Posted on 11/13/2007 7:08:30 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
Marriage is a foundation of civilized life. No advanced civilization has ever existed without the married, two-parent family. Those who argue that our civilization needs healthy marriages to survive are not exaggerating.
And yet I cannot, in good conscience, urge young men to marry today. For many men (and some women), marriage has become nothing less than a one-way ticket to jail. Even the New York Times has reported on how easily "the divorce court leads to a jail cell," mostly for men. In fact, if I have one urgent piece of practical advice for young men today it is this: Do not marry and do not have children.
Spreading this message may also, in the long run, be the most effective method of saving marriage as an institution. For until we understand that the principal threat to marriage today is not cultural but political, and that it comes not from homosexuals but from heterosexuals, we will never reverse the decline of marriage. The main destroyer of marriage, it should be obvious, is divorce. Michael McManus of Marriage Savers points out that "divorce is a far more grievous blow to marriage than today's challenge by gays." The central problem is the divorce laws.
It is well known that half of all marriages end in divorce. But widespread misconceptions lead many to believe it cannot happen to them. Many conscientious people think they will never be divorced because they do not believe in it. In fact, it is likely to happen to you whether you wish it or not.
First, you do not have to agree to the divorce or commit any legal transgression. Under "no-fault" divorce laws, your spouse can divorce you unilaterally without giving any reasons. The judge will then grant the divorce automatically without any questions.
But further, not only does your spouse incur no penalty for breaking faith; she can actually profit enormously. Simply by filing for divorce, your spouse can take everything you have, also without giving any reasons. First, she will almost certainly get automatic and sole custody of your children and exclude you from them, without having to show that you have done anything wrong. Then any unauthorized contact with your children is a crime. Yes, for seeing your own children you will be subject to arrest.
There is no burden of proof on the court to justify why they are seizing control of your children and allowing your spouse to forcibly keep you from them. The burden of proof (and the financial burden) is on you to show why you should be allowed to see your children.
The divorce industry thus makes it very attractive for your spouse to divorce you and take your children. (All this earns money for lawyers whose bar associations control the careers of judges.) While property divisions and spousal support certainly favor women, the largest windfall comes through the children. With custody, she can then demand "child support" that may amount to half, two-thirds, or more of your income. (The amount is set by committees consisting of feminists, lawyers, and enforcement agents – all of whom have a vested interest in setting the payments as high as possible.) She may spend it however she wishes. You pay the taxes on it, but she gets the tax deduction.
You could easily be left with monthly income of a few hundreds dollars and be forced to move in with relatives or sleep in your car. Once you have sold everything you own, borrowed from relatives, and maximized your credit cards, they then call you a "deadbeat dad" and take you away in handcuffs. You are told you have "abandoned" your children and incarcerated without trial.
Evidence indicates that, as men discover all this, they have already begun an impromptu marriage "strike": refusing to marry or start families, knowing they can be criminalized if their wife files for divorce. "Have anti-father family court policies led to a men's marriage strike?" ask Glenn Sacks and Dianna Thompson in the Philadelphia Enquirer. In Britain, fathers tour university campuses warning young men not to start families. In his book, From Courtship to Courtroom, Attorney Jed Abraham concludes that the only protection for men to avoid losing their children and everything else is not to start families in the first place.
Is it wise to disseminate such advice? If people stop marrying, what will become of the family and our civilization?
Marriage is already all but dead, legally speaking, and divorce is the principal reason. The fall in the Western birth rate is directly connected with divorce law.
It is also likely that same-sex marriage is being demanded only because of how heterosexuals have already debased marriage through divorce law. "The world of no-strings heterosexual hookups and 50% divorce rates preceded gay marriage," advocate Andrew Sullivan points out. "All homosexuals are saying...is that, under the current definition, there's no reason to exclude us. If you want to return straight marriage to the 1950s, go ahead. But until you do, the exclusion of gays is simply an anomaly – and a denial of basic civil equality."
We will not restore marriage by burying our heads in the sand; nor simply by preaching to young people to marry, as the Bush administration's government therapy programs now do. The way to restore marriage as an institution in which young people can place their trust, their children, and their lives is to make it an enforceable contract. We urgently need a national debate about divorce, child custody, and the terms under which the government can forcibly sunder the bonds between parents and their children. We owe it to future generations, if there are to be any.
Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D., is assistant professor of government at Patrick Henry College and President of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. His book, Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family, has just been published by Cumberland House Publishing.
A few years back we were at a parent teacher conference, and the teacher suggested a few things we could do together to improve Ratboy's academic performance.
She was amazed to find that we were divorced, saying that she had many children of divorce in her classes, and that she could always tell who they were. Except him. She had no idea we were divorced.
We could think of no finer complement.
True, but incest is pretty much universally frowned upon...
(BITTER IRONY JOKE!!!!)
Yeah....but that takes WORK!!!! And many today think everything should be EASY!
Well said. I’m printing that out for my son.
“marry a traditional woman if you want a family. don’t be a mouse-man”
True, but trad women are very difficult to find. Even then, they have been raised with a men vs women attitude. They were taught by the media and university that they are victims, and that men are beasts. Many are typically hypersensitive (like many minorities) and are easily offended. While many of these women are easily spotted and avoided, many are not, or become converted to this mindset post marriage. There is also the issue of women who suddenly decide that their post marriage appearance is unimportant (commonplace) and suddenly gain 100 lbs (and then don’t understand why their hubby is interested in someone else). Marriage is a minefield, choose wrong, and you risk bankrupcy the loss of your home and children. What young man in his right mind would take the risk, especially considering that sex is essentially free for the asking.
Hey! we used CCAI, you WON’T be disappointed. Is your dossier in China now? We adopted twice, 12/98 (G 116) and 12/04 (G 702).
Absolutely, they’ve the best in-China facilitators. I think the world of Raymond Shang (Guangzhou) and Anna Zhu (Beijing). I’d go back tomorrow if I could.
Most times their travel agent gives you the option of a Guangzhou or Beijing entry - we chose the Beijing so we could see the sights, visit TS, GW, SP, FC, MT, and the Wangfujing District.
Lilly and Joshua and the folk at CCAI have done a great work for the children and for the parents.
FReepmail me if there’s anything I can help you with, questions you need answered (that I in my limited knowledge can answer..).
You were wise!
Agree. Tongue...biting.
"..The U.S. divorce rate is 17.7 per 1,000 married women, down from 22.6 in 1980. The marriage rate is also on a steady decline: a 50% drop since 1970 from 76.5 per 1,000 unmarried women to 39.9, says the report, whose calculations are based on an internationally used measurement..."
What goes on in family court has to be part of the reason for the decline in the marriage rate.
Like this one? Or do you think that you have the vision to specify the religion too?
I. Group Profile
Name: Snake Handlers
History:
Snake Handlers are more generally known as the Church of God with Signs Following. Under this umbrella term falls the loosely organized “Pentecostal churches, ministers and itinerent preachers popularly known as snake handlers.” The practice itself developed out of the Pentecostal-Holiness movement which flourished in the first two decades of the twentieth century (Melton 1996, 636).
IMO, the fundemental problem is that people are getting married for all the wrong reasons. Young folks get married because they think it’s all about sex. It isn’t, it’s about commitment. Sex with one partner is just part of the bigger picture of commitment.
Until we start teaching that good marriages begin with respect for their partner and commitment to the relationship and the marriage, the divorce rate will continue unabated.
” It may take one who wants to end the marriage, but how it got to that point was caused by both.”
Not always true...there are plenty of completely innocent spouses - male and female - who were stomped on by selfish jerks.
This thread mentions the calculating cold woman who screws the man over - but it often happens the other way as well. There are plenty of men sleeping around and ditching their first wives for a younger model.
In the end - if one person has decided to be self-centered, then the whole thing is likely to crash.
My hubby and I had everything working against us. We were told we were too young.
Our original plan when we first became engaged was to have a 2 yr. engagement and get married after I graduated college.
Well...the 2 yrs quickly became a 6 month engagement instead, and I wound up a young married mom commuting to a local university.
We had many people advising us against the wedding.
Well...it’s 20 years later and we’ve added 7 more little ones.
And when we look back, we have to admit that going to church, having a prayer life - that was an enormous bonus.
We got the message early on that marriage is not about “self”, but is instead about self-sacrifice.
People getting married should do so because they want to actively love their spouse and children - give them everything they’ve got.
It’s about giving - not getting.
It is hard work, and I often do thank God, but I’m not sure I do every day...this thread has reminded me that I really should.
Great minds think alike.....
See post 86.
“half of all marriages end in divorce.”
That is using statistics to lie.
It’s is impossible to calculate how many marriages end in divorce. What they mean is that, over a certain period of time, there were twice as many marriages as divorces.
Not the same as “half of all marriages end in divorce.”
Lame... your example is valid but not the general trend
In terms of damage done to family and children (and the culture that they comprise), divorce is far, far worse than sodomy. If we as Christians spent the same resources and time fighting divorce as we do homosexuality, we’d all be far better off.
The Church teaches what Jesus taught: no divorce. Ever. For any reason. A man and wife are obligated to stay married even if they end up hating each other’s guts. If a man and wife cannot live together in peace, they may physically separate, but must remain married and faithful to their spouse for the rest of their lives. It is a duty to God.
But we don’t care, because in America personal happiness is our #1 value, not Duty or God. And so the divorce mill grinds on, wrecking lives and ruining our society.
Mrs Chan and I have a wonderful marriage, but even if we didn’t we are both dedicated to marriage as a sacrament and an institution. We take seriously the “until death us do part” thing.
It’s rare to find divorced parents and blended families working together for the sake of the children. I once worked with a woman who was divorced with one daughter. She married again and that marriage produced two sons. At some point, this woman got together her present and former husband and members of her family and the two husbands’ families, and basically laid down the law. They were all going to try to get along and work together for the sake of the children. If there were going to be any disagreements, they would not be played out on the children. Amazingly, they did get along for the most part. This woman told me that her children had three sets of grandparents — there was none of this “you’re no relation to me” thing — each family welcomed the stepchildren with open arms. The ex and the present husband also treated their non-biological children as their own. As a result of everyone’s cooperation, the children turned out well.
Having once worked for attorneys who specialized in “family law” — I know that scenarios like yours and my former co-worker’s are a rarity.
Yeah. I married a nice Catholic girl.
That worked.
NOT!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.