ing in their extreme individualism in the matter of marriage is that it is merely a personal matter. We grant that it is a personal matter, and we shall later show how largely personal it is.
But when people become careless of others involved in marriage, and indifferent to all that may socially proceed from marriage, society has the right to take a hand.
The individualist asks: "Is not one the master, or the mistress, of one's own life and destiny?"
Yes, one has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness so long as his practice does not interfere with similar rights possessed by others.
If marriage is to descend to the level of brute mating, with no regard for offspring and the future,—descend into mere lust and temporary pleasure, it would mean that the fountain of all human life had ceased to be protected.
For licentious living destroys society itself as well as the individual.
We cannot allow the individual to pollute the fountain from which all drink. He may destroy himself, but he must not be allowed to destroy society. He cannot be allowed to make laws subversive of the common good, nor be a law unto himself.
One might want to build his house out in the
