It's not the GAYS who are destroying marriage...

[jsgoddess]

... it's those pesky wimmen (and lawyers, don't forget lawyers)!

From here

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.

[snip]

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.

I'm just kind of pleased that a conservative is acknowledging that the biggest problems with marriage aren't brought in by gays. Of course, this guy's solution is that men shouldn't get married. Seems a bit like destroying the village to save it, but still.

[eleanorigby]

He's off base re custody as well. Most parents share custody in one way or another today. Even my parents, divorced way back in 1975 had visitation rights for my dad (he moved to another state, so no shared custody). And as for the her taking you for all you've got--most women are expected to WORK post divorce, they may get child support, but most don't get big alimony payments, some don't get any at all.
Divorce drops a woman's income by one third.

This article concentrates on older women undergoing divorce, but it is still pertinent to the thread.

olderwomenand divorce

I can't find the article with the one third statistic. Since I am actively contemplating divorce, I know I read that somewhere and it gave me pause.

And what is with the demonization of women in this guy's article? So, they're either domestic goddesses, whose hands that rock the cradles also rule the world, or they're ballbusting bankrobbing bitches? Do these guys even know that gray exists? or is it always black and white for them?

[Kuboydal]

We all know that marriage is the leading cause of divorce.

[gwendee]

That guy's ex musta had a seriously sharky divorce lawyer!

[Voyager]

Note his qualifies:

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.

Trying to sell his book, I see. This poor old oppressed men crap is nothing new. I'm happy I'm in the oppressed class, so I can laugh at my protectors with a clear conscience.

[picunurse]

Sounds like he was a pediphile or at the very least, an abuser. being denied any contact with one's kids usually means a bad dad.

[picunurse]

Sounds like he was a pediphile or at the very least, an abuser. Being denied any contact with one's kids usually means a bad dad.

[Muffin]

Blame the hand that rocks the cradle -- if the father had never been born, then there never would have been a divorce.

More seriously, if one wishes to look at the fairness or unfairness of the divorce process, one needs to look at the broad numbers. There are disaffected people of both sexes who may or may not have reason to be upset with the process. In claiming that men are necessarily screwed over by the divorce process, the fellow simply shows himself to be a nutter.

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by picunurse

Sounds like he was a pediphile or at the very least, an abuser. being denied any contact with one's kids usually means a bad dad.

Absolutely! No one has ever lied about fears of abuse!

[Foxy40]

Originally Posted by eleanorigby

He's off base re custody as well. Most parents share custody in one way or another today. Even my parents, divorced way back in 1975 had visitation rights for my dad (he moved to another state, so no shared custody). And as for the her taking you for all you've got--most women are expected to WORK post divorce, they may get child support, but most don't get big alimony payments, some don't get any at all.
Divorce drops a woman's income by one third.

I see very little "shared custody" in my circles. What I see is a lot of moms with primary residence and fathers with "visitation". That word "visitation" when it comes to parents and children annoys me. You don't visit a child. You raise a child.

I am wondering why you capitalized "work" when you wrote what is expected after divorce. Of course they are expected to work and I have been very clear about my position about the antiquated practice of spousal support. If your statistic is correct and divorce drops a woman's income by a third, then women better start choosing to be a little more self sufficient in case their marriage doesn't work out instead of not only being financially supported throughout the marriage but have expectations of that support if the marriage fails. If a woman's income drops it because she now has to earn it herself. There is nothing wrong with that. People live in the manner which they can afford.

[OneCentStamp]

Originally Posted by picunurse

Sounds like he was a pediphile

What's the matter with an innocent foot fetish?

[Kuboydal]

Originally Posted by OneCentStamp

What's the matter with an innocent foot fetish?

Fungal infections.

[Little Nemo]

Some men get locked into the mentality that they own everything around them. It's my house, my car, my money, my wife, my children. Anything their wife gets is stolen from them.