I actually have a horse in this race and can speak deeply into this issue out of real experience. Before I do, there are a few things that I want to get out there first.
A father’s rights are inherent, given by God, and should only be removed if he is unfit, period.
A mother’s rights are inherent, given by God, and should only be removed if she is unfit, period.
Now, there is an absolute cloud over the major issue in this whole debate, and that is divorce in general and the reasons people list as the reasons. Irreconcilable differences is far and away the number one reason listed on divorce petitions, but such a large margin, it undermines the more serious reasons. People can’t get along or agree on things is the primary reason children are taken away from one of their parents.
There is also an absolute bias in preference of the mother. Make no mistake, it is a bias, and it is prevalent in every level of societal views on family rights. It is present in the abortion practice, birth certificates, custody, parenting time, and financial assets. The rights of the father in all of these instances is a back burner issue.
Societal view has relegated men, in the view of the courts, to sperm donors and financial contributors. It is the default position, and the burden of proof to the contrary is on the man’s shoulders, both legally and in the court of opinion. Where did this view come from? Is it based on any real evidence, facts, or study? Or is it based in the ideology of a movement with an agenda? I will not force my view down your throat, but the evidence is out there for anyone to find, do your own research.
In my divorce, I was not the petitioner. We both worked in stable jobs and were good parents. I was at home with my son during the daytime, and worked third shift to make sure he wasn’t in someones care other than his parents. That’s right I was there from the time he woke up until 9pm at night. My wife got home at 7pm every night and spent a few hours with him before bedtime.
When we separated, she asked me to move out and get my own place while we worked on things, which I did. I still spent the same time with my son, picking him up before she went to work. I still paid a large portion of her household bills and my own. I was, and remain a good father. There was no abuse, infidelity, or in-propriety of any kind…at least on my part.
The court gave primary custody to my wife, citing that because she was not unfit, the courts deference was to the mother. My son is 14 now, and has grown up with a part time dad. I have never missed a child support payment. I paid for braces because she could not afford it. I provide insurance, medical, dental, life. They live in a brand new 3 bedroom home, that I paid for (at least its a good place for my son), and I live in an apartment. I have been unable to claim him on my income taxes since the divorce, even thought I provide for at least half his needs. I have money set aside to help with his future education.
I do all of this because I love my son, and would have done it inside the marriage as well, not because the court said I should (incidentally, the support is the only thing court ordered in all of this).
There is no legitimate reason for the outcome, but there is a biased reason for it. And who really loses here? My son.
Actually, I really have no idea why you would think what he said was ridiculous. It sounded spot on to me. 
