Rescuing Marriage From The Liberals, Because Civilization Is At Stake

I try not to be a judgmental person. Especially of late, I typically prefer to leave the obnoxious moralizing, shallow virtue-signaling, and hysterical hand-wringing to the Leftists, who after decades of godlessness finally seem to have what’s ‘moral’ and ‘immoral’ down pat, being high priests and priestesses of their own invented ‘religion,’ after all. But I try to live and let live, respecting other people’s viewpoints and understanding that, though I may see the world through a particular lens, others may see things in an entirely different way.

So yeah, I get that the “but” that’s about to come will, in some people’s view, cancel out any of the above sentiments, BUT I still feel compelled to ask - What on earth happened to marriage? Even for those who don’t believe the practice to be God-ordained as prescribed in the Bible, it’s hard to deny that following the “success sequence” of finishing school, getting a job, getting married, THEN having children leads to a remarkably strong bulwark against poverty.

And yet, has anyone else noticed that ‘traditional’ families - i.e. a husband, a wife, and a child or children who are actually at least nine months younger than the total time their parents have been married - are about as rare as a liberal who tips?

I know I’m not the only one who’s noticed. Talk about it with anyone you trust of a traditional bent and they’ll tell you in a whisper, if they’re honest, that they’ve noticed it too. Taking divorce and split families out of this analysis entirely (a whole other issue), chances are a shocking percentage of young couples with kids you spot at a grocery store, an amusement park, at work, or even your church will either be unmarried or have been married at some point after their children were conceived or born. Talk to the ones you know in a non-judgmental way, and you’ll discover a variety of reasons - one or the other is just not ready to “settle down” (though they already have children and are living together); one or the other is just not “responsible” (though they have a HUGE responsibility between them); one of the other or both just needs to be a little more financially stable (though that didn’t stop them from - ahem - procreating). You get the picture. There’s always a reason to justify not adding ‘commitment’ to what one’s life essentially already is.

In fairness, it’s not entirely their fault. Why has marriage, an institution as old as humankind itself, fallen out of such favor with the masses? Although marriage has for millenia been the building block of families, indeed of civilization itself, in 2014 only 46 percent of adults agreed with the statement, “Society is better off if people make marriage and having children a priority,” according to PEW Research.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson got into some trouble after this Wednesday night “Tucker Carlson Tonight” segment (take 15 minutes and watch it - it’s one of his all-time best) in which he blamed the decline of marriage - and consequently of society itself - at least in part on the lack of male income opportunities and the elites’ utter disregard and even contempt of the plight of the American blue-collar male. Because, well, despite all the hyperventilating about the nonexistent ‘glass ceiling’ and the mythical ‘gender pay gap,’ women, even liberal ones, tend to not want to marry men who make less money than they do. Among the many critics of Tucker’s segment was Joy Behar and the hosts of “The View,” who ridiculed it, but as Carlson noted the next night, never attempted to dispute the facts behind his argument.

Probably because the facts are all too easily provable. The same PEW study quoted above says: “Never-married women place a great deal of importance on finding someone who has a steady job—fully 78% [compared to 46 percent of men] say this would be very important to them in choosing a spouse or partner. For never-married men, someone who shares their ideas about raising children is more important in choosing a spouse than someone who has a steady job.”

Of course, as we all know, liberals never let facts get in the way of a good narrative.

So on one hand, you’ve got women not wanting to marry men who can’t find good jobs. On the other, a generally anti-male, anti-father court system that makes marrying the wrong woman among the most tragic life decisions a man can make. Add no-fault divorce, the decline of traditional morals and the “marriage penalty” tax into the mix, and it’s almost like marriage these days is set up to fail.

Yet Tucker also noted how, interestingly, marriage is alive and well among rich people, and the actual facts bear this out as well. In a New York Times article titled, “Marriage Is for Rich People,” Catherine Rampell (a lib) writes, “The rich are different from you and me: they’re more likely to get married. A new report, by Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney of the Hamilton Project, looked at the decline in marriage rates over the last 50 years and found a strong connection to income. Dwindling marriage rates are concentrated among the poor — the very people whose living standards would be most improved by having a second household income.”

If you’re a leftist and your goal was to destroy, then remake society into whatever twisted image you had in your head of what it should be, you’d likely first go after its foundation. Could this explain why leftists have been going after marriage as an institution - and by extension the family - for decades? Destroy the means by which humans raise stable, functional, healthy members of the next generation, and you strike at the root of society itself. If you believe that traditional society (a.k.a. Western civilization) is evil at its core, as today’s leftists do, it’s a strategy that makes sense, at least in their own warped minds.

It’s not about being ‘judgy’ or intolerant or in any way looking down on people who make bad or unwise decisions, because we all make bad or unwise decisions from time to time. However, the facts show that the “success sequence” mentioned above isn’t just a path to financial success, it’s one to success as a society as well. To save it, we must save marriage as an institution. In order to have any hope of doing that, we must recognize, expose, then reverse the forces that are tearing it apart. The next generation literally hangs in the balance.

What on earth happened to marriage?

My own daughter has so rejected Christianity that she won't marry her "old man" and has taken to referring to their relationship as "partner".

It is 100 percent a spiritual battle.

Of course it is ‘by design’.

This is the dirty democrats method of restarting slavery in this country.

Their core voting constitute is this group of ‘single mothers’.

They are dependent upon the federal government for their livelihoods.

In exchange, these women turn over their lovers for persecution and prosecution by the government for ‘child support’.

Child support amounts for the low income lot are typically capped at a seizure of 50% of ‘net income’.

However, the actual orders can exceed this maximum capped amount.

These excess orders are uncollectable but are used to justify every more harsh and draconian laws and regulations to abuse these ‘deadbeats’ with.

The men, left with no money to live on, then spiral down into despair and depravity.

Many of them try to start families again, only to be tossed to the curb repeatedly.

Before the birth control pill, rocking and rolling on a steady basis was sure to result in a baby.

The birth control pill in typical usage has a roughly five percent annual failure rate, mainly because the female forget to take a pill or two or three.

When my sister went to meet a date outside, my mother was sure to shout no sex before marriage, within earshot of the beau. Her boys were quietly told not to make females pregnant.

I don't agree with Ben Shapiro on every issue, but I believe he is 100% correct when he approaches the "gay marriage" question with the idea that the government shouldn't recognize ANY marriages -- any more than it recognizes a baptism or a bar mitzvah. The institution of marriage began to collapse as soon as you had the government get involved in administering it.

I see a lot of people on here posting very misleading comments that would have people believe that only liberals attacked marriage, getting us to this point.

That is an outright lie, and it is an outright lie whether made through ignorance or through deceit.

Many otherwise biblical pastors and laymen pushed no-fault divorce.
No-fault divorce us the linchpin on which much of this hinges. Without no-fault divorce there would never have been any gay or lesbian marriage because those subcultures have little capacity for monogamous relationships. When their wealth was highly at risk should they get caught philandering there were only a tiny minority of them willing to get within rock throwing distance of marriage.

Pastors and Christian lawyers with whom I have spoken almost always justified their support for no-fault divorce by telling of the anger, hurt, and suffering divorce brings to the whole extended family.

God abhors it. It's supposed to hurt. Avoiding that hurt is a benefit provided to us for our own good by a benevolent creator. Just like every other hurt, it's purpose is for our ultimate preservation.

That's a good point.

Let's even take the religious element out of the discussion and look at it with objectively as a purely secular institution.

Outside a religious context, a marriage is a contract between two people. I challenge anyone to find any other contractual relationship that can be severed as readily as a marriage contract -- especially through a legal action initiated by only one party to the contract.

In this context, a married person seeking a divorce is the equivalent of a person who buys a new car ... and then goes back five years later and forces the dealer to take the car back in exchange for: (1) the full purchase price, and (2) indefinite payments to cover the person's transportation costs after the car is returned. Nobody would ever sell a car if there was even a 1% chance that something like this could ever happen.

The whole thing is really a sad joke.

Its such a bad deal for men today.

No women would get married if they faced all the negatives and responsibilities men have, its a one way contract and family court exists just to divorce rape men. Over 80% of divorce initiated by women, you know why, because its great for them.

Wow, so many things happened to marriage. Marriage was once viewed as a sacred bond, not an agreement to stay together as long as the good feelings lasted. Women became more economically independent, so they did not rely on a man for financial support. Living together and having children out of wedlock is no longer taboo. Government programs, such as social security and welfare meant that people did not need families as much as they once did for financial support. Increasingly large government and its interference in the housing market meant that people needed 2 incomes to buy a house, pay taxes, and have a comfortable standard of living. College because outrageously expensive and the education system no longer prepared people for life and a career. Globalization of the economy changed the rules of employment, so that people could no longer depend on a 30+ year career with one company and a secure pension. It also destroyed high-paying blue collar jobs, so that many men could no longer afford to marry and support a family. Divorce became much easier to get and is no longer frowned upon. Feminism made men and women antagonists instead of partners.

I can probably think of a few more things, but you get the drift. I’m afraid the genie is out of the bottle, and it’s not going to change.

Laws concerning marriage have destroyed the family; they play a huge role in our demographic death spiral. NJ is now re-visiting “alimony for life”, and not because men are complaining (they’ve been complaining for decades to no avail); it is being re-visited because vocal white women can’t find spouses to commit. Instead they work (and are taxed) like men to provide for other peoples’ children, while raising cats and dogs...

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.