Why No One is Married: The Tragedy of No-Fault Divorce

e3mil.com ^ | 2/24/03 | Ed Truncellito, JD

[nickcarraway]

ping

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[muawiyah]

That's all very good, but the fact is "no fault" divorce became popular when folks discovered that all the "reasons", aka, "the family's dirty linen", need not be published for public review.

"No fault" let's people "save face".

[Servant of the Nine]

Beforehand, almost any man could rule his wife and settle disputes by physical force.

I can promise you that had my late father ever laid a hand on my 85 year old mother she would have killed him without a thought. There is a term for women who aren't willing to do that, "abused".

Most women of her generation and mine would no more accept being "coerced" than I would. If you are not ready to kill the person who tries to coerce you, you aren't human, just a future slave.

The simple fact that you brought this up as an example of the "good old days" though needing updating and "Spousal Equality" demonstrates that you have so little understanding of a real relationship that nothing you say is of value.

Lawyers made huge fees on divorces in the old days, now most divorces hardly pay enough to keep the lights on. I am sure you would just looooove to see at fault divorce return. You are just another cheap jack lawyer trolling for business.

So9

[Theophilus]

Marriage never fails, people fail. Then the people in authority (family, friends, church & magistrate) also fail to enforce the law. Marriage is the prime victim of the gods of tolerance. Tolerance is the flaming jet fuel flowing through the girders of our culture.

[FirstTomato]

The problem in our society is not divorce, but not enough people getting married. Not being married when pregnant, not respecting marriage in the first place, and the consequences to society of children without fathers in the home is the problem.

When people are in a marriage and want out, the consequences of staying can be more devestating on children, than if they separate.

In the last 50 years, we've had a cultural swing towards socialism in this society, where government and psychology have replaced religion in the lives of people. The lack of community bonding is one of the first steps in destroying a culture, and that is what has happened. In order to restore respect for marriage, a restoration of the benefits of religion is paramount in our society.

[TruthConquers]

So, what is the solution?

Can Christians make their own marriage agreements separate from the civil authorities?

[buccaneer81]

Lawyers made huge fees on divorces in the old days, now most divorces hardly pay enough to keep the lights on. I am sure you would just looooove to see at fault divorce return. You are just another cheap jack lawyer trolling for business.

Well, I'm not a lawyer, and I would love to see fault divorce return. Because no fault divorce has cost me over $20,000, jail time, and the opportunity to spend time with my five year old son. You see, adultery and kidnapping are winked at in no-fault divorce. You, sir/madam (I suspect the latter) are clueless.

[nightdriver]

"In contrast, the registered cohabitation that we still call marriage invokes the jurisdiction of government officers. They receive authority to manage the lives of both spouses and their children with legal force."

Of course if you are a subversive socialist, wanting to bring our country down, you will applaud this with every fiber of your being.

[DAnconia55]

Ridiculous. The #1 cause is the immoral practice of alimony.

[Servant of the Nine]

Well, I'm not a lawyer, and I would love to see fault divorce return. Because no fault divorce has cost me over $20,000, jail time, and the opportunity to spend time with my five year old son.

Since that is not the normal course of a no fault divorce, I would suggest you screwed up badly either in picking a wife or in divorcing her. Now you want everyone else to pay for your stupidity by making divorce more difficult.

So9

[Restorer]

Can Christians make their own marriage agreements separate from the civil authorities?

I don't know about you, but I am not married because of anything the civil authorities have done. I am married (26 years and counting) because I made a commitment to my wife and my God. I honor the state's right to make laws, but their laws have nothing whatsoever to do with whether I keep my commitment.

The problem here is that divorce laws (of whatever description) are like locks, they only work against those who don't need them. Anyone determined to evade either will generally succeed without too much trouble.

[dalereed]

Divorce should be next to imposible!

I've been married for 43 years so what do I know.

[bethelgrad]

My wife and I have discussed this very thing. What makes the marriage right before God? The state or commitment before God? Could he honor a marriage that did not have the state blessing? There was a time when the state did not make marriage its business, rather it was the responsiblity of the community to recognize marriages. I think it may be a matter of intent. I wholeheartedly reject the cohabitation thing to "see if we work." A legal marriage does make it more difficult to just walk away though.

[Little Bill]

He may have screwed up but States vary widely in their treatment of the walking wallet. I was divorced in Mass and I contested for adultery, I made out out well, if you consider $250,000 worth of alimony until I retire well.

If I had contested in New Hampshire where Adultry is actionable in the courts I could have reclaimed my money. Regretfully I didn't live in NH at the time.

[dpwiener]

Although cohabitation is handicapped in many ways, it unfortunately has one important advantage: ordinary cohabitation keeps government out of the home.

The only thing wrong with the above sentence is the word "unfortunately". Cohabitation does keep government out of the home, and that's a huge advantage over government-regulated marriages. If you want to get married in a religious ceremony, go ahead and do it; just don't register it with the government. Instead, create a cohabitation contract to handle the civil issues (property ownership, monetary arrangements, etc.). That way you aren't forced to accept the one-size-fits-all government-defined civil marriage contract.

My POSSLQand I have lived together, utilizing a cohabitation contract, for over 25 years now. It has worked out just fine, and we've successfully avoided government interference in our relationship.

[buccaneer81]

Your reply leads me to believe that you are a beneficiary of the divorce industry. I did nothing wrong, and like so many men lost everything. But I will never give up on my son.

You are a real piece of work. It must be nice to judge from upon high. If you were any more smug, your last name would be Clinton.

[Bob J]

NOW on RadioFR! Brent Bozell (Media Research Center), Scott Hogenson (CNSNews.com), Bill Federer (author and ex US Congressman), Tygh Bailes (Leadership Institute)and Gary Nowlan (Libertarian Party Prez Candidate)!

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep! HIFI broadband feed HERE! (when available)

Would you like to receive a note when RadioFR is on the air? Click HERE!

Click HERE to chat in the RadioFR chat room!

Miss a show?

Click HERE for RadioFR Archives!

[Servant of the Nine]

Your reply leads me to believe that you are a beneficiary of the divorce industry. I did nothing wrong, and like so many men lost everything. But I will never give up on my son.

Other than losing a house in a divorce, I have nothing to do with them.

I and hundreds of people I know have been diovorced with no more than a little financial hardship. Well worth it to be rid of the other person.

If what you say is true, then your case is extraordinary, a fraction of one percent. Why should we turn the law on it's head so that it makes 99+% unhapier in order to make you happy?

I would guess that you, and you alone chose the wrong woman. Why should the other 99+% of people who function best under the current system be punished for that?

So9