Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RogerFGay
No body hates governmetn intrusion more than me. (Well, maybe some libertarians do). Anyway, the problem here is that divorce necessarily implicates the state. (i.e. big brother -- who, by the way, is really "all tax-payers.")

Big brother, and all of his cousins get stuck footing the bill for the real costs of broken homes.

Perhaps you have stumbled onto the solution, however. Perhaps it is as simple as requiring a marraige contract. Government does not dictate the terms, just that there be a valid agreement. This is no different than parties rights to contract freely now. The failure to contat, however, leaves default rules in the form of law to be applied. (Which we now know can't wok effectively in every case.) No contract, no marriage. The contract would devise post marriage rights and obligations, taking the state out of the equation. (But for your normal breach of contract.)

65 posted on 10/22/2002 8:15:14 AM PDT by Iron Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]


To: Iron Eagle
Anyway, the problem here is that divorce necessarily implicates the state. (i.e. big brother -- who, by the way, is really "all tax-payers.")

Not necessarily.

Big brother, and all of his cousins get stuck footing the bill for the real costs of broken homes.

The "solution" that's emerged over the past half century is to "invest" huge amounts of taxpayer funds into breaking families up, and over the past quarter century assuring that women across the economic spectrum find it profitable enough to break up the family to keep the rate of break-up high.

Perhaps you have stumbled onto the solution, however. Perhaps it is as simple as requiring a marraige contract. Government does not dictate the terms, just that there be a valid agreement.

Back before marriage was abolished in the US, there was a legally meaningful marriage contract. It isn't necessary to invent one or have lawyers draw up papers before the marriage. Courts in the US had more than two centuries of experience dealing with divorce issues and the "implied contract" was firmly established, including many meaningful details. They didn't even start from scratch. Early divorce laws in the US were based on laws that had developed in other countries (including England).
66 posted on 10/22/2002 8:30:22 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson