Replies

Taken into Custody ...sometimes crosses the line into stridency, such as in the author's comparisons of family courts to Nazis, Stalin, the Eastern Bloc, the Weimar Republic; his references to Orwell, Marxism, "human sacrifice," and so forth. But Baskerville himself seems aware of the gap between his claims and popular understanding

I did my grad thesis on the topic of the legal destruction of marriage in U.S. law since the 60s, and have also had some detailed email correspondence with Baskerville. I agree with his overall thesis that the courts and the divorce industry are enthusiastically destroying our country, but I cannot lay all blame on divorcing women, nor interpret statistical trends as he does. This issue is infinitely complex. Blaming one sex or the other is not going to help us out of this mess.

I agree that no-fault is a cancer on society and should be severely limited to childless couples or parents who are not contesting the terms of their divorce. But his prescriptions that the Constitution can be amended and that judges need to enforce marriage are total pie-in-the-sky.

This problem cannot be legislated away; and when one complains of state interference in the family, one cannot wish for state enforcement, either.

Sadly, destruction of the family is a huge movement originating in the global socialist movement, and as usual, money and power are the motivating forces behind the scenes. Lawyers, parents, judges, children, feminists, experts, et cetera are just the pawns. If there had been a great movement for fathers and against mothers, the results would have been the same -- divide and conquer.

Toqueville was right when he observed that this nation's legal system could only work if the people are religiously observant, and of course he was talking about Christianity, which along with its Judaic roots was the founding ethos of our country, regardless of the liberal attempts to erase this factual history. And the solution will only come in the realm of individual spiritual understanding of the importance of marriage, extended family and the community of married families in the neighborhoods, schools and places of worship.

I grew up in a neighborhood that was about half Protestants and Catholics and the other half Jews. In the 50s there were great social divisions between these groups, but we got along based on the overwhelmingly common assumptions of marital behavior. Parents were married, children could focus on their schoolwork without concerns about sex or their parents' stability, sex was only appropriate within marriage, fidelity was expected, marriage is for life, and the choice of a mate within one's religious tradition was a decision of utmost seriousness, akin to a life-or-death choice.

Trying to explain to today's youth how stable this society felt to us, how grounding in values and rootedness, is impossible. We can only hope that it is the heart's desire of a new generation, and that they will re-embrace the desire for emotional stability and common decency and make it happen again over time. This is the gist of Baskerville's conclusion -- that individuals must realize the depth of the damage caused by easy divorce, recommit themselves and join together to demand reestablishment of marriage.