Divorce and Women’s Rights
Highly egregious and clearly unacceptable are this nation’s present laws and welfare programs that actually promote divorce, and even more egregious, an unjust divorce. Today, our laws and welfare programs are a direct frontal attack against Yahweh’s laws! Furthermore, for many sound reasons our divorce laws should be based on a patriarchal form of family government, which we had at the beginning of this nation, and as already demonstrated would quickly and significantly cut America’s epidemic divorce rates.
And men, let us be honest here. Any man who divorces his wife (except for infidelity) is, in practice, party to the women’s rights movement. How can this be? What is the foundational truth that is being violated in that movement? They violate the divine governmental order in marriage, wherein two become one flesh under the husband’s headship. So, when women seek to be equal to the man, they violate the government of headship. But why does that headship exist? Because of the union of two into one flesh. In that union, the government of headship then comes into order.
Thus, there are two critical parts to this divine order, and if one or the other is attacked, there is like participation and guilt. Those two parts are (1) irrevocable union, and (2) headship. When a woman rebels, as in the case of the women’s rights movement, she is guilty of violating this divine order. And when a man divorces his wife (except for infidelity), he is equally guilty of violating this divine order, and thus bears the same offense. Likewise, he is being feminine in his actions, operating out of his emotions and lusts, and not out of just and right masculine government.
Therefore, any man who divorces his wife is, in practice, being feministic and becomes a party to the women’s rights movement; because divorce, like women’s rights, attacks the same governmental truth. Thus, by its very actions, participation in divorce condones women’s rights. And to speak against feminism while condoning divorce is the height of hypocrisy. In one’s mind the two aberrations can be separated; but in governmental truth, the two are the same—both attack the bedrock of two into one flesh under the husband’s headship. If we do away with women’s rights, of necessity we must do away with divorce. If we attack feminism, of necessity we must attack divorce. Why? Because they are one and the same in God’s government.