[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Gunman Ambushes Border Patrol Agents In Texas Amid Anti-ICE Rhetoric From Democrats

Texas Flood

Why America Built A Forest From Canada To Texas

Tucker Carlson Interviews President of Iran Mosoud Pezeshkian

PROOF Netanyahu Wants US To Fight His Wars

RAPID CRUSTAL MOVEMENT DETECTED- Are the Unusual Earthquakes TRIGGER for MORE (in Japan and Italy) ?

Google Bets Big On Nuclear Fusion

Iran sets a world record by deporting 300,000 illegal refugees in 14 days

Brazilian Women Soccer Players (in Bikinis) Incredible Skills

Watch: Mexico City Protest Against American Ex-Pat 'Invasion' Turns Viole

Kazakhstan Just BETRAYED Russia - Takes gunpowder out of Putin’s Hands

Why CNN & Fareed Zakaria are Wrong About Iran and Trump

Something Is Going Deeply WRONG In Russia

329 Rivers in China Exceed Flood Warnings, With 75,000 Dams in Critical Condition

Command Of Russian Army 'Undermined' After 16 Of Putin's Generals Killed At War, UK Says

Rickards: Superintelligence Will Never Arrive

Which Countries Invest In The US The Most?

The History of Barbecue

‘Pathetic’: Joe Biden tells another ‘tall tale’ during rare public appearance

Lawsuit Reveals CDC Has ZERO Evidence Proving Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

Trumps DOJ Reportedly Quietly Looking Into Criminal Charges Against Election Officials

Volcanic Risk and Phreatic (Groundwater) eruptions at Campi Flegrei in Italy

Russia Upgrades AGS-17 Automatic Grenade Launcher!

They told us the chickenpox vaccine was no big deal—just a routine jab to “protect” kids from a mild childhood illness

Pentagon creates new military border zone in Arizona

For over 200 years neurological damage from vaccines has been noted and documented

The killing of cardiologist in Gaza must be Indonesia's wake-up call

Marandi: Israel Prepares Proxies for Next War with Iran?

"Hitler Survived WW2 And I Brought Proof" Norman Ohler STUNS Joe Rogan

CIA Finally Admits a Pyschological Warfare Agent from the Agency “Came into Contact” with Lee Harvey Oswald before JFK’s Assassination


Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: Marriage Sinks to New Low, Recession Blamed…
Source: SpearHead
URL Source: http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/0 ... s-to-new-low-recession-blamed/
Published: Oct 5, 2010
Author: W.F. Price
Post Date: 2010-10-05 14:21:34 by Lysander_Spooner
Keywords: None
Views: 848
Comments: 45

Marriage Sinks to New Low, Recession Blamed… by W.F. Price on September 28, 2010

Recently released Census Bureau figures reveal that in 2009 the proportion of married Americans fell lower than ever, dropping 5% in the last 9 years alone. Compared to 57% in 2000, today only 52% of all adults are married. The institution of marriage is crumbling under a combined feminist and federal assault, which has legislated it into something that is roughly the opposite of what it used to be.

Pointing to the recession as the primary reason for the death of marriage is entirely off the mark. The decline of marriage has been ongoing since at least the early 1970s, when no-fault divorce created an explosion of divorces and started to make men more reluctant to tie the knot.

Spearhead contributor Charles Martel wrote a piece on the decline of the marriage rate that suggests that if current trends continue, marriage will cease to exist within roughly twenty years.

In the earlier days of the decline, men were generally blamed, but perhaps the recession provides an even more convenient excuse. Or, maybe, those who still support the institution are simply holding out in the impossible hope that the trend will turn around when times are better.

They are deluding themselves. As long as marriage remains an institution designed to suck the lifeblood out of men for the benefit of lawyers, the government and women, it will continue to weaken until it meets its well-deserved demise.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 33.

#6. To: Lysander_Spooner (#0)

As long as marriage remains an institution designed to suck the lifeblood out of men for the benefit of lawyers, the government and women, it will continue to weaken until it meets its well-deserved demise.

What? Marriage isn't a 50/50 type of deal and committment anymore? It's all the ebil women who are to blame and men are just "victims" in marriage.

Women get the lifeblood sucked out of them too......especially if they had assets prior to marriage.

abraxas  posted on  2010-10-05   18:09:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: abraxas (#6)

While that can be true it is likely about 98% males getting the hose job and 2% of the females. Theft is theft and the 'Divorce Racket' is clearly biased against the productive male. A few females also get a taste of the bitterness.

I for one would never 'do it' again, and I know lots of males who feel the exact same way. Feminists and greedy lawyers/judges have stacke deck, and we are not playing the game. So-called 'marriage' is dying a justifiable death in my view. Peace.

Lysander_Spooner  posted on  2010-10-06   10:21:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Lysander_Spooner (#11)

Feminists and greedy lawyers/judges have stacke deck, and we are not playing the game

Where is the personal responsibility? At least I can admit that I wouldn't have been hosed if I had a pre-nup. It's not theft when people don't protect their assets.

And, although it was a rough learning experience, I'm not bitter at all. I will simply be better educated and prepared if I do it again.

This victim mentality doesn't work for me.....

abraxas  posted on  2010-10-06   11:09:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: abraxas (#16)

This victim mentality doesn't work for me.....

I will simply be better educated and prepared if I do it again.

Yes it likely does. My guess is you are a woman?

If you support the present system it based entirely on women being the victim.

Pre-nups aren't worth the paper they are written on, just another way lawyers fleece the unsuspecting and the uninformed, and usually men pay for these. The judge will flap his lips with some comment to the effect: "The pre-nup is null and void because it is not in the interests of society". Then proceeds to toss it in the circular file.

As far as doing it again, good luck with that, marginal males seem to be the only ones getting married these day, and even their numbers are declining. Please see my post today of the Death of Marriage. I for one will never 'do it' again. My sons, both 21, are wise to the system and it seems as most of their male piers are also. Mean while, the girls their age for the most part have a strategic plan of wearing slut gear, getting tossed around from guy to guy, while dreaming of marrying a rich guy, and going shopping on his credit card the rest of their lives. It would be funny if it wern't so tragic. Peace.

Lysander_Spooner  posted on  2010-10-06   11:31:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Lysander_Spooner (#17)

If you support the present system it based entirely on women being the victim.

I disagree. Plus, it's different in each state. If you live in a fault state, it's best to understand what this means and act accordingly. I live in a no fault state so none of the issues that led to divorce are addressed by the court, only the splitting of assets and custody issues.

My ex-husband filed a motion right away, created massive legal costs. His attorney was as you described, but that was HIS CHOICE. He could have opted for an attorney that has a good track record in settling, not litigating. Again, HIS CHOICE. Perhaps, you opted for such an attorney as well.

Pre-nups do not protect what is acquired DURING marriage, only what one has acquired PRIOR to marriage. Many people do not understand this. Most pre-nups

abraxas  posted on  2010-10-06   11:44:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: abraxas (#19)

1. Plus, it's different in each state. If you live in a fault state, it's best to understand what this means and act accordingly.

2. My ex-husband filed a motion right away, created massive legal costs. His attorney was as you described, but that was HIS CHOICE. He could have opted for an attorney that has a good track record in settling, not litigating. Again, HIS CHOICE. Perhaps, you opted for such an attorney as well.

3.Pre-nups do not protect what is acquired DURING marriage, only what one has acquired PRIOR to marriage. Many people do not understand this.

1. As of October 2010, all states allow no-fault divorce [4] Source URL:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-fault_divorce

2. The DR Court system incentivives these type of behaviors, it is litigation, it is adversarial by its nature. Most of the massive legal costs are created by the actions of women. It is a fact that 75% of divorces are initiated by women. In my case I fired 10 attornies, one robbed me of $10,000, they were all louses, and crooks. Hers was the worst crook. In the end I represented myself and won full custody of my sons. She started the war, I finished it.

3.Pre-nups are routinely thrown out of court, they are not worth the paper they are written on and do not protect anyone.

Lysander_Spooner  posted on  2010-10-06   12:16:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Lysander_Spooner (#26)

In my case I fired 10 attornies, one robbed me of $10,000, they were all louses, and crooks

I wasn't aware of the recent turn to no-fault everywhere. CA should see a rise in divorces just from this change.

I agree it can be very difficult to find a good attorney.....an honest one is even harder to find. I was fortunate as I worked in a law firm for years.

It's actually 65% of divorces that are initiated by women. However, statistics clearly indicate that people do marry again....despite an even highter risk of divorce than the first marriage. 75% of all divorced people re-marry, half of them within three years.

65% of all second marriages fail.

abraxas  posted on  2010-10-06   12:27:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: abraxas (#30)

65% of all second marriages fail.

True.

If I were starting a business, and essentially so-called 'marriage' is nothing more than a civil union, a business deal, there is no way I would invest my time, energy, property and money on something that has a 65% failure rate. An endeavor if it doesn't work out because my partner wants to be 'liberated', who can leave for "no reason/no fault", steal half the assets at a minimum, and dictate to me when I can and can't interact with my employees, oops I meant children( I hope you catch my drift), is just not attractive or wise for most but the most marginal of men.

Lysander_Spooner  posted on  2010-10-06   12:34:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 33.

        There are no replies to Comment # 33.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 33.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]