Posted on 11/26/2007 10:26:35 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
“There were far fewer divorces back in the old days of your grandmother and mother in law.”
But when they did occur, it more often than not - left the mother and children fighting for survival while daddy got off scott free, so the result of that is what we see today - a tendency by the courts to ensure that mother and children are provided for.
And if nothing else - this should teach us that when we try to rely on the court system to remedy societal problems - the courts will never get it “just right”.
“Now we have marriages failing at neatly 50%.”
From what I’ve read of other freeper comments, this 50% figure is skewed because it includes marriages by 2nd timers (and 3rd and 4th)
I’m not sure what the figure is for 1st time marriages, but I suspect it is lower.
“As our home and families go, so goes our Nation. “
I agree, I’m just not sure how much courts can do about it when people don’t believe in God anymore - or faithfulness- or self sacrifice.
It seems the fundamentals that are required to hold up good marriages are not being promoted in our culture anymore.
That is not something the courts can remedy.
“If we make divorce an even more expensive and difficult process.”
I’m not sure if I’m supportive of making lawyers wealthier than they already are.
Maybe it would be good to go back to one party having to “prove” their case for divorce (ie...adultery, abandonment...etc.)
This law might benefit women, but it does not benefit society, upon which the security of women depend.
Women have always been major property owners, and run businesses. Run down to your county recorders office and check.
You really need to read about women, marriage and divorce and the common law in decades past. I'll bet you never have read any actual text published during those periods. Go to the same place, county seat, and pull some old appellate court cases then get back to me. 
Propose what you’d like to do and how it will help.
It was, actually. I amend the question, which you dodged (an oversight, I'm sure).
Did you read my post? I answered your question.
The same way you get any law changed.
Too many interests involved in this divorce industry. You hadn't figured that out? Waiting for you to tell me how to overcome them.
It's a billion $ industry involving courts (legislative tribunals) lawyers and women who seek to gain, plus various other public officials and those who seek to tear down the integrity of the country for their own ends.
"The same way you get any law changed."
Too many interests involved in this divorce industry.
Ah, so I was right.
You want to use the force of the state to settle a political argument you think you can't win.
Not a conservative position.
That may be a feasible and winnable fight whereas flat repeal would not be.
In English? None of that ~say~ anything.
What is liberal is breaking down the system of honor and responsibility each person takes when becoming one with another and making children.
What is liberal is providing a loaded gun for public use on every street corner entirely dependent on the good faith, sense, honesty and self governance of the individuals that have access to it, with little or no oversight.
Do you see yourself in those last two paragraphs?
What is liberal is providing a loaded gun for public use on every street corner entirely dependent on the good faith, sense, honesty and self governance of the individuals that have access to it, with little or no oversight.
Ah, an emotional argument. And one that raises the spectre of those darned guns, to boot.
Yep, a liberal's response. Through and through. Unworthy of you, and unworthy of this forum.
I'm sorry you feel you have no convincing argument, that you have to resort to emotional appeals and then the power of the State to make your case.
I live in a Right to Work state, so that is the context in which I posed the question.
In the scenarios I outlined, as the employer, I would have to demonstrate just cause in the firing if taken to court, and it would have to be backed up by extensive documentation. I know this because I’ve had my legal department advise me to keep employees longer than necessary (based on ability/performance) strictly so we could ensure we were sufficiently documented to protect against lawsuit.
But in a no fault divorce, as a husband I would have no standing to demand a similar demonstration of cause if my wife chose to leave me for no specific reason.
That’s whack.
An analogy.
What kind of penalty? Forty lashes? Public humiliation? Take their kids away and never let them see them again? Give them the kids but no money? Forfeit their investment in common property? What?
Also,
what if (as in many cases) both parties want the divorce. The marriage is over, they both want to move on. Who gets slapped if both are in agreement?
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.