Advice to young men: Do not marry, do not have children

ENTERSTAGERIGHT ^ | 11/12/2007 | Stephen Baskerville

[Responsibility2nd]

Marriage is a foundation of civilized life. No advanced civilization has ever existed without the married, two-parent family. Those who argue that our civilization needs healthy marriages to survive are not exaggerating.

And yet I cannot, in good conscience, urge young men to marry today. For many men (and some women), marriage has become nothing less than a one-way ticket to jail. Even the New York Times has reported on how easily "the divorce court leads to a jail cell," mostly for men. In fact, if I have one urgent piece of practical advice for young men today it is this: Do not marry and do not have children.

Spreading this message may also, in the long run, be the most effective method of saving marriage as an institution. 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.

It is well known that half of all marriages end in divorce. But widespread misconceptions lead many to believe it cannot happen to them. Many conscientious people think they will never be divorced because they do not believe in it. In fact, it is likely to happen to you whether you wish it or not.

First, you do not have to agree to the divorce or commit any legal transgression. Under "no-fault" divorce laws, your spouse can divorce you unilaterally without giving any reasons. The judge will then grant the divorce automatically without any questions.

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.

There is no burden of proof on the court to justify why they are seizing control of your children and allowing your spouse to forcibly keep you from them. The burden of proof (and the financial burden) is on you to show why you should be allowed to see your children.

The divorce industry thus makes it very attractive for your spouse to divorce you and take your children. (All this earns money for lawyers whose bar associations control the careers of judges.) While property divisions and spousal support certainly favor women, the largest windfall comes through the children. With custody, she can then demand "child support" that may amount to half, two-thirds, or more of your income. (The amount is set by committees consisting of feminists, lawyers, and enforcement agents – all of whom have a vested interest in setting the payments as high as possible.) She may spend it however she wishes. You pay the taxes on it, but she gets the tax deduction.

You could easily be left with monthly income of a few hundreds dollars and be forced to move in with relatives or sleep in your car. Once you have sold everything you own, borrowed from relatives, and maximized your credit cards, they then call you a "deadbeat dad" and take you away in handcuffs. You are told you have "abandoned" your children and incarcerated without trial.

Evidence indicates that, as men discover all this, they have already begun an impromptu marriage "strike": refusing to marry or start families, knowing they can be criminalized if their wife files for divorce. "Have anti-father family court policies led to a men's marriage strike?" ask Glenn Sacks and Dianna Thompson in the Philadelphia Enquirer. In Britain, fathers tour university campuses warning young men not to start families. In his book, From Courtship to Courtroom, Attorney Jed Abraham concludes that the only protection for men to avoid losing their children and everything else is not to start families in the first place.

Is it wise to disseminate such advice? If people stop marrying, what will become of the family and our civilization?

Marriage is already all but dead, legally speaking, and divorce is the principal reason. The fall in the Western birth rate is directly connected with divorce law.

It is also likely that same-sex marriage is being demanded only because of how heterosexuals have already debased marriage through divorce law. "The world of no-strings heterosexual hookups and 50% divorce rates preceded gay marriage," advocate Andrew Sullivan points out. "All homosexuals are saying...is that, under the current definition, there's no reason to exclude us. If you want to return straight marriage to the 1950s, go ahead. But until you do, the exclusion of gays is simply an anomaly – and a denial of basic civil equality."

We will not restore marriage by burying our heads in the sand; nor simply by preaching to young people to marry, as the Bush administration's government therapy programs now do. The way to restore marriage as an institution in which young people can place their trust, their children, and their lives is to make it an enforceable contract. We urgently need a national debate about divorce, child custody, and the terms under which the government can forcibly sunder the bonds between parents and their children. We owe it to future generations, if there are to be any.

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.

[goldstategop]

They have a good point. For men today, there are few upsides to marriage and a lot of risks. Plus anti-men courts automatically side against men in the post-divorce fight. Unless family laws are reformed, there's little reason for men to seek marriage.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Scotswife]

“Finally never ever marry a woman who does not laugh, and that you cannot make laugh, and that cannot make you laugh. If she cannot laugh at herself, run away, run far far away. Life is hard, its full of unpleasantness, with moments of pure joy sprinkled in. Laugher will be the only thin that will get you through the rough spots.”

Right on.

[null and void]

But it does raise a question. There are plenty of women from Asia, E. Europe, Latin America, etc dreaming of meeting and marrying an American man, meanwhile no man from any other country wants (outside of an easy hookup) anything to do with an American women.

Why do you think that is?

No idea...

[Scotswife]

“:) Whew. Thanks from all the women whose moms never taught them how to cook. Of course, competing in sports through my college years usually had me at a practice and nowhere near a kitchen long enough to do more than nuke something or stop at the cafeteria on the way home.”

same here.
I’m still working on that skill.
I’m better than I was, but I don’t ever consider entering any competitions.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

This situation is the radical man-hating feminazi’s dream come true. Through their power of intimidation and character assassination, they have purchased judges and lawmakers.
Never marry a feminazi!

[American Quilter]

My older sister is in a train wreck.

You have my sympathy. It's so hard to see a loved one making bad choices that you know are going to end up hurting her. She should, of course, sprint from this guy at top speed, but you'll have a tough time making her see that. Good luck to you--at least she has you for a sister!

[Preachin']

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

[goodnesswins]

Marriage ought to be like combining salt and water

All sorts of things work against this today.....my husband and I are a "team"....but the Bank, the Medical Center, etc all think we are VERY separate people.....have to go to extraordinary ends to trade info.....my husband NEVER banks....NEVER....I handle all short term financial things, but, the Bank requires him to do things just because we're two "separate" people - like allow me to be a signatory on something (something that online I'm already handling...) LOL. The Medical Center requires that I go upstairs and get a form that would allow my husband access to my records....in case something happened. It is frustrating.

[null and void]

I’ll add one item, which I learned from Dr. Laura—date the person for two years before you marry. No one can hide his/her real self for that long.

My daughter doesn't date. She's courting an nice young man now.

Courting.

She's much wiser than her parents.

[LWalk18]

What does a father have to do in order to get the custody of the kids? Why is custody usually awarded to the mother? I’m married and childless, so I’m really asking because I don’t understand the system either.

1) First of all, they have to stop listening to those who say that men "never get custody" and it's not even worth trying. You can't win custody by giving up.

2) Men should take an active role in the everyday care of the children during the marriage, and let others see you being active in your kids' lives.

3)When a split occurs, they should do everything possible to make sure the children remain in their possession. Divorces take months and in that time the parent who has the child most of the time tends to have the advantage.

4) Men should be prepared to fight for their rights in court, obtaining a lawyer if at all possible, especially if she is represented.

5) Remember, it is about what is best for the children, not getting back at your wife. Most courts don't care about which spouse was wronged in the marriage. Tone down any bitterness in court and keep your eye on getting the children.

[kjhm]

I found this explanation to “mother custody” in a court decision from the 1800s. The mother had custody PRIOR to birth, through the marriage contract she shares custody with the father, when the marriage contract ends custody reverts to the mother.

[PapaBear3625]

Yeah, but to go bitter against marriage and either wind up living in mommy’s basement when they are 40 or decide to go gay is not the answer.

I know several men who simply decided not to marry. None are living in their moms' basements, nor do they find any shortage of female companionship

For young men today, the cost of marriage is too high (in terms of the risk of future financial and personal disaster) and the benefits are low (they can get most of the benefits of marriage without marriage)

Anybody wants to fix it, needs to make it much less profitable for women to divorce

[exit82]

I have both(all grown now) and I do.

A few times a day.

[devistate one four]

14th amendment is equal treatment under the law. That’s 50%
for each. Sue the family court if they don’t allow you 50%

[Responsibility2nd]

It’s a well know fact that Snake Handlers have a 1-2 percent divorce rate.

Yeah.

The rattlers always get ‘em first.

[null and void]

Average murder conviction is 11 years. So it could be reasonably postulated that killing your spouse COULD be less burdensome both financial and jail time than getting a divorce and then going to jail for non payment of support.

Yeah, but killing the bitch is hard on the kids. < /joke? sarcasm? irony?...>

[fleagle]

Divorce is an industry all right, and a profitable one.<<

That is the stone cold truth.

No-fault divorce did more damage to the fabric of our country and our society than pretty much anything else I can think of.

[bigred41]

“If the wife is truly bad, tape your phone calls with her if its legal in your state and then present her a copy letting her know you will be taking her back to court. Make a real effort to get your kids and don’t give up”

I second this- we have a close family friend and after 15 years of marriage he discovered his wife had started using drugs and sleeping with her dealer. He told her that he was going away for the weekend for a business trip and then spent that weekend at his neighbors house taping his wife and her lover. When confronted with this, he got custody of both kids, child support (that he will never see) got to leave the state, and his wife had to go to parenting classes and take drug tests (things she won’t do)

Judges used to give mothers kids automatically, not so much anymore (at least around here)

[meyer]

I greatly hate to say this: Much in this article is very accurate, and worth serious consideration.

Agreed, and I've seen it happen too many times.

[null and void]

See post 140...