Dads Against the Divorce Industry
DA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS.
DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes.
What Has Happened To Dads Is A Sin!Gerald L. Rowles, Ph.D.
November 25, 2002
Within the same week, two feminist spokeswomen, Martha Burk and Germaine Greer have, ironically, brought the question of morality into their self-initiated war of the sexes.
"Is it legal? Probably. Is it morally right? No." - Martha Burk of the National Council of Women's Organizations commenting on Augusta National Golf Club's single-sex membership, 11/14/2002Martha Burk was point-blank direct in imposing her judgment; that the existence of a male-only organization is immoral but, unfortunately, legal. One might further conclude that Ms Burk considers the existence of the male-only Catholic priesthood immoral as well. Her statement begs the question; what then is the feminist advocacy of abortion - legal but, unfortunately, immoral?
"Men get angry when I describe them as 'freaks of nature, fragile, fantastic, bizarre', as idiots savants, 'full of queer obsessions about fetishistic activities and arbitrary goals, doomed to competition and injustice not merely towards females, but towards children, animals and other men'. Women made men redundant; redundant tissue inevitably turns malignant." - Germaine Greer 11/16/2002Germaine Greer on the other hand, was her usual circumlocutious self. Not only are men freaky, bizarre, idiotic, fetishistic, unjust, and redundant tissue, they are malignant - synonymous with malicious; diabolical, in the bible according to Grrrreer. How is it immoral for men to respond like Christ in the temple when such excremental, hostile maledictions are thrust in their midst?
What is not immediately apparent in these screeds, and those of a similar cant and prejudice for the last 40 years is that these mere mortals are setting themselves forth as demigoddesses; as the final arbiters of morality, without so much as a blush. The stench of their hubris is overwhelming. If this is the ultimate manifestation of female empowerment, God deliver us.
As has been characteristic of the nihilism of feminism, even God cannot get a fair hearing before their wrath. Contrast this with the faith and morality of the founding fathers that, in their humility, acknowledged the ontology of a superior deity as the basis for our constitutional framework. For feminists, their rage and self-entitlement are the only requisite criteria for all judgments and decrees. And yet, the popular media can never bring itself to point out the hypocrisy of this very un-PC judgmentalism.
I was reminded of the intrinsic role that God played in our country's founding when I received an email from a student writing a research a paper. He referenced an archived article at the DA*DI site entitled The First Great Commandment .
The author of this piece points out that during the period of revolutionary war, 35 percent of all political quotation came directly from the Bible. He further instructs that "we owe at least two basic principles of Constitutional law to their understanding and convictions regarding the first great commandment - 'Thou shalt love the lord thy God with all thy heart and him only thou shalt serve' - They are: 1. Our rejection of kings. 2. Our belief in equality before the law (as one of many inalienable rights)."
Given the foregoing, it is no stretch of the imagination to conclude that what Ms's Burk and Greer are about is reestablishing the "divine rights of
But as the founding fathers established, these United States were founded with the Ten Commandments in mind. That feminism has sinned against man-kind, and particularly fathers, is revealed in considering those first rules:
(As a clarification for Protestant Christians, the numbering of the commandments follows that of the Catholic Christian tradition.)
Both Adam and Eve were the product of the Creator in the Garden of Eden. In decreeing that one-half of the sex equation is redundant and of an inferior, ungodly cast, Germaine Greer and her ilk are declaring the Creator incompetent, and themselves superior to His design.
It is implicit in God's command that both mother and father are of equal value in His eyes. But haven't the feminist-inspired courts found fathers to be an inferior, ungodly cast, dishonoring fatherhood while disobeying God's commandment? Does it not follow that the custody and support mandates, which serve these presumptions, are a travesty before God?
In the feminists' alternate universe, the "battered wife" defense for women who murder their spouses, not in self-defense, but while they sleep, or after meticulous planning, is a circumlocution of God's intent. Abortion, with a special place in the afterlife for those who commit partial-birth abortion, is undoubtedly a grievous sin. But for the feminist, Choice rises above God's word.
In its fundamental form, this commandment regards divorce in and of itself as adultery. Consequently, the Catholic Church has traditionally made it very difficult to annul a marriage, and in the past it did not recognize secular divorce per-se. Given that feminism has inculcated a divorce mentality in contemporary women, is that not a sinful disregard for God's law? Under His law, there is no such thing as "no-fault" divorce. Or how about this: "Child support must be set high enough to make divorce attractive." - Phillip Caroom, Circuit Court Judge. Or how about the growing awareness of "paternity fraud"; are these not legalized, but immoral, forms of adultery being perpetuated by the nihilist, feminist State?
The feminist sins, which defy this commandment, are almost too numerous to cover briefly, but include: the creation of the Violence Against Women Act which is at its core a lie against man-kind. Aren't restraining orders and other false allegations of abuse, which the Godless feminists have inspired and promulgated, evidence of their presumptive "divine right" to criminalize fatherhood. And how about that most perverse lie, "in the bests interests of the child"?
Among others, this command might be brought to the attention of Ms Burk, who clearly covets control of the Augusta Golf Club - through nothing more than the divine right of feminism.
From the Founder's perspective, the feminist State has committed multiple violations of the very constitution that sought to prevent such malfeasance. The unjust circumstances of contemporary laws and PC "morality" which are being imposed upon men and fathers have been well documented.
But at the risk of being dragged before the court of the lionesses, we need to be reminded that today's men and fathers are caught up in a vast web of sin spun by feminist-inspired immorality and sexuality; in open defiance of God's law. The argument could be rightly made that these immoral and tyrannical conditions constitute the necessary and sufficient moral grounds for a second revolution.
Perhaps, however, this can be a bloodless revolt. An ostensible moral man now occupies the seat of power in the nation's capital. From all accounts white, male, and pro-life brigades placed him there. 2004, and the potential continuation of his mandate is less than two years away.
In this second revolution, let's send a loud and clear message daily. Let's tell the new George that we want to see the reinstatement of a moral, constitutional government that guarantees equal justice for men, children and fathers. And if that is not clearly forthcoming by November 2004, we will simply stay home.
To paraphrase Patrick Henry; Give dads their God-given liberty ... or get lost!
Back to DA*DI's Home