I assumed that kids were coming after marriage. But yes, children are legally binding. However, child support and possible alimony are two different things. How many people have joint property? A few bank accounts and maybe some land? If you aren't married (or common law married), that property will not transform into…

1. Switzerland has mandatory conscription. Unless you want to enact that in the United States, I don't think it will work. Switzerland is also a small, wealthy nation. Look at who is perpetrating gun crime in the USA. Hint - its not wealthy people. Besides, military training is in large parts tactical training meaning…

Paying for college herself instead of mommy and daddy's or the government's teat? Definitely not a democrat.

Here, lemme grab that point flying over your head for ya - increasing the red tape to wade through to get a gun isn't going to decrease crime.

There's about 30,000 deaths a year from trained, licensed and tested drivers. Dumbasses are going to be dumbasses.

Gotta disagree. That marriage license legally binds you. You throw all the chips in at that point. If you're a guy and lose on the hand, you lose, on average, a lot more chips than the wife. It's a much bigger investment.

You're criteria are too broad to be useful without analyzing specific past acts of a person. To answer any of those questions would involve analyzing the past actions of a person.

So what criteria can we use to value potential mates? Would you date a former member of the Aryan Brotherhood?

No, its not black and white. Sorry to give you the impression it was. It's tough to couch terms when debating a point. It is a very real issue with possible consequences so it is something to examine when evaluating your mate choice.

Yes, because women are giving it up easier, meaning men have to commit less resources and can get away with just cohabitation. Most men I know have no desire to settle down with a woman after she has given her best years (i.e., sexual and fertile peak) cohabitating with some other dude.

Completely wrong and nothing I have written states so. If you actually read what I wrote, the logic is completely divorced from genitals. It's economics and prudent investing in regards to a resource. Women don't do the same cost/benefit analyses in finding a husband?

You don't have to, but it doesn't mean its wrong. Do not forget that there is a difference between somebody who had two boyfriends over 10 years and somebody who had a new fuck buddy every month for 10 years. This only works if you buy the original premise that sex is a valuable commodity owned by women (who can…

Because man sex isn't a precious commodity. Read the article.

I would not because it doesn't apply to men. It's useless to try to convince you that men and women are fundamentally different. I'm sure you'll just ignore the science that states promiscuous women have higher divorce rates, etc, so let's just see how all the slut-walkers turn our in 15 years.

Yes, obviously I was implying that women were mere chattel, to be bought and sold and used by superior men. But you know, let your blind ideology get you all offended by an analogy.

It's obviously a little more nuanced than either/or. Today, there is little motivation or stimuli to push men towards settling down when there is an abundance of sex in the market place. 40 years ago, it was a hell of a lot harder for a young man to spend his life finding fresh new scroggins every couple of weeks.…

Ha. But they won't. And this article will continue to be correct.

Jesus, it's not the only factor. What would prompt a man into settling down and raising kids if he could continue banging young nubile women the rest of his life??

That's right. Love had very little to do with marriage before the industrial age. Marriage was a way to increase financial access and power. Any person would be crazy to marry for love.

There are exceptions, but overall, a used rental car is going to have a lot more issues than a new model fresh off the lot. It's just something to look out for.