In his book, Our Dance Has Turned to Death, sociologist Carl Wilson
traces the seven
steps of societies in decline. Near the end, the
country reaches Stage Five where the affection between husbands and
wives is replaced by suspicion and hostility. Stage Six is marked by
selfish individualism that fragments society into warring factions.
If Mr. Wilson's analysis is correct, then American society is closer to
anarchy than most people realize.
That process of family and social disintegration is spurred by the
Violence Against Women Act - VAWA for short -- the $1
billion-dollar-a-year law that was passed five years ago at the behest
of the radical feminists. VAWA comes up for renewal later this year in
Congress.
When you look closely, it becomes clear that VAWA has an agenda that
reaches far beyond the protection of women.
VAWA-funded educational programs push the time-worn storyline of the
violent man and a brutalized woman. But that stereotype is false. The
truth is, members of the fairer sex are
just as likely to commit
domestic violence as men.
But once society comes to believe that members of the male sex are a
menace to women, it becomes easy to enact laws that strip men of their
Constitutional rights of due process and equal treatment under the law.
Again, that's where VAWA steps in.
One of the tools promoted by VAWA is the use of restraining orders. At
first blush, the idea sounds common-sensical: a woman who is being
abused should be able to get her husband removed from the house.
But in many states, judges crank out restraining orders like Confederate
one-dollar bills, not pausing to verify the woman's claims or even to
hear the man's side of the story.
A 1995 Massachusetts study found that
60,000
restraining orders were
issued each year. In fewer than half of those cases was there even an
allegation of physical violence. In the other cases, the woman simply
claimed she felt afraid, or maybe there had been a marital spat.
Recently the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court became concerned that
this epidemic of restraining orders was fraying the fabric of judicial
impartiality. The Court opined that judges must "resist a culture of
summarily issuing and extending these orders."
Elaine Epstein, former president of the Massachusetts Bar Association,
was even more candid: "Restraining orders are granted to virtually all
who apply.In many [divorce] cases, allegations of abuse are now used for
tactical advantage."
Tactical advantage? Ms. Epstein was referring to the fact that while
hubby is barred from the house, the wife quickly files for a divorce,
and cleverly requests temporary custody of the kids. That paves the way
for near-automatic award of sole custody once the divorce is finalized.
So careful about raising your voice, Pop, or you might be thrown out on
your ear -- and end up losing your kids for good measure.
Is this beginning to sound like Carl Wilson's Stage Five of societal
dissolution? In fact, has anyone noticed that Constitutional protections
of due process are being shredded by this near-hysteria over domestic
violence?
And there's more to the story.
Columnist Phyllis Schlafly
recently
probed the financial incentives that
drive our nation's child support system: "Follow the money," she warned.
"The less time that noncustodial parents (usually fathers) are permitted
to be with their children, the more child support they are required to
pay into the state fund."
So last month, family advocates in California set out to challenge these
perverse incentives by introducing the
Shared Parenting Bill. Their aim
was to encourage equal participation of fathers by granting them joint
custody of their children in the event of divorce.
Who could ever be against that?
The ladies from NOW, that's who. Their argument? Changing the practice
of awarding sole custody to mothers would expose the kids to all manner
of abusive dads.
That smear conveniently ignored an interesting fact: it's mothers, not
fathers who are far more likely to abuse and neglect their children,
according to the
U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
So two weeks ago, the California Assembly Judiciary Committee killed the
Shared Parenting Bill. And divorced children were rendered fatherless by
a spiteful gender stereotype.
The fragmentation of society into warring factions - shades of Mr.
Wilson's Stage Six.
The Violence Against Women Act represents a frontal assault on both
fatherhood and on the integrity of the traditional family. That's a
troubling harbinger for the dissolution of democratic society.
