Posted on 11/26/2007 10:26:35 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
As a general rule, plaintiffs who file for "no-fault" divorce should be found unfit to gain custody of their children. This should be done for the protection of the children involved. But most importantly it should be done to restrain the growth rate of the scourge known as "no-fault" divorce.
Radical homosexual activists have been bold in their attempt to redefine the basic make-up of the family by assaulting the God ordained institution of marriage with whatever creative sexual union could be devised. Yet the damage they've inflicted upon children to date is miniscule compared to the arrogance, selfishness, and defiance that the plaintiffs of "no-fault" divorce have unleashed upon child after child.
Particularly dangerous has been the growing effect of women seeking no-fault divorce only to then seek casual cohabitation with replacement men. According to this Associated Press story out last week "abusive-boyfriend" syndrome is increasingly putting children into not just emotional, spiritual, and mental jeopardy - but now sadly - increasing physical risk of life and limb.
Children living in households with unrelated adults are nearly 50 times as likely to die of inflicted injuries as children living with two biological parents, according to a study of Missouri abuse reports published in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2005. Children living in stepfamilies or with single parents are at higher risk of physical or sexual assault than children living with two biological or adoptive parents, according to several studies co-authored by David Finkelhor, director of the University of New Hampshire's Crimes Against Children Research Center. Girls whose parents divorce are at significantly higher risk of sexual assault, whether they live with their mother or their father, according to research by Robin Wilson, a family law professor at Washington and Lee University. The problem in large measure is that plaintiffs in "No-Fault" cases are living in such denial and total and complete selfishness that they don't truly care about the welfare of their children - not truly.
Oh they may say they do - especially when their guilty conscience comes to the custody portion of the divorce proceeding. Overcome by the guilt they know in their hearts as to how immoral their "no-fault" claim is that in order to compensate for a failed marriage - they publicly verbalize their propaganda to being all that much better of a parental unit. Yet in reality this argument is disingenuous given the fact that they are saying before the court that they are willing to destabilize the life of their children for literally "no reason."
I am not arguing that possible legitimate reasons for marital dissolution should be eliminated in custody concerns. Infidelity, abuse, and addictive behaviors should serve as distinct considerations when evaluating the decision-making ability, integrity, and trustworthiness of the potential parents who seek custody. But the idea that one can come before a judge and say "there is no legitimate reason" for us to crack up the stability of the universe that I committed to providing for the children I was given responsibility for seems a stretch in logic.
Prior to the emergence of "no-fault" divorces faith and legal communities both helped restrain people's willingness to divorce. In forcing the plaintiff to cite a cause as to why such a tragic measure should be taken the message to society was strong. Adultery jeopardizes the welfare of children, because it jeopardized the welfare of the marriage that created those children. Physical abuse was seen as a criminal aberration in marriage - one that was carried out by a minority of those who engaged in the institution and certainly one that puts the welfare of spouse and children in physical risk of injury and life. Addictive behaviors and abandonment are all also easily understandable risks to the health of the family unit.
Yet here is the fowl smelling stench of the truth behind "no fault" divorce. Sinful humans grew tired of having to live up to the vows they took before God, and the responsibilities they committed to before man.
Wanting to fornicate without consequence wasn't enough - now we wanted a guilt free way to make it happen. So as a result people are "finding themselves", "trying to figure things out", or stating that "they are not ready for the responsibilities" that marriage brings with it and just need an amicable way of exiting the situation.
Yet they were "responsible" enough to form a legal union, create children, and begin the act of attempting to parent them?
Many decades ago the average age at which people got married was younger, even in the teens in many cases - and the maturation process of the persons involved in these unions was something that grew as the commitments of life multiplied.
Today it is our pathetic desire to extend adolescence to later and later into adulthood coupled with the sin of envy that is more often than not the root cause of the whole demonic lie of why "no fault" divorce is so "necessary."
This scourge has brought with it some additional unforeseen secondary problems as well. Violence against the non-blood-related children by the new man is just one example. (In nature the new lion will often eat the cubs of the previous male when mating with a previously mated lioness.) Men who cruise women with children is a phenomenon now that we can track statistically. And then there is the Woody Allen syndrome of the individual who is drawn toward sexual acting out with the blooming daughters of the formerly married woman.
Put bluntly there is NO benefit to the children of a society that makes marriage as easy to escape from as choosing which store to shop at.
And the price of doing so is killing our children.
We should return to the day of accountability and responsibility as a culture - particularly when it comes to the welfare of children.
And plaintiffs who file for "no-fault" divorces should be ready to lose their children in the process of doing so.
Kevin McCullough's first hardback title "The MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking" is now available. Kevin McCullough is heard daily in New York City, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware on WMCA 570 at 2pm. He blogs at www.muscleheadrevolution.com.
Well, once you take that vienna sausage, it’s gone! That milk just keeps on flowing.
___________
LOL. I can’t help myself. Sorry Najida.
Vienna sausage is to pig, as milk is to cow.
Get it now?
I'd say say that's a given. Everybody knows that.
Thanks for the info, I will check it out. Looking at the larger picture, and not reading it all in great detail, I’m guessing that ALL kids from divorced households fare less well than the kids who grow up with both parents.
I back off from there before getting into that whole same sex union stuff...
I am sorry to hear that. I hope things are better now. And I fully understand why separation is totally necessary sometimes.
Life is too short, and no, good things don’t always result in such hardship.
If I thought enjoying this life was all there was, I'd probably agree. But I don't think that. I believe that "whoever loses his life for my sake will find it", so that whatever I miss out on this time around will be granted hundredfold in heaven.
Perspective makes all the difference!!
I think perspective changes, and I also think that bad people can make others suffer out of that ‘well, you’ll have you reward in heaven, so don’t (get a divorce, get that broken leg set, get morphine for cancer etc)’
Again, with that belief, then nothing we do medically, emotionally or spiritually for a better life should be allowed.
And I believe a good God would want the opposite. There are so many pains and sorrows in life that can’t be avoided or changed, so those that CAN be are truly gifts from above.
Went camping with friends this weekend. When the subject of menopause came up, one woman chirped up; “I never even knew I was going through it until the doctor told me. I said so THAT must be the reason I’m dating such younger men lately!”
Yes. In Japan there situation is worse then ours. The women by cultural design when married become subservient. Women are educated now over there and don’t want this role. I can’t say I blame them.
To me many American women are spoiled brats with the law on there side and immediate power to control the household as they see fit.
Now before I get flamed from good, Christian conservative women on this forum who can no doubt speak volumes of abusive men let me say this: The only good point this author really points out is that our society must go back to accountability and a decent moral standard. The laws may change a bit to swing back to equalibrium and that would help but only a little. Without a good moral standard our country is rotting away at the core and on every front.
“Didn’t say there weren’t scumbag men. OTOH, my dad didn’t get a new model. In fact, he’s been divorced from my mother for 18 years and has never remarried. Never really tried, in fact.”
I am filing for divorce in the next few days. She has a good heart but became too broken to ever fix from abuse in her early years. After 11 years of trying I am packing it in and I am very depressed about it.
I will always stay in her life as a friend and will support her in any and every way - except co-habiting the same household. That said, I will never remarry. Finding a decent life-long spouse in this society seems like it is near impossible. And I don’t have time to explore dozens of relationships to see if one could ‘work out’.
And often a bigger threat.
It isn't any coincidence that it's precisely the most religious folks who were and are the ones founding and running the hospices, charities, soup kitchens, schools, orphanages, relief efforts, prison ministries, and shelters.
By contrast, it's those who are most concerned about this life and this life only that are the ones who tend to strive the least for the welfare of their fellow man.
So there seems little ground for concern in that direction. ;)
Although I have survived a divorce, one that was absolutely necessary in order to protect my life, I still do believe that............as does my husband.
"If you don't like no-fault divorce, change the law."
We've been trying for years to do just that. It's not as easy as you make it sound.
I understand that. Changing laws isn't always easy, nor should it be.
But until you get the law changed, what right has the state to punish people who exercise their rights under that law?
Yeah, I can't imagine going into marriage thinking otherwise.
If that unrelated adult happens to be a child molester, then you are absolutely right.
“I guess I’m just suprized that you and other FReepers (Hello JRBC) are in favor of NFD.”
It is indeed widely abused by both sexes, perhaps more female then male, but also consider the laws currently favor the female. I am getting divorced soon. I have no joy over it and have tried for 11 years. I would admit we were both abusive to each other earlier on but as the years go by I see there is no way to win except to not co-habitate. So now what? Stay legally married and be ATM for the rest of my life?
Some things happen to people while growing up. Sometimes the damage can be mitigated through counseling, spirituality or anti-depressents. But some people are too damaged, too broken from their abuse and know no other way then to vent their anger and frustrations on YOU as there outlet. Each day I do not know if I say the wrong thing if my wife will be very abusive, sometimes physical. After verbally abusing me for two days straight, out of massive frustration I mocked her (bad mistake). She threatened to KILL me. Now shall I stay married no matter what? I guess I should stick around and see if I get a knife to my head one evening, yeah just what the kids need.
You must be older and married a long time ago. It’s easy to understand the proper respect each gender held for each other just a few short decades ago. American society is TWACKED man - where have you been? From the top on down accountability in business or personal is about selfishness and ambition.
You have obviously not read my comments on this thread or any of my other comments in this regard to make such a knee-jerk comment.
I did NOT propser from my divorce, if anyone did it was him, as he did his damnedest to destroy my reputation in the community, while I was using my connections to help the SOB get a job and went so far as to type his resume for hime.
Don't you DARE give me that bullcrap that all women prosper from divorce.
BTW - he did get a job because of me.
Make your case. I said that the no-fault option is a woman oriented thing, and women make out with it, usually at the expense of the man. One does not take counsel for the continuance of a program from those who are enlarged by the program.
Show me wrong with actual data.
I missed the beginning of this conversation - have you provided "actual data" to support your assertion?
The fact that she's (presumably) a woman has nothing to do with it - some people are capable, after all, of putting what's right before their own potential personal and fincancial interests. I'd wager most people on this site can - it's one of the things that defines a conservative, after all.
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.