Divorce’s incentives Regarding your article this week on the proposed changes to Florida’s alimony guidelines, I’m fortunate my ex-wife and I accepted that divorce was about moving on and not getting even or making lawyers rich.
No one marries with a plan to divorce, but divorce happens for various reasons. One reason that has become more prevalent since the “no-fault” divorce was introduced in the 1970s is the financial incentives of divorce. Before no-fault, divorce was rare because it required a cause like infidelity, abuse or other accepted reasons. Worse, women tended not to work outside the home and left with nothing. With no-fault, the commitment to marry “?’til death do us part” became “?’til things get hard, I get bored or I find someone else.”
Marriages are hard work, and usually the toughest times are when kids are young, careers are beginning and finding balance is nearly impossible. But to some, divorce is like hitting the lottery with the possibility of up to 22 years of child support, lifetime alimony, division of retirement accounts and usually the house. If the system were fair with no financial incentive to divorce, then divorce filings would be 50-50 (husbands and wives). Unfortunately, more than 80 percent of divorces are filed by women, and like some of the women in the article, lifetime alimony is a stronger commitment than their marriage vows. Maybe we should eliminate the no-fault and financial incentives and see how many people work through the tough times and stay married.
Discrimination In an incredibly bigoted op-ed piece by social researchers Charlotte Childress and Harriet Childress (“White men in America have some explaining to do,” Other Views, April 3), they start by stating “Imagine if African-American men and boys were committing mass shootings month after month, year after year.” We don’t have to imagine it; it’s already happening — perhaps not in a “mass” way, but in large numbers regardless. The 500-plus homicides in Chicago this year alone are almost exclusively black-on-black crimes. The Crips and the Bloods have been killing each other by the thousands over the years; not too many white boys there. The Latin Kings, MS-13, La Raza Nation and the Mexican Mafia are just a few of the dozens of Hispanic-centric gangs that kill each other and African-Americans, who are rival gang members. And white men in America have some explaining to do?
Their red herring continues by blasting the NRA (Oh, my God! It’s “led by white men”!). I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: the Crips and the Bloods are not NRA members. The 500 homicide victims in Chicago weren’t killed by the NRA. The Latin Kings, MS-13, and the Mexican Mafia aren’t members of the NRA. Do I need to go on?
They want to hold white men in leadership roles accountable for the current culture that they say causes other white men to commit mass killings. OK, let’s do that — the day after we hold black men in leadership roles (President Obama, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Eric Holder) accountable for the murders committed by the Crips and the Bloods. Let’s do it the day after we hold Hispanic men in leadership roles (Gov. William Richardson, Secretary Henry Cisneros, Sen. Robert Menendez) accountable for the murders committed by the Latin Kings and MS-13. Where should we start?
The blatant bias and academic dishonesty that characterize this “research” should be shown for what it is: discrimination against a majority population to score political points. Didn’t we already see this during the 2012 presidential campaign? And, my fellow Americans, didn’t we have enough?
Steffan F. Cress
Uncomfortable facts The column “White men in America have some explaining to do” was such a stretch and inaccurate that I had to look up who the Childress sisters who wrote it are. No surprise: twin sisters in their 60s from Oregon who have a long history as college professors.
I could make a more intelligent argument that their generation created the environment for not just mass shootings but the large majority of all shootings. Like the 500-plus homicides in Chicago last year for example. What about the 400-plus in New York City or 300-plus in Los Angeles?
Why did the Childress sisters not tie that into their article? The overwhelming percentage of homicides and gun violence are committed by minorities in this country. Just uncomfortable facts and not silly liberal dribble.
Dean L. Walters
Liberal mindset Yes, a very minute percentage of us “evil white men” have committed terrible acts of violence. Any normal human being (which most of us white dudes are) abhor these acts.
I was not at any of these crimes, nor were my guns. But because of the liberal mindset, all of us male Caucasians must pay the price. Truth be told, it is not only we white-skinned devils who own guns. There are many responsible people of color and both sexes owning them also.
I know it is the popular mantra of the left to paint white men as the bad guys, while they ignore the killings in Chicago, Detroit and D.C. committed by mostly minorities.
In closing, I am going to be very politically incorrect. I am white and proud. And no, ladies, I owe no explanations to you or anyone else.
New Port Richey