In America, where Americans are expected to voluntarily obey the law, the courts are mere insurers of objectivity in the forum where law is questioned. We Americans have allowed our courts to go too far. We have allowed our courts not only the authority to say what is right or wrong about an argument before it but what the solution to the argument and problem is, giving its own solution.
The courts use the law in some undefined scientific form wherein only the law is considered, that is, the statutory law, with a total disregard publicly for any consideration of spiritual and moral laws of our society. God allegedly made a law, "thou shalt not kill," and yet we kill; how can we have respect and regard for a man-made law that one can kill as long as it meets the guidelines of the law and the courts?
What is this all about? Child and spousal abuse. Where is the discipline? To set standards and laws as to what constitutes child and spousal abuse, leaving no room nor authority for one to discipline the other, is ludicrous, dangerous and stimulates the disrespect needed which causes violence. Children, spouses, animals and people in general need civil discipline.
The courts, and the law, while questionably identifying abuse, commingled criminal assault with a lack of identifying levels of discipline. The court maintains and uses contempt. The court will not relinquish its authority to maintain contumacious discipline within its view with no right to an attorney nor a right to a trial while restricting the discipline within a family. No one in a household has authority to insist and enforce any sort of civil behavior. In a democracy, where spiritual and moral laws and a respect for those laws are imperatives is what makes legal and statutory laws unnecessary to be rigidly enforced.
Ergo, the "separation of powers" doctrine of our legal constitutional considerations is the apparent solution. If the court would stay within the parameters of that theory, American justice would work, less crime would occur and Americans, through that learned respect, would voluntarily reintroduce their commitment to civil behavior through the use of spiritual and moral laws.
Please, no one is advocating abuse or subordination of one human being over another. What I am advocating is that one understands and accepts the responsibilities and limits of behavior based on their consent, consent to be a child with parental controls, consent to be a spouse with spousal controls, consent to be a citizen of a democratic nation with controls. We must come to grips with the fact that when there are more than one in any situation the rules of civil behavior become more important than the individual considerations of the two.
In a dictatorship, one is told what civil and public behavior is and will be; in a democracy, one has the freedoms, in civil and public behavior, to dictate the terms of behavior, assemble in groups to affect civil or public behavior and go to jail or to hell if that behavior is thwarted by law.
A girlfriend or boyfriend has the freedoms to do what they want to do or leave; marriage is supposed to say no. The mere marriage license is consent to subordinate oneself to the vows of the marriage and to the considerations of the spousal partner. Assault, in any situation, marriage, girlfriend or boyfriend, must be treated as a crime which is handled by prosecutors and the courts. This means that spousal and child abuse, if an assault, must be prosecuted in our courts not by using abuse alone in a divorce or grounds for that divorce, nor can it be used as reasons to intervene in the discipline of one's children.
A police officer, a prosecutor or the court cannot walk with every person to insure enforcement of court orders and injunctions, as they work only after the violence has taken place. Disrespect takes place before any reprehensible behavior and the disrespect is first for the human and then the law. If man will not obey nor fear God in His law, "Thou Shalt Not Kill," why would man respect or fear and adhere to the laws of our justice system? Children and spouses must take responsibility for any behavior which may place their well-being in jeopardy while using the laws, spiritual, moral and statutory, in cases of violation of those laws. No one should endure the pains of disrespect before the law can act but that is the law.
And, the law, the statutory law, is there to punish if violence follows the disrespect. We, society, must place civil obedience and enforcement back into the hands of the people, leaving violations of the law in the hands of police officers, prosecutors and courts. Discipline and civil behavior expectations are different from abuse and violence and now, today, discipline and civil misbehavior are left to the system which is not always present when the activity takes place. Spouses, children and society must take the initial steps to defend themselves against disrespect by not being disrespectful and then, if violence occur, call in the police officer, the prosecutor and the courts. Self-defense must be the initial action in an abusive or violent situation, and the first self-defense is respect.
