My solution to the gay marriage issue: stricter divorce laws

[shira]

I have one issue with this and its just because I know of a situation that happened in real life. Married couple with one kid, wife gets pregnant and both agree that she will take a year off, and only a year, to be with the newborn. Wife then refuses to go back to work after the agreed upon year causing the entire family financial hardship for the next 2-3 years of the marriage. The entire time she is saying that she is going to get a job in X time (after this school year, after the summer, etc). The relationship gets extremely taxed because of the fact that she refused to go back to work.

Should this man be responsible to financially support her (the children are not in question at all) if they get divorced because she refused to work as she had agreed to?

In a case like this, if the facts can be established that one of the spouses materially misled the other, judges should have discretion to limit/cut-off alimony.

Note that the OP would BAR this husband from divorcing his wife.

 

[sandorski]

Better ideas:

1) Give Homosexuals their Rights
2) Protect the "Sanctity" of Marriage by not getting Divorced

 

[nehalem256]

Better ideas:

1) Give Homosexuals their Rights
2) Protect the "Sanctity" of Marriage by not getting Divorced

(1) Marriage is between a man and a woman. No one has a right to marry someone of the same sex. You want to redefine marriage. Please at least be honest about it.

(2) Sounds like what the OP is proposing.

 

[sandorski]

(1) Marriage is between a man and a woman. No one has a right to marry someone of the same sex. You want to redefine marriage. Please at least be honest about it.

(2) Sounds like what the OP is proposing.

Incorrect

 

[SheHateMe]

(1) Marriage is between a man and a woman. No one has a right to marry someone of the same sex. You want to redefine marriage. Please at least be honest about it.

(2) Sounds like what the OP is proposing.

And Conservative Christians want to rule the country. Please at least be honest about it.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Exposing children to immoral acts isn't the way forward

__________________

define immoral......is it immoral for 2 people who love each other to want to satisfy each other??

Also how many time did your parents have sex with the door open so you could watch??

 

[MixMasterTang]

Rape is sex without consent. Marriage is consent to sex (barring obvious situations such as a couple divorcing).

I would say the insanity is anyway implying having sex with your husband is the same as a stranger forcing you to have sex.

If a husbands says his wife can't drive his car, which is in his name, should she be able to be charge with grand theft auto?

EDIT: If you don't want to have sex with your husband then don't get married.

Besides it shouldn't be a problem because women like sex just as much as men

You're crazier than I thought, you should try talking to a therapist, and I'm not trying to be insulting by saying that.

 

[dawp]

Divorce isn't the problem, people getting married for the wrong reasons is.

instead of changing divorce laws to make it harder to get divorced, change the marriage laws to make it harder for people to get married.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Rape is sex without consent. Marriage is consent to sex (barring obvious situations such as a couple divorcing).

I would say the insanity is anyway implying having sex with your husband is the same as a stranger forcing you to have sex.

If a husbands says his wife can't drive his car, which is in his name, should she be able to be charge with grand theft auto?

EDIT: If you don't want to have sex with your husband then don't get married.

Besides it shouldn't be a problem because women like sex just as much as men

Do you really believe this nonsense you post?

 

[ichy]

There would never have been an issue to begin with had people not enjoyed jerking off to pissing off Christians so much. All the gay union movement had to do was go with Civil Unions or Civil Partnerships instead of trying to call it Marriage and it would have removed the main basis for religious people to oppose it. Instead the movement started as a Gay Union/Piss off Christians and here we are.

Bullshit. When Vermont first had civil unions the fundies threw just as big of a hissy fit.

 

[Fenixgoon]

how are strict divorce penalties solutions exclusively to gay marriage? wouldn't they be solutions to all marriages, gay or straight?

 

[SheHateMe]

how are strict divorce penalties solutions exclusively to gay marriage? wouldn't they be solutions to all marriages, gay or straight?

We're only worried about gay marriages...because that is the most pressing issue facing society right now. D:

 

[rudeguy]

how are strict divorce penalties solutions exclusively to gay marriage? wouldn't they be solutions to all marriages, gay or straight?

the stricter laws would apply to all couples

Sorry for the confusion.

 

[rudeguy]

Divorce isn't the problem, people getting married for the wrong reasons is.

instead of changing divorce laws to make it harder to get divorced, change the marriage laws to make it harder for people to get married.

I believe the distortion of what marriage is is the problem.

 

[nehalem256]

And Conservative Christians want to rule the country. Please at least be honest about it.

How is that any different than liberals?

I assume every group wants to pass laws consistent with their values/ideology. Why are liberals always so shocked by this?

 

[nehalem256]

Do you really believe this nonsense you post?

Ok, lets look further at marital rape.

(1) The law is unenforceable. All you have is the woman's word. Why have laws that are completely unenforceable?

(2) Why do you want the government in people's bedrooms

(3) How do you justify prohibitions of adultery in marriage if the wife is denying the husband sex.

(4) Assuming that women really do want sex as much as men why is it necessary?

 

[dawp]

I believe the distortion of what marriage is is the problem.

Marriage is what we say it is as a society and has changed over the years. You can no longer have a plural marriage, for instance. Having a multitude of wives and concubines is frowned upon.

Only right-wing conservatives are not keeping up with the times. Try not to impose your values on me since I do not hold them.

If I chose to have multiple wives or marry a woman with multiple husbands that is my choice not yours.

If you make divorce too difficult to get, you will have more people simply separating and living apart and 'sinning'. if that's what you want, fine but I, for one, do not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8JsRx2lois
watch the video all the way to the end.

 

[nehalem256]

Marriage is what we say it is as a society and has changed over the years. You can no longer have a plural marriage, for instance. Having a multitude of wives and concubines is frowned upon.

Only right-wing conservatives are not keeping up with the times. Try not to impose your values on me since I do not hold them.

If I chose to have multiple wives or marry a woman with multiple husbands that is my choice not yours.

If you make divorce too difficult to get, you will have more people simply separating and living apart and 'sinning'. if that's what you want, fine but I, for one, do not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8JsRx2lois
watch the video all the way to the end.

Stop pretending that it is only right-wing conservatives who want to impose their values on others.

Unless you are an anarchist you do the exact same thing.

 

[lopri]

@OP: What a refreshing honesty and courage. I salute you. (no sarcasm here)

 

[dawp]

Stop pretending that it is only right-wing conservatives who want to impose their values on others.

Unless you are an anarchist you do the exact same thing.

my views are that unless it harms someone else you should be able to do whatever you want.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Yea...another night without sleep. House is clean so I figured I'd solve the world's problems.


The main, if not only, objection to gay marriage is from Christian Conservatives like myself. We don't have a real, actual objection to it other than our deep rooted morals. So it seems pretty simple that if we can solve a major issue by relenting on a minor issue, us Christians would be more than happy to give in on gay marriage.

The major issue would be divorce. I don't think anyone out there would disagree that divorce is a huge problem. Why not allow gay marriage but put stricter divorce laws in place? Divorce would only be legal if one person was shown to have committed adultery or physical abuse. The offending partner would be liable for 100% spousal and child support. No exceptions. This would add consequences where right now there are none. It may not stop someone from cheating or beating but it may stop people from marrying the wrong person.

Please critique my attempt at saving the world.

Why is divorce a huge problem? For whom? For kids that now don't have to have parents that practically hate each other being forced to live together?

And why adultery? Why not for burning their possessions or verbally abusing them? Ever been psychologically abused? It makes people take their own lives because they can't live with it and you are suggesting that people should stay forcibly married to their abuser because you can't empathize?

Your "deep rooted morals" are not based on empathy, it's based on whackjobs musings from a completely different era, if we actually based society on those morals we'd have a society resembling Afghanistan.

 

[soulcougher73]

This idea..is terrible. Id rather just outlaw marriage in the first place

 

[zsdersw]

Yea...another night without sleep. House is clean so I figured I'd solve the world's problems.


The main, if not only, objection to gay marriage is from Christian Conservatives like myself. We don't have a real, actual objection to it other than our deep rooted morals. So it seems pretty simple that if we can solve a major issue by relenting on a minor issue, us Christians would be more than happy to give in on gay marriage.

The major issue would be divorce. I don't think anyone out there would disagree that divorce is a huge problem. Why not allow gay marriage but put stricter divorce laws in place? Divorce would only be legal if one person was shown to have committed adultery or physical abuse. The offending partner would be liable for 100% spousal and child support. No exceptions. This would add consequences where right now there are none. It may not stop someone from cheating or beating but it may stop people from marrying the wrong person.

Please critique my attempt at saving the world.

I find it hard to believe that the heterosexual majority is going to agree to these restrictions.

 

[zsdersw]

My solution is to remove government from marriage altogether. In the US, marriage was a religious institution before it became a legal one. The people accepted the legal one since it matched the religious one, even though it clearly violates the separation of church and state. Rather than continue to make things worse by the state changing the meaning of a religious institution, we should fix the issue completely and get the govt out of marriage.

Do a find/replace on the legal forms and turn marriage into civil union. Churches can still issue their marriage certificate along with the civil union certificate of the state. Each religion can have their own marriage styles and the state's hand is no longer around the neck of religion. New civil unions (homosexual, polygamist, incestuous) can be created easily without any religious problems.

Everyone wins except the extremists on the far idiot fringes of both sides of the issue...and these people are perpetually offended so there is no making them happy and we should not bother to try.

This is all fine and dandy, but the biggest obstacle to it is the heterosexual majority.

 

[dank69]

You should just jerk off instead of thinking about nonsense such as this.

I'm not just being a dismissive asshole, either. Take your "Christian" morals and shove them. We don't need your approval to do anything. But even if you ignore that angle, your "solution" makes zero sense. You won't get "Christian" buy in, for starters. "Christians" aren't going to all of a sudden accept fags just because you make divorce laws more strict.

I mean, FFS morals aren't a fucking negotiation. If you think they are you are doing it wrong.