Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'No-Fault' = No Kids
Townhall ^ | 11/25/2007 | Kevin McCullough

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.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: divorce; homosexualagenda; moralabsolutes; nofault; nofaultdivorce
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 281-298 next last
To: Emmett McCarthy

The point I was trying to make is I don’t believe an end to no-fault is really going to help the situation, with or without kids involved, but especially with kids involved.


81 posted on 11/26/2007 11:41:36 AM PST by Gabz (Don't tell my mom I'm a lobbyist, she thinks I'm a piano player in a whorehouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
No, I think femi-nazism is mostly a meaningless buzzword used by weak and bitter men.

The insults are falling on deaf ears. Here is a simple fact for you; a man who gets married these days is asking for it. Period. If you want the very cold, calculating analysis of the situation, here it is: it has become so likely for a marriage to go south these days, that the risk / reward ratio doesn't favor getting married. The benefits of marriage do not justify the risk of emotional distress and turmoil that a bad marriage can cause. Especially if children are involved. Sorry, it's not bitterness, and childish insults will not change that. It is, in fact, more a self-preservation sort of thing at this point.
82 posted on 11/26/2007 11:41:55 AM PST by JamesP81 ("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

Tell ya what darlin’,
we women conservatives will just leave you guys here to bitch and moan about us...and then you can post all the T&A, we hate wommen unless we screw them threads you want.


83 posted on 11/26/2007 11:44:34 AM PST by najida ("Will you dance at my birthday party?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: najida
Some kids are way better off if Mommy and Daddy divorce. Sometimes hell is simply hell and the child needs to be removed from it.....

And in those situations, why not carry the logic through to the next step.

If the parents are that unfit..... then deny custody to both parents and go to State foster care.

I guarantee you that if we increase the pain and punishment of divorce and throw something like this into the mix.... all parties will wise up. There will be fewer divorces and fewer children groing up in broken homes.

Ending NFD is bad for lawyers, but good for children.

84 posted on 11/26/2007 11:45:11 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Jersey Republican Biker Chick
We do not want children.

You will never get criticism on that from me.

But, you know after living together we knew we could put up with each others crap...

Same way with us, but not having a child, which we had pretty much agreed upon, sorta, kinda got taken out of our hands. She's now 9 and we wouldn't change a thing, however, I completely understand the osition of you and your husband.

85 posted on 11/26/2007 11:47:27 AM PST by Gabz (Don't tell my mom I'm a lobbyist, she thinks I'm a piano player in a whorehouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

As I said, I don’t plan on divorcing. I don’t know of anyone who divorced who actually felt like they were enriched by the experience. I will say, without hesitation, that a good marriage is far better for all involved than a no fault divorce. Maybe more of the social engineers around here should focus more on that, than on saving their own butts in a possible divorce.


86 posted on 11/26/2007 11:47:28 AM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

Good luck to you.... most of the healthy balanced people I know are still getting married, even the ones who have had it go bad for them before. Call them optimists.


87 posted on 11/26/2007 11:50:10 AM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

Ha ha ha, sometimes those surprises happen.


88 posted on 11/26/2007 11:50:13 AM PST by Jersey Republican Biker Chick (RIP Eric Medlen. You will be missed.../ Get well Soon John Force!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: najida

I’m conservative, and I do like and respect women.


89 posted on 11/26/2007 11:52:14 AM PST by RockinRight (Just because you're pro-life and talk about God a lot doesn't mean you're a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: najida
......we women conservatives will......

Which one of the conservative women on this thread are you???

One of those who proudly boast and brag about how they lived together before marriage and don't have any children?

Or one who wants to keep NFD so that children can lose out on the sanctity of marriage, home, family, and having a father?

I swear sometimes I think DU has hijacked Free Republic.

90 posted on 11/26/2007 11:52:17 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Look,
You post female bashing threads and invite folks over for the fun. So deal with the responses.

NFD is here, it’s not going anywhere. Sometimes ONE parent IS that bad. That’s life. Sometimes one parent IS that fit, again, that’s life.

Sometimes children KNOW that their lives would be better if Mom and Dad just weren’t under the same roof. They ain’t stupid.

And what is this BS from a conservative about getting DFACS involved in wrecking families? Do you really have THAT much contempt for women, even your ‘conservative’ sisters?


91 posted on 11/26/2007 11:52:27 AM PST by najida ("Will you dance at my birthday party?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Children are better off if their parents remain married. This is true educationally, physically, materially, and in many other ways.

One part of me is in total agreement with you, however, there are many, many times when the opposite is true and the other part of me has dealt with that far too many times.

NFD is bad for the kids. If parents know that their "dirty laundry" will harm their kids in the home, then why will they care if it harms them in a court of law?

I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

Children of bad marriages that stay together do turn out alright, just as do the child of divorce. But the same is also true in the opposite direction.

Doing away with no-fault divorce is not the answer.....changing the way custody, support, and visitation are determined is the way to go.

92 posted on 11/26/2007 11:53:54 AM PST by Gabz (Don't tell my mom I'm a lobbyist, she thinks I'm a piano player in a whorehouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

I don’t know either and I doubt I’ll ever marry again personally. I can’t think of another other kind of contract in society that can be broken without any kind of grounds the way marriage is, though, and that seems strange. I signed some of my songs to a certain publisher in 1978 and he’s never been able to make me any money on them, for example, and yet I can’t get them back until at least 2013. A marriage, on the other hand, can be laid aside in 90 days. Don’t seem right.


93 posted on 11/26/2007 11:55:11 AM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
If the parents are that unfit..... then deny custody to both parents and go to State foster care.

Because being a poor spouse does not mean a parent is "unfit". Children of divorce may suffer, but their life is a cakewalk compared to children that grow up in foster care system.

I guarantee you that if we increase the pain and punishment of divorce and throw something like this into the mix.... all parties will wise up.

Not necessarily. Divorce, especially when custody is contested is no cakewalk anyway. A parent who would stoop to using the children as pawns in a divorce will not be discourage by having to prove fault.

For example, in my state there is a low standard of proof needed to obtain a domestic violence protective order against a spouse. How many false claims will be made if you make domestic violence one of the few outlets available to obtain a divorce?

You can't make someone who wants to leave actually stay in the home with the children, or if they do stay you can't make them be a good spouse. Choosing a spouse is the most important decision of our lives; the fact that many people treat it cavalierly is the real problem, not no fault divorce.

94 posted on 11/26/2007 11:56:59 AM PST by LWalk18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
As a general rule, plaintiffs who file for "no-fault" divorce should be found unfit to gain custody of their children.

Blah blah blah.

As a "general rule," I'd say that most people who rail against no fault divorce have an axe to grind . . . i.e., bitter divorcees who feel like they've been burned by bitchy ex-wives or assh*le ex-husbands. Place the blame properly, you embittered: it's not so much the no fault divorce that's at fault, it's that you chose to marry a really rotten person.

95 posted on 11/26/2007 11:57:59 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd; najida

Um...I think she’s the type that believes government should be as small as possible and leave us the hell alone.

Am I right?


96 posted on 11/26/2007 11:58:48 AM PST by RockinRight (Just because you're pro-life and talk about God a lot doesn't mean you're a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
You and I are in total agreement. But there is one sentence in your post I would like to expound upon :

Other people’s marriages are not my business, no matter how lofty my societal goal.

You said a mouthful here and I could not agree more. I was absolutely shocked by the number of people who decided to make my divorce their business, and there were no children involved in it. I did everything in my power to keep it private, unfortunately we lived in a small town and I had a fiarly high profile job and I couldn't go anywhere that someone didn't comment upon it because while I tried to keep it private he talked all over town. Horrific.

Why others can't mind their own danged business is beyond me.

97 posted on 11/26/2007 12:01:21 PM PST by Gabz (Don't tell my mom I'm a lobbyist, she thinks I'm a piano player in a whorehouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

As for DU hijacking FR,
hell yeah....just read any T&A thread or a thread like this.
It’s like “Boys Only” nailed across the door.

Me?
I’ve been married twice, widowed twice.
No kids due to a endometrial necrosis in my 20’s that damn near killed me.

My second marriage was hell on earth,
with a very insane, very sick, very ‘holy’ man.

And ya know what?

I was faithful. I worked my ass off to make sure we kept a roof over our heads, only to find out later he had a pension he wasn’t telling me about. He lived 14 years with a disease that should have killed him in 5 with 9 being the longest his Dr. had ever seen.

I put on a ton of weight because of the surgery only to be told I was a fat cow (who was buying his meds, keeping the lights on and putting groceries in the fridge). I had pets mysteriously die, friends stop calling, gifts from friends and family vanish.

But I didn’t divorce him-— I didn’t see it as an option.

I was in hell, I knew I was in hell. And it took everything I had to get up and go out the door some mornings. Oh, and I was in church every Sunday with a big ‘ole fake smile on my face because, well...it was expected.

He died 10 years ago. And little by little, I recovered from 10 years of misery. I also discovered a chitload of muscles and character I didn’t have before marrying that SOB.

Will I get married again? Hell No, because every damn day I was married I was reminded that I made a vow before God and what kind woman would break such a holy vow.

I wouldn’t wish that misery on any man, woman or child on the planet. (And yes, I was one of those kids who as early as 8 was begging my mother to leave my father).

Do I still go to church? No, it gave me nothing when I needed it the most. Leaving it was the second step to freedom.

Do I think divorce is bad?
Don’t know,
Marriage was bad enough.


98 posted on 11/26/2007 12:05:16 PM PST by najida ("Will you dance at my birthday party?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Uh
Yeah,
I believe in little government.

However, there seems to be those who want the government to ‘put us uppity wimmen in our places”


99 posted on 11/26/2007 12:06:28 PM PST by najida ("Will you dance at my birthday party?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: highball

Until then, the state ought not penalize people for exercising their legal rights in some attempt to influence social policy.

***
I think you are missing the point. The writer is pointing out the epidemic of selfishness that is so rampant among parents and his so harmful to their children.


100 posted on 11/26/2007 12:07:42 PM PST by Bigg Red (Duncan Hunter in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 281-298 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson