Eliminate "No-Fault Divorce" To Strengthen Marriage and Discourage Gay Marriage

[garyganu]

This gary guy obviously has his issues, but it is interesting to see the liberals here reflexively opposed to anything that smacks of personal responsibility.

Does No Fault divorce remove any personal responsibility? Does it require punishment and lengthy court hearings to be responsible?

What gary is doing is having the gov't override what the two people involved want as far as an ending to the marriage. That, in my opinion, is gov't interference where it is unwarranted.

WB, you have it exactly backwards. No fault divorce removes all options from the injured party. It limits his/her choices.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You demonstrate the illogical attempt of false analogies, garyganu, for two reasons. (1) Adultery is not a crime, and no competent reason has ever proved that it should be. (2) We are not talking about stealing, which is engaged in by straight and homosexual.

We are talking about the failure, not of government (funny, you would want a statist solution), but of the family and church when it comes to inculcating the virtues of fidelity and commitment.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no way to make people honor committment or fulfill their promises. They have to be raised that way. This isn't a failure of the government or the system that permits easy divorce. It's a failure of personal integrity and that can't be legislated.

Murder, theft, drug abuse, assault, perjury, etc, are also failures of personal integrity. We DO legislate morality in most all laws on the books.

Why do you excuse family and church, garyganu, for these failures and suggest statist solutions?

 

[garyganu]

You demonstrate the illogical attempt of false analogies, garyganu, for two reasons. (1) Adultery is not a crime, and no competent reason has ever proved that it should be. (2) We are not talking about stealing, which is engaged in by straight and homosexual.

We are talking about the failure, not of government (funny, you would want a statist solution), but of the family and church when it comes to inculcating the virtues of fidelity and commitment.

Not criminal punishment. Civil damages. The one at fault should pay court costs. I costs the taxpayer nothing.

 

[Unkotare]

This gary guy obviously has his issues, but it is interesting to see the liberals here reflexively opposed to anything that smacks of personal responsibility.

Does No Fault divorce remove any personal responsibility? Does it require punishment and lengthy court hearings to be responsible?.

LOL. Typical liberal.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You demonstrate the illogical attempt of false analogies, garyganu, for two reasons. (1) Adultery is not a crime, and no competent reason has ever proved that it should be. (2) We are not talking about stealing, which is engaged in by straight and homosexual.

We are talking about the failure, not of government (funny, you would want a statist solution), but of the family and church when it comes to inculcating the virtues of fidelity and commitment.

Not criminal punishment. Civil damages. The one at fault should pay court costs. I costs the taxpayer nothing.

Tort damage is available for alienation of affection, etc. Check the laws in your state,

 

[WinterBorn]

This gary guy obviously has his issues, but it is interesting to see the liberals here reflexively opposed to anything that smacks of personal responsibility.

Does No Fault divorce remove any personal responsibility? Does it require punishment and lengthy court hearings to be responsible?.

LOL. Typical liberal.

Rather than made (what you consider) snide remarks, why not actually join in the discussion?

Or is this the best you have to offer?

 

[Unkotare]

I calls em like I sees em.

 

[WinterBorn]

This gary guy obviously has his issues, but it is interesting to see the liberals here reflexively opposed to anything that smacks of personal responsibility.

Does No Fault divorce remove any personal responsibility? Does it require punishment and lengthy court hearings to be responsible?

What gary is doing is having the gov't override what the two people involved want as far as an ending to the marriage. That, in my opinion, is gov't interference where it is unwarranted.

WB, you have it exactly backwards. No fault divorce removes all options from the injured party. It limits his/her choices.

I can only go by the information in Alabama, where I got my only divorce. We have No Fault divorce laws available. But it does not restrict all divorces to only that. Spouses can still take each other to the cleaners in divorce court.

 

[WinterBorn]

I calls em like I sees em.

So that would be a 'No'.

Thanks for clarifying your ability to discuss an issue.

 

[Luke Haney]

The best way to reduce divorce rates and to discourage gay marriage is to bring back "no fault divorce" laws. Cheating on your wife or husband is a "breach of contract" and the guilty party should be held liable and forced to pay damages.

The promise of sexual exclusivity (fidelity) is a very important part of marriage. This needs to be clearly written into all civil marriage contracts and enforced by the divorce courts. Marriage is about rights and responsibilities to each other. Modern society has taken all of the responsibility out of marriage. If people were held accountable for their actions, we would see much fewer divorces and much fewer gay men would be interested in marriage.

The best way to reduce divorce rates would be to bring back divorce "fault laws". No-fault laws have failed, they have been accompanied with more divorces due to the lack of punishment, and ease of simply giving up on their partner. I'm not wishing misery on anyone, I don't think people should continue on with marriage if they are not happy. Of course it should still be simple to get divorced if grounds are commonsense. But, bringing back fault laws will definitely slow down divorce rates. People will think about marriage a lot harder, try harder during hard times, and will be based more on love rather than money, lust, or citizenship.

 

[Unkotare]

Does it require punishment and lengthy court hearings to be responsible?

We can see how responsible people are without accountability.

 

[Vandalshandle]

What a great idea! Have the state legislate perpetual marriage, which, in some cases, is equivalent to living in hell. Of course, there could be consequences. First, it would discourage many from ever getting married, and two, there are those that would resort to another option to end the marriage. However, the real alternative would simply be "desertion", which was always cause for a divorce, anyway.

 

[Agit8r]

And let's excommunicate Ronald Reagan while we are at it

 

[JakeStarkey]

Only God haters would want to eliminate no fault divorce.

 

[HenryBHough]

Lawyers oughta love the idea of eliminating no-fault divorce - setting the stage for more very profitable court battles. Gee, if I wonder how the fault vs. no-fault thing will play out in the case of some very recent same-sex marriages?

 

[JakeStarkey]

No differently than in a state such as South Carolina, which still has some very silly rules.

Lawyer make money, make every one else look funny.