[buccaneer81]

I couldn't agree more with this piece. One has to live through this mess to comprehend the devastation that ensues thanks to our feminized court system and the legislators who continue to tear up the constitution when it comes to matters of child custody and child support.

[big'ol_freeper]

Big'ol_bump

[per loin]

The courts have no business getting into ordering child support. Whoever the kids live with can support them.

[Skooz]

Glad I got married before I read this.

The article is, of course, undeniably true. The divorce laws in this nation are insane. A wife's lawyer will almost always try to get a restraining order on the husband--regardless of whether or not the husband is any risk--because a restraining order is powerful leverage with the court. "Hhmmm....he's so terrible and threatening she had to get a restraining order to protect herself and her children from this monster." The family court system requires a complete overhaul.

[2sheep]

What a sad state for the nation! The satanic agenda through the Marxists and globalists has pushed for this day. They want to destroy family and set up baby farms. This will be the result.

[College Repub]

Can't Pre-nup's take care of this? Men could hand the women a nice expensive ring on the condition she sign the pre-nup :) Outlining financial and other conditions should a divorce occurr for ANY reason...

[meyer]

This is right on!! I've seen it so many times that I absolutely refuse to even get close to marriage. At least I'll be able to retire some day.

The article forgot to mention alimony which is still popular in some jurisdictions. My friend got the son in his divorce (the boy was 16, chose to live with dad), but still had to pay some crazy amount on the order of $2000 per month for 4 or 5 years so that she could "get back on her feet". Heck, in my court, she would have paid back rent to him for the time she spent living under his paycheck. :^)

This ought to get a rise out of someone...

[CatoRenasci]

Truly gives more meaning to the old adage:

Marry in haste, repent at leisure!

[Taxman]

&#!*)%@ feminists have ruined the institution of marriage in the U.S. for both men and women.

[warped]

I think the biggest problem is that too many people rush into marriage with no counseling, and don't even consider finding someone of the same religion, abstaining till marriage, etc. Yes, the feminist movement is probably responsible for much of this. I married someone I met at a teen rally at my church, we both abstained till marriage, and I'm approaching a tenth anniversary now, with two wonderful kids, no problems in the relationship, and loving life.

[Savage Beast]

I have never lived through anything like this, and I'm sure that I don't understand it fully, but I don't have any difficulty seeing the injustice--nobody does, who wants to see it.

[gitmogrunt]

"The odds are 2 to 1 Katherine will initiate the divorce".

Down at the track, they call those odds a sure shot or "favorite".

[RightOnline]

This is so sad..........and SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true.

[Maceman]

I know guys who came home one day to an empty house or apartment - wife gone, kids gone. They never saw it coming.

Any guy who never even sees it coming is too clueless to live.

[razorback-bert]

It's the Fem-a-nazi BS thrown at men during a divorce that hurts more than the money and probaly the leading cause of many.

[narses]

The answer? Marry for love, not money. Include, if you want permanence, God in the contract. Make the vows meaning them. Take the time before the wedding (we took years) to really get to know each other, especially under pressure and in crisis. If money is your lodestone, study the wealthy. You'll discover that most of the wealthy (not including inheirited or 'found' wealth) marry into their own peer group and do so with the intent of permanence and with love as a prerequisite. (If you want love defined, imho it is the willingness to sacrifice for another.) In other words, imho, if you want money you first need love.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

ping

[AD from SpringBay]

I have a friend who could be the poster-boy for this article - deck is clearly stacked against him and his beautiful children.

[NMFXSTC]

Fred Reed, the witty and stinging columnist just wrote a column on this (To Marry or Not) this week...good read!:

http://www.Fredoneverything.ne t/ColMenu.html

[JMJ333]

Wasn't it Lenin who said, "Destroy the family and you'll destroy society"...?

[fporretto]

The only real surprise in this is that it's taken people so long to wake up to the results of the insane legal and economic incentives they've loaded onto marriage.

Overwhelmingly, men are the more "at risk" of the two sexes, given the way the State treats marriage and its dissolution. Add to that the prevalent belief among women that their troubles can be largely laid at men's door, and you have a formula for disaster. As if we could possibly make it worse, not even prenuptial contracts can safeguard a divorcing man's possessions, as judges in divorce actions now routinely discard them as the "fruits of emotional coercion."

There is no absolute defense. Even Miss Right can transform into Miss Militant Gender-War Feminist Harridan. That being the case, it's more of an act of bravery to marry in America today than it's ever been before, and I salute any man who's got the guts for it -- but I also commend the good sense of any man whose doubts about how his marital enterprise might end cause him to shy away from the altar.

Marriage is not for the dubious, the grasping, the self-absorbed, or the faint of heart. If you're one of these, spend a couple of years in the Army and get straightened out and toughened up first. You owe it to your children-to-be.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com