Trump has shown how impotent the courts are if you just say no, tell them to fuck off, and carry on with whatever lawless shit they instructed you to stop doing.
Apparently the courts are just a concept unless there’s someone willing and able to enforce their decisions.
So, I guess we’ll see in November if America decides to enforce their laws. Their track record with Don doesn’t provide much in the way of assurance that this will be the case, and if the trend continues then another Trump Rubicon will have been crossed where the rule of law being applied with a semblance of equality is officially dismissed.
And with that dismissal goes 250 years of American democracy.
Incredibly enough, not by a Russian style revolution, but by one lying, grifting, idiot of a man and his merry band of sycophants.
And by the way. What’s happening with the Epstein files?
They’re still being argued about in court, which is exactly what’s going to happen after Donnie and Mike rig or deny the election results. Then the rest of the world gets to see if this latest Trump fuckery gets dealt with or if everyone gets bored with it and lets the issue slide.
Because the N.F.L is back on the tube.