Jimmy, thanks for responding. I greatly appreciate your input. By no means do I take offense and I don't intend any in my reply. I have to give you creds for your service to our country and for this, I support any soldier who has his children taken from him by the family courts simply because he is away fighting in places like Iraq or Afghanistan. I'm so sorry to have to say it but but I think that the kind of country I live in doesn't live up to its promise. You and I both took that oath to defend the constitution and it pains me that you don't see what Texas (and other states) are doing to ignore the fundamentals of both constitutions.
What kind of a country? We declared independance in 1776 for life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. 190 years later, Us white folk did not have the freedom to marry who we wanted. In 1967, that all changed when Loving v. Virginia was decided by the Supreme Court. In the 70s, we would have had to ask the court for permission to marry if us men fell behind on our child support. That went away after Zablocki v. Redhail was decided.
Your theory that you can't stay married (wich is the norm) is what is causing good soldiers to loose their children simply because they are sent to fight our country's wars and are not able to get home to save themselves or their children from the Texas family courts. What kind of a country? This country places marriage and parenting as one of the basic rights of man. It is an inalienable right to raise one's children . That is a right that is not conferred by the State and cannot be abridged by ordinary means and yet it is being done without any compelling interest. This is why I posted the question.
Turner v. Safely stated the Supreme Courts opinion that marriage is a fundamental right (religious component for those who so choose).
The Supreme Court has also made it clear that the Govt. has no authority over the care and custody of one's children greater than the parents themselves. Santoski v. Kramer, Toxel v. Granvill et al. unless there is harm or neglect that would rebut the parental presumption.
Waite v. Waite 2001 was argued here in Texas and states exactly the opposite of what you are saying. It's the state that determines whether or not two people can divorce and determines the reasons that it can be granted for.
Semper Fi (can I say that?)
Godspeed my brother in arms,