Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.1
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.2
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.3
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.4
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.5
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.6
FOOTNOTES
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.1
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.2
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.3
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.4
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.5
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.6
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.7
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.8
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.9
MARRIAGE-10.1
MARRIAGE-10.2
MARRIAGE-10.3
MARRIAGE-10.4
MARRIAGE-10.5
MARRIAGE-10.6
MARRIAGE-10.7
MARRIAGE-10.8
MARRIAGE-10.9
MARRIAGE-10.10
MARRIAGE-10.11
MARRIAGE-10.12
FOOTNOTES
THE ART OF LOVE-11.1
THE ART OF LOVE-11.2
THE ART OF LOVE-11.3
THE ART OF LOVE-11.4
THE ART OF LOVE-11.5
THE ART OF LOVE-11.6
THE ART OF LOVE-11.7
THE ART OF LOVE-11.8
THE ART OF LOVE-11.9
THE ART OF LOVE-11.10
THE ART OF LOVE-11.11
FOOTNOTES
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.1
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.2
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.3
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.4
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.5
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.6
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.7
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.8
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.9
FOOTNOTES
INDEX OF AUTHORS

court and declare: "We are both in the wrong: we have not been able to 

fulfil our engagements to each other; we have erred in choosing each 

other." The long reports of the case in open court, the mutual 

recriminations, the detectives, the servant girls and other witnesses, the 

infamous inquisition into intimate secrets--all these things, which no 

necessity could ever justify, are altogether unnecessary. 

 

 

It is said by some that if there were no impediments to divorce a man 

might be married in succession to half a dozen women. These simple-minded 

or ignorant persons do not seem to be aware that even when marriage is 

absolutely indissoluble a man can, and frequently does, carry on sexual 

relationships not merely successively, but, if he chooses, even 

simultaneously, with half a dozen women. There is, however, this important 

difference that, in the one case, the man is encouraged by the law to 

believe that he need only treat at most one of the six women with anything 

approaching to justice and humanity; in the other case the law insists 

that he shall fairly and openly fulfil his obligations towards all the six 

women. It is a very important difference, and there ought to be no 

question as to which state of things is moral and which immoral. It is no 

concern of the State to inquire into the number of persons with whom a man 

or a woman chooses to have sexual relationships; it is a private matter 

which may indeed affect their own finer spiritual development but which it 

is impertinent for the State to pry into. It is, however, the concern of 

the State, in its own collective interest and that of its members, to see 

that no injustice is done. 

 

But what about the children? That is necessarily a very important 

question. The question of the arrangements made for the children in cases 

of divorce is always one to which the State must give its regulative 

attention, for it is only when there are children that the State has any 

real concern in the matter. 

 

At one time it was even supposed by some that the existence of children 

was a serious argument against facility of divorce. A more reasonable view 

is now generally taken. It is, in the first place, recognized that a very 

large proportion of couples seeking divorce have no children. In England 

the proportion is about forty per cent.; in some other countries it is 

doubtless larger still. But even when there are children no one who 

realizes what the conditions are in families where the parents ought to be 

but are not divorced can have any doubt that usually those conditions are 

extremely bad for the children. The tension between the parents absorbs 

energy which should be devoted to the children. The spectacle of the 

grievances or quarrels of their parents is demoralizing for the children, 

and usually fatal to any respect towards them. At the best it is 

injuriously distressing to the children. One effective parent, there 

cannot be the slightest doubt, is far better for a child than two 

ineffective parents. There is a further point, often overlooked, for 

consideration here. Two people when living together at variance--one of 

them perhaps, it is not rarely the case, nervously abnormal or 

diseased--are not fitted to become parents, nor in the best condition for 

procreation. It is, therefore, not merely an act of justice to the 

individual, but a measure called for in the interests of the State, that 

new citizens should not be brought into the community through such 

defective channels.[353] From this point of view all the interests of the 

State are on the side of facility of divorce. 

 

There is a final argument which is often brought forward against facility 


Page 2 from 5:  Back   1  [2]  3   4   5   Forward