Replies

I doubt anyone would debate the way things OUGHT to be. You are correct; however we are arguing how things actually exist.

The courts, at the behest of women, have set paternity, community property, and alimony laws in place that are by definition unfair (and that is putting it very mildly). Men are screwed over by the justice system at every turn. A woman wants a divorce, she can get the most expensive attorney her husband's income can provide; he will pay for both attorneys at the end of the day. She has no limits on the amount of money she can spend, after all, her ex-husband to be will get the bills. She can demand the kids, the house, the car and nearly half of what he makes for the rest of his life, plus half of what he is worth today.

Women have worked hard, and I mean worked *&$# hard to make marriage as unappealing as possible for a logical man to consider. The legal obligations, coupled with the tax penalties mean a man (and only a man) becomes a slave, a piece of property, with little legal protection, once the license is filed; and even fewer rights if a child enters the picture. If it were not for tradition or religon, there would be no compelling reason for a logical man to even consider marriage.

Unless we start as a society stating how things ought to be so that progress can be made towards that end how else are we going to get there? Louisiana has started allowing a covenant marriage in which it is much more difficult to get divorced. There are IMO only a few valid reasons for couples to get divorced anyway. If it's tougher to get out people may make better choices going in.

Louisiana Covenant Marriage

Women have worked hard, and I mean worked *&$# hard to make marriage as unappealing as possible for a logical man

Yeah, but what kind of women? Maybe the Patricia Irelands and the NOW crowd? This is a conservative forum. Conservative people are different. If I marry it will be a God thing. I don't just go to church to look good. I go because I really believe all this sh!+