Posted on 03/12/2015 7:37:26 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
I saw this headline at Newsalert from a CNS News article and went over to read it:
(CNSNews.com) – Seventy percent of American males between the ages of 20 and 34 are not married, and many live in a state of “perpetual adolescence” with ominous consequences for the nation’s future, says Janice Shaw Crouse, author of “Marriage Matters.”
“Far too many young men have failed to make a normal progression into adult roles of responsibility and self-sufficiency, roles generally associated with marriage and fatherhood,” Crouse, the former executive director of the Beverly LaHaye Institute, wrote in a recent Washington Times oped.
The high percentage of bachelors means bleak prospects for millions of young women who dream about a wedding day that may never come. “It’s very, very depressing,” Crouse told CNSNews.com.
It seems that Crouse and her crowd are watching too many Say Yes to the Dress episodes. So what matters is that women’s dreams are shattered? What about the bleak prospects for millions of men across the country who get very little legal or psychological protection from marriage? Now that’s what’s very, very depressing. Change that and maybe more men will be interested.
I doubt I’ve listened to Sandman... video moves to slow so I usually stick to reading text... (I read 7,000+ WPM)
I do listen usually to music on youtube in the background while I read.
Seriously? Are you sure it's not child support you are paying, not alimony? That kind of figure for alimony means either you had a really long marriage (seems unlikely if you're apart 24 years), she has a serious disability, she had a pre-nup, or you were very well off financially at the time of divorce and she had a hand in building that success.
Child support is a different matter. A child deserves adequate support from both parents, although the way it is delivered may differ.
What family court do you work at?
For 24 years? How many kids, and how many left in the house?
I calls them as I sees them. It’s always been the case that previous generations complain about current generations, certainly the boomers were nothing to write home about at that age.
Men of means, sure, guy scraping by on disability, not so much.
Women from other countries (and men too, for that matter) will certainly tell you what you want to hear, that’s going to be about citizenship and (if you are particularly unlucky) about living a life of leisure with a rich American. I know one guy who is down to publicly offering to write a large check if she’ll just go back where she comes from!
Sure, atheism is not prone to building a workable society, Christianity seems to be about as good as it gets IMO.
Thing is though, you catch more flies with sugar than vinegar (and more yet with b.s., but we won’t go there at the moment). That goes both for young whippersnappers and females, btw :)
I’m not blaming men specifically, but, as in our previous conversations, you choose to see it that way.
My point addressed single parents who choose to have children without a husband or wife.
Yes, it’s not that I don’t want to enter into a state-sanctioned contract wherein the other party can terminate the contract at any time, without warning or cause and will take 50% of my assets and my children away while imparting life-long, recurring payments to support their ‘lifestyle choices’. Nope, it’s that I’m ‘failing to be a responsible and self-sufficient adult’.
The author believes men are supposed to be chumps and marks.
In business such a contract would be unconscionable in writ and unenforceable. But families are a business the lawyers and states profit from so they write the laws the way they need to in order to make the most money off of them.
It’s a racket.
If they really cared about “the children” they would outlaw abortion and divorce. Instead they legalized and promote them. They are wicked, corrupt and evil.
I wonder how many single men who caught a glimpse of “Say Yes to the Dress” say themselves no way I am being part of the madness. If you watch that show, the women seem more interested in being princess for a day than marriage itself.
It's really bad when they're all supervisors. Really, really bad. The entire chain of command is female, and that's starting to become more prevalent in federal workplaces.
Just think of an office dominated by Nancy Pelosi or Barbara Boxer wannabes. That is your typical federal bureaucracy today.
One has to be a court employee to recognize that kids need two parents?
Conservatives haven't reached that low a point, have we?
Why marry when sex is probably out of the question any way.
I agree that in a more perfect country, men should not choose to be single parents. Even if they choose to try and do the “noble” thing, a “wife” can choose to destroy that at any time.
Would you posit that the only two choices men have are to remain child-less or (as another poster put it) “enter into a state-sanctioned contract wherein the other party can terminate the contract at any time, without warning or cause and will take 50% of my assets and my children away while imparting life-long, recurring payments to support their ‘lifestyle choices” ?
I'm a grouser, as are many of my friends. I'm willing to admit that I'm not perfect, and my wife has put up with me for nearly 30 years, an admirable feat on her part.
At the same time, I've earned my right to grouse. The drama that comes from her side of the family, with her six sisters, is extensive. They can make a mountain out of a molehill in nothing flat.
Sure they do, but the courts have pretty much guaranteed there won’t be a father in the kid’s life. If somebody wants to be a father, the only way to guarantee that is to remove the mother.
I didn't get married until I was 42 (sounds young to me now). I was too busy with my career before then.
Everybody grouses from time to time even women. :-)
Jonty, as I said before, I’m talking about single people using surrogates or whatever to have kids because they “want” them.
It isn’t about what the adult wants. Now, that has always been my position when I hear about women doing it. My opinion doesn’t change because men want it.
No-fault divorce, all of that...yep, you’re right, it’s a mistake and it’s made the breakup of families much easier.
That does not change the fact that deliberately setting out to have children when one is single is a selfish act.
Can you honestly say you disagree with that? If you do, simply because the person wanting to do it happens to be male, you must be consistent and also sanction women when they do it. But it is definitely not a conservative stance.
I got kicked out of a seminar last month because I objected when it turned into a bash evil men support group. LOL There was also an anti-Christian, anti family video which I objected to.
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.