Skip to comments.Obamacare vs. No-fault divorce
Posted on 02/10/2011 4:22:54 AM PST by mbeaven
"The new healthcare law can make certain things more difficult, but family life will still happen. And that is what is most important."
"After the passage of no-fault divorce (thank you Ronald Regan), children are often not raised in a stable two-parent home. Traditional marriage, as an institution, is in retreat."
(Excerpt) Read more at considerandhearme.wordpress.com ...
Sorry, I don’t click on blog links - I’ll read if you post the entire thing. Also, I don’t like being lectured to by newbies.
How do you get pictures and captions posted here too?
(The hidden truth - It's a deep dark secret Pirate Ritual!)
Interesting article. And please note, not everyone (by a long shot) cares about people using excerpts to help promote their blogs. It takes no effort to click a mouse. I’ve discovered a lot of cool blogs this way which I never would have checked out otherwise.
Just for starters -
If you need further assistance, PM me.
I don’t agree that no-fault divorce is at fault for the decline of marriage as in instituion. The reason is that if someone is in a situation to which they are not committed, and divorce is difficult, they do other things that will get them out of it, one way or another, or not get into it in the first place to avoid legal problems down the road.
Here in New York, the last state to move toward no-fault divorce, the debate is fresh and the practices involved to get out of an unwanted marriage have been laid out on the table. They range from purposeful adultry to abandonment and colusion to falsify things that happened in the marriage in order to just get out of it. And divorces still happened here in New York at comparable averages when they were more difficult to get.
The cause of the decline in marriage as an institution is a change in culture. Part of it is empowerment to not stay in abusive or one-sided relationships, and the other part of it is an unwillingness to rebuild upon the rubble from the curveballs life throws at us.
From a personal perspective, I grew up with parents who likely should have called it quits because they were so distracted with the emotional upheaval going on, on a near constant basis, that they were not attentive parents, and my sister and I did not get the ‘cultivation’ into adulthood we needed to have the best chances in life. I am not insulting my parents, they are spectacular people, and especially my mother could have been an outstanding parent if it were not for being human and having to cope with being in a bad marriage and raise two kids at the same time.
When it got to be my turn, I ended up in the same kind of marriage and it was much worse. There was no physical abuse, but there was plenty of emotional abuse, laziness and alcohol involved, and I got the point where I just couldn’t take it any longer. I ended up as the blacksheep in the family because I didn’t fit the mold of taking whatever that lazy drunk who refused to admit he had a problem, let alone do something about it for the sake of our daughter handed me. But I had a child to raise, needed to focus on that and he made it impossible.
And of course, I went and made it worse as far as what my family thought of me and remarried. I married someone who wanted to be a dad and he did all of the dad kind of things for and with my daughter, and that is the kind of family life, stable and secure without all the upheaval, I wanted for her. We’ve been together now for 17 years and even though we’ve had the curveballs thrown at us, I wouldn’t change a thing.
Amen. The belief that no reading is better than reading that might require one of them onerous mouse clicks is a mental disorder.
No, it wasn't posted at all. It was excerpted.
Any relation to Ronald Reagan?
- - - - -
President Obamas healthcare law (Obamacare) does a lot of things but it is most known for putting control of healthcare into the governments hands and for requiring everyone to own a health insurance policy (universal mandate). There is good reason many are concerned increased healthcare costs, increased taxes, and the problem of what to do with the sick when the money is gone. But when everything is all said and done, people will still be born, they will still be raised by their parents, learn, grow, eventually marry and have kids, grow old, and die. The new healthcare law can make certain things more difficult, but family life will still happen. And that is what is most important.
Regan's no-fault divorce has destroyed the fabric of American life, strong families.
Now contrast Obamacare with no-fault divorce. Before no-fault divorce, divorce was difficult. There needed to be evidence of wrong-doing and it was even more difficult if both parties did not consent. After the passage of no-fault divorce (thank you Ronald Regan), children are often not raised in a stable two-parent home. Traditional marriage, as an institution, is in retreat. The whim of one infects all. It doesnt matter what the other partner wants. It doesnt matter what is the best for the children. All that matters is that one person is free to pursue their own selfish will. Children no longer have mom or dad (or suffer from custody fights) and they endure all the results of losing a parent. We know the statistics about suicide, about academic failure, about behavior problems, crime, etc.
The fact of the matter is that, under Obamacare, people will continue to live their lives much as men have for the past generations. With no-fault divorce, we change the family and the world we live. Significantly.
So why do the state legislatures, courts, and congress ignore this real evil that needs to be addressed?
Feedback to what? All you posted was a broadside against Reagan. Is there more you’d like to post?
Anyone opposed to divorce is invited to spend a week with my ex-wife.
Then we’ll talk.
mbeaven's conservative creds are a bit tarnished there, no?
I’ve got a couple of those around ..... somewhere .....
Pimping has no politics.
Ex-wife mood music...
Pimping pretends to have the politics of the venue.
So........... are ya out yet?
mbeaven, you asked for honest feedback so here it is: this is probably one of the most poorly written pieces I've read in a very long time. Poorly constructed sentences and changes in verb tense mid sentence do not make this easy to read. For me, it was like listening to the rejects on American Idol. Your writing is equivilent to the screeching of the loosers thinking they can sing.
Sensei! Two-time loser? You got me beat. I only have one ex-hubby, and that was 45 years ago.
Third time - DING! DING! DING!
“Anyone opposed to divorce is invited to spend a week with my ex-wife.
Then well talk.”
Thanks for the correction. Spell check was not my friend today!
From a conservative position, the problem with divorce is the same problem as with gay marriage: There is no such thing. If you marry someone of the same gender, you are not really married. If you divorce and remarry, you are still married to the first person (until they die).
I am familiar. However, it is still forbidden to marry a divorced person.
” and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery”
Right, but it does not say it is forbidden to marry a divorced person. Punctuation is important; it is one sentace not two.
If you marry someone who subsequently fornicates, you can divorce them and find someone else.
Of course this line of conversation has nothing to do with no-fault divorce, ObamaCare, or the fact that people are going to do what people do regardless of how difficult divorce is to get.
You have no logic. It is adultery but it is not forbidden? Read 1 Cor 6:9 to see what happens to those who commit adultery (marry a divorced person or remarry after divorcing).
Let’s dissect what you posted:
“Matthew, Chapter 5:32
but I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery. “
1. If she is already committing adultery, putting her out does not make her an adulterer. She already is one.
2. Put away is not the same as divorce. The scripture is speaking of separation. Vows are “until death do we part” and there are not “get out of your vows to God” cards. So you can separate for adultery but you can never marry again (until death of one).
3. It doesn’t matter the reason why the person was put away, to marry them is adultery. Even if the person was put away for adultery.
Also, punctuation is a translator’s inference. Scriptures were written with no punctuation. You have to rely on the authority of the Catholic Church to say what the scriptures mean, as it was they who decided what should be in the Bible and what shouldn’t be. The Catholic Church says there is no divorce. They compiled the Bible. They rejected books rejected, they accepted books accepted. All this hundreds of years before any other denomination was on the scene.
Divorce is a lie. Those who divorce and remarry commit adultery. Unrepentant adulterers go to hell. Not too complicated here.
“You have no logic. It is adultery but it is not forbidden? Read 1 Cor 6:9 to see what happens to those who commit adultery (marry a divorced person or remarry after divorcing).”
First, in the verse I provided, fornication is not adultery; otherwise it would not make sense to use another word. In other translations unchastity and immorality have been used in place of fornication. In the ones I looked at adultery is never used there.
In I Corinthians, the when the topic of marriage is discussed, Paul prefaces what he said by saying that he says it without command. But if you read the entire thing, it paints the picture where women are not much more than property, with a clear double standard. If you have been released from a wife, do not seek a wife. But if you remarry, you have not sinned and, A woman is bound to a husband until he dies.
In Galatians, however, he goes on to talk about the law, being established through a mediator, was a tutor until Christ could redeem. In verse 28 he says: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ. Christ looks at everyone the same. Romans chapter 3 is similar, and they appear to be reiterations and expansions of John 3.
All in all, salvation is a deeply personal affair and is not something that can be legislated, whether a little or a lot, in a free and self-governing society. Citizens here have the right to make up their own minds about how to conduct themselves, to judge their own conduct, and believe whatever they are inclined to believe. The use of law to coerce others to participate in ones ideal view of society is not much different than what the radical left is attempting now, or what radical Islamists are doing with shariah law in the Middle East and Europe and is nothing short of tyranny. I do not condone its use in that way, in the place of real leadership and persuasion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.