Posted on 11/13/2009 10:10:22 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
I’d sign his petition and vote for it, but I’m pretty sure he won’t get anywhere with it just based on the comments in this thread. If the supposedly conservatively minded folks of FreeRepublic can’t form a consensus agreement on something like this then, barring a miracle of God, there is no way a majority in the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia will agree to it.
>>Yes, and the law of unintended consequences would be you would get your precious ‘face to face with commitment’ right along side of ‘lots of illegitimate children’.<<
Interesting. People seem to forget that until the last 50 years divorce was quite uncommon.
I have said for years that non-religious people should not get married.
I'm not sure how you make a leap like that but maybe you should know I'm opposed to parking tickets also.
The concerns over illegitimate children will be very few.
If mom and dad get a $5000 tax credit for each child - SO LONG AS MOM AND DAD ARE MARRIED - and divorced/non married couples get squat....
Just what kind of increase in illegitimate children and kids from broken homes do you think there will be?
Hmmm?
I don’t believe the government should be involved in the family unit. Could they possibly make it more difficult to get a divorce, or better yet, make it more difficult to marry? Absolutely. But to abolish divorce completely is absurd. I don’t think that’s a precendent anyone would want to set.
The couple will one day answer to God for their decisions, but they certainly shouldn’t be answering to the government.
I married a product of divorce and have seen the effects of it on my husband, even into adulthood. I have also seen the other side of it and “staying together for the kids”, which is just as unhealthy, especially if the parents show zero love and emotion towards each other. I’m not going to argue the emotional effects of divorce, though, as I live it everyday.
Outlawing divorce while keeping adultery legal has the effect of destroying marriage. Making sex outside of marriage illegal (one month jail term?) would have a strengthening effect.
We have come to the point in society where no gender will hold sex with high value, and it is decimating the family and ultimately the nation. My guess is that our nation will probably not survive it, because families will just slowly deteriorate into masses of people with little interest in each other and a bunch of children conceived by strangers. If we really wanted to raise up the family, we would make it harder to divorce, restrict contraception to married couples, restrict abortions to medical necessity, and harshly penalize adultery. To aid a more chaste society, we would also have to restrict media production of sexually stimulating material, which would ban many commercials and prime time television.
I don't think we have the stomach as a nation to handle such a shift.
California's no-fault divorce law (the first one in the country, IIRC) was signed into law by that arch-feminist Ronald Reagan.
“I suppose you are pro-abortion too.”
Riigghhhttt, because not wanting the government telling us who we have to remain married to is exactly the same thing as dismembering and killing an infant.
the government has no more business in peoples marriages than they do their healthcare
Just like others who say:
the government has no more business in peoples marriages womens wombs than they do.......
That's how I made the leap to you being pro-abortion. Your logic is the same.
I think your first mistake is the assumption that you have the right to impose your views on god and morality upon others. you don’t.
What kind of conservative uses the government to reward and punish people for behavior they don’t agree with. How far do you want to take it? I hate when “conservatives” say they want the government out of their lives until it’s a pet project they have.
See post 69.
I probably wouldn’t tax the heck out of people who divorce, just because a lot of families that divorce aren’t that rich to begin with and it hurts the kids. Splitting up assets and paying divorce lawyers takes a lot of money up from both sides and it hurts kids.
That said, I’d certainly be in favor of a judge being able to potentially put a fine down on a case-by-case basis, based on a percentage fault analysis. But that would pretty much happen anyway through the proceeding.
And you are right, it’s a good thing for the state to encourage couples to stay together with incentives tax-wise. The state has always recognized that families, a structure that pre-dates government, is a positive fundamental building block of society. Hell, if government goes, family structure will still be there. As will the church.
your logic is screwed up.
A divorce is not the same as killing a child in the womb.
One leads to death, the other to the end of a relationship.
I see. So in your mind it is all or nothing as far as government involvement in our affairs. Makes sense/s
If you think that an adult deciding to divorce is the same as someone deciding to kill an innocent child than your brain is screwed up. Absolutely illogical.
i thought the same thing.
I never saw anything written like this, but you are 100 percent correct. Even some conservative FREEPERS are part of these six “Sacraments” of the Enemy. That is the saddest part of all.
Explain that to him. I already get that
I see.
So you’re OK with the status quo. Rewarding bad behavior. Giving tax credits to those who pay no taxes.
You’re OK with an immoral divorce system in this country - brought to us courtesy of the femi-nazi’s.
And OK with LBJ’s not-so-Great Society that replaced the family with a welfare check.
I see.
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.