If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politics UK)   No-fault divorce makes splitting up too easy say judges, who want to hang a critical "bad-thinking" clause on at least one half of the couples and shame them for it   (politics.co.uk) divider line 407
    More: Interesting, Tory MPs, couples, Westminster Hall  
•       •       •

7031 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2014 at 10:09 AM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



407 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-15 10:49:45 AM  
What a wonderful idea. Because divorcing couples don't have enough mental pain going  on as it is.
 
2014-01-15 10:49:55 AM  

Slartibartfaster: Wait, I missed that bit on the contract I signed, Can you point out this clause ?


What exactly do you think marriage is?  Just like any contract you sign, I highly suggest you NOT get married until you read what is on that contract.  Just as any other contract, saying "I missed that bit" doesn't hold up in court.  No one is forcing you to sign the contract, no one is forcing you to get married.

The Muthaship: Oh yeah.  Those things are bulletproof!


If you don't want to split your assets should you end up splitting up with your partner and you don't trust pre-nups, then don't get married.
 
2014-01-15 10:50:28 AM  

wildcardjack: I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.

So, get married, no meds, suddenly she's MY burden! fark that shiat, I ditched that crazy redhead. And I do mean craaazy. Delusional, pathological liar that got brutally violent when you picked at her lies.

She'd be great on Fox News.


So the woman you "loved" enough to marry is suddenly a "burden" when you discover she has mental health issues.  I really really hope you didn't mean that to sound the way it does.  Because if you did,  you are a HUGE a#$hole.
 
2014-01-15 10:51:01 AM  

lennavan: If you don't want to split your assets should you end up splitting up with your partner and you don't trust pre-nups, then don't get married.


I'm for fairness in the split is all.  Regardless of who it favors.
 
GBB
2014-01-15 10:53:47 AM  
Had a nice no-fault divorce several years ago.  We're still friends.  Even invited her to my wedding last year.  No one seems to understand the concept that it's possible for 2 people to drift apart and not get all homicidal about it.

My current wife was iffy about the whole situation until I asked her, "If, after you and I are together for 11 years, you decide that you want to move on, would you want me to get upset and all possessive with you and do spiteful things toward you, or would you want me to accept it and deal with it like an adult?"
 
2014-01-15 10:54:03 AM  

vudukungfu: How about requiring them to sign a legitimate contract that is legally binding and can be dissolved if one party reneges on their part?
Then all the other voo doo mumbo jumbo they do can be moot, which it is.


This.


Nebulous defined contracts whose terms are decided during dissolution is a farked up way to do marriage.

Stop state sponsored marriages. Let the state do what they do and enforce defined contracts. If you want a state licensed marriage, sign a contract with terms. This would solve so many of the issues in family courts.
 
2014-01-15 10:54:23 AM  

Sybarite: This brave MP defending the social importance of committed relationships was the same one vigorously opposing the marriage equality bill earlier this year.


At least he's consistent.  Is there not an issue about people being against same-gender relationships but NOT against (easy) divorces?
 
2014-01-15 10:55:11 AM  

wildcardjack: I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.


This really should be grounds for an annulment.
 
2014-01-15 10:59:26 AM  

Rapmaster2000: Christ.  They're like Republicans, but whinier.


Interesting.  The church used to keep families together but then modern society killed off the church.  It looks like Society has picked up the void.  Either that or its the evil republicans.
 
2014-01-15 10:59:58 AM  

The Muthaship: lennavan: If you don't want to split your assets should you end up splitting up with your partner and you don't trust pre-nups, then don't get married.

I'm for fairness in the split is all.  Regardless of who it favors.


If you decide to get married, then you are treated as equal members in the relationship sharing everything.  That means when you split, it is 50/50.  If you don't like that, get a pre-nup.  If you don't like that and you don't trust the pre-nup, then don't get married.  Because when you enter a marriage, it is with the understanding that you are going to be equal members in the relationship.  No one is forcing you to get married.

wildcardjack: I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.

So, get married, no meds, suddenly she's MY burden! fark that shiat, I ditched that crazy redhead. And I do mean craaazy. Delusional, pathological liar that got brutally violent when you picked at her lies.


I like to date girls long enough to know whether or not they are on psychiatric medicine to suppress their delusions, pathological lies and brutal violence before I ask them to marry me.  Seems like a smart idea.
 
2014-01-15 11:00:30 AM  
Fark is getting damn close to daily kid. Leave it to moderators to allow a thread about marriage in Britain to turn into GOP and Fox bashing. Of course if you talk about the farkleft in an unrelated topic you get a 24 hour ban... congrats mods!
 
2014-01-15 11:01:14 AM  

urbangirl: So the woman you "loved" enough to marry is suddenly a "burden" when you discover she has mental health issues. I really really hope you didn't mean that to sound the way it does. Because if you did, you are a HUGE a#$hole.


If you don't disclose your mental health issues to a long-term partner, you're a terrible person. If you don't disclose them until after the wedding, you are an asshole of almost inconceivable magnitude. That level of deceit is completely inexcusable.

That said, a person who does that is not a burden. One carries a burden. Once found out, a person like that is a memory.
 
2014-01-15 11:01:26 AM  

urbangirl: wildcardjack: I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.

So, get married, no meds, suddenly she's MY burden! fark that shiat, I ditched that crazy redhead. And I do mean craaazy. Delusional, pathological liar that got brutally violent when you picked at her lies.

She'd be great on Fox News.

So the woman you "loved" enough to marry is suddenly a "burden" when you discover she has mental health issues.  I really really hope you didn't mean that to sound the way it does.  Because if you did,  you are a HUGE a#$hole.


The way it's written is like the guy paid a dowry for her then wanted a refund when he was sold bad goods.
 
2014-01-15 11:01:35 AM  

lennavan: Just like any contract you sign


Ive signed lots of contracts, they usually outline definitions.... how is this one different ?

Specifically state the clause.
 
2014-01-15 11:02:46 AM  

MyRandomName

Fark is getting damn close to daily kid. Leave it to moderators to allow a thread about marriage in Britain to turn into GOP and Fox bashing. Of course if you talk about the farkleft in an unrelated topic you get a 24 hour ban... congrats mods!

^ This. It's easier for them to win debates when they just silence the opposition.
It's the socialist way. Stalin, Pol Pot, that adolf guy, fark mods...
 
2014-01-15 11:04:18 AM  

MBooda: [i1.kym-cdn.com image 165x115]
/except it doesn't go far enough


care to explain "not far enough"?
 
2014-01-15 11:05:09 AM  

lennavan: No one is forcing you to get married.


I get all that, and I'm not opposed to an equal split as long as there isn't considerable malfeasance by one party or the other.  I don't think no-fault divorce should be done away with, but it shouldn't be the only option.
 
2014-01-15 11:05:27 AM  

thurstonxhowell: urbangirl: So the woman you "loved" enough to marry is suddenly a "burden" when you discover she has mental health issues. I really really hope you didn't mean that to sound the way it does. Because if you did, you are a HUGE a#$hole.

If you don't disclose your mental health issues to a long-term partner, you're a terrible person. If you don't disclose them until after the wedding, you are an asshole of almost inconceivable magnitude. That level of deceit is completely inexcusable.

That said, a person who does that is not a burden. One carries a burden. Once found out, a person like that is a memory.


one of the symptoms of depression (as an example of a mental health problem) is unwillingness to talk about it. Lord J was depressed and it was months before he told me. When you feel shiat 24/7 about everything about yourself, you don't imagine that your stupid feelings are worth talking about, and a depressed person is also afraid how other people will respond. It doesnt make you a terrible person or an asshole. Have some compassion.
 
2014-01-15 11:06:34 AM  

MutantMotherMouse: GORDON: Easy: Divorce tax.  The State gets half.

Did you seriously just say that outloud? Great. Well, we know what's up next on the political agenda.

/not sure if brilliant


Yeah, it seemed scarily plausible when I thought of it.  You know politicians would LOVE a new tax.
 
2014-01-15 11:07:44 AM  

GBB: My current wife was iffy about the whole situation until I asked her, "If, after you and I are together for 11 years, you decide that you want to move on, would you want me to get upset and all possessive with you and do spiteful things toward you, or would you want me to accept it and deal with it like an adult?"


This sounds like my parents. Together for 24 years and just grew apart. They're still friends and my dad stops by to fix things at my mom's place because he's handy like that. Neither of them speak ill of the other and they just live their own lives.
 
2014-01-15 11:08:59 AM  

urbangirl: wildcardjack: I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.

So, get married, no meds, suddenly she's MY burden! fark that shiat, I ditched that crazy redhead. And I do mean craaazy. Delusional, pathological liar that got brutally violent when you picked at her lies.

She'd be great on Fox News.

So the woman you "loved" enough to marry is suddenly a "burden" when you discover she has mental health issues.  I really really hope you didn't mean that to sound the way it does.  Because if you did,  you are a HUGE a#$hole.


He loved the fact that she wasn't crazy, and it turned out she was crazy and there was a concerted effort to lie to him.
 
2014-01-15 11:10:05 AM  
Sooo this is another "It shouldn't be easy because it makes me feel all icky inside" type law? I'm surprised they don't have one outlawing girls because the have cooties. It fits with their first-grader mentality.
 
2014-01-15 11:12:06 AM  

Slartibartfaster: lennavan: Just like any contract you sign

Ive signed lots of contracts, they usually outline definitions.... how is this one different ?

Specifically state the clause.


Depends on what state you live in, dipshiat.

Step 1)  Point your browser to www.google.com, www.yahoo.com, www.bing.com or whatever your favorite search engine is
Step 2)  Search for "Marriage State Law [INSERT YOUR STATE HERE]"
Step 3)  Click until you find the relevant law
Step 4)  Find whatever definition for whatever you want as outlined in the publicly available contract for marriage
Step 5)  Go sit in the corner and feel bad about yourself

If you want to skip straight to step 5 because you're not actually interested in the answer but thought you had a decent point until you realized you were stupid, I'm okay with that.
 
2014-01-15 11:14:55 AM  

GORDON: He loved the fact that she wasn't crazy, and it turned out she was crazy and there was a concerted effort to lie to him.


Alternatively, he did not do his due diligence to find out what should have been obvious.
 
GBB
2014-01-15 11:15:04 AM  
According to the judges, breaking up should be hard, like this (Sorry for the auto play video.  You've been warned)
 
2014-01-15 11:16:12 AM  
I do not want the 'State' involved in any facet of my life. Period.
 
2014-01-15 11:16:58 AM  

Slartibartfaster: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Because you signed the contract stating such.

Wait, I missed that bit on the contract I signed, Can you point out this clause ?


Look up your local marriage statute and/or case history.
 
2014-01-15 11:17:26 AM  

Clemkadidlefark: I do not want the 'State' involved in any facet of my life. Period.


Then since you will never get married, what happens during divorce is a non issue for you.
 
2014-01-15 11:18:40 AM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: MBooda: [i1.kym-cdn.com image 165x115]
/except it doesn't go far enough

care to explain "not far enough"?


Idiots treating marriage and divorce like an automatic trash disposal are just one of many reasons to bring this back:
www.waitsel.com
/ever wonder why marriage should be a secular/civil institution instead of a purely religious one?
 
2014-01-15 11:19:54 AM  
This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.
 
2014-01-15 11:20:07 AM  

lennavan: GORDON: He loved the fact that she wasn't crazy, and it turned out she was crazy and there was a concerted effort to lie to him.

Alternatively, he did not do his due diligence to find out what should have been obvious.


I think it is pretty much accepted that people are protected from being duped/stupid in America, because Progress.  He is not at fault.
 
2014-01-15 11:20:17 AM  

wildcardjack: I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.

So, get married, no meds, suddenly she's MY burden! fark that shiat, I ditched that crazy redhead. And I do mean craaazy. Delusional, pathological liar that got brutally violent when you picked at her lies.

She'd be great on Fox News.


So YOU were her previous husband!  I should sue you for not tattooing a warning label on her somewhere.  Maybe we can form a club when her current husband drops her.
 
2014-01-15 11:20:44 AM  

Clemkadidlefark: I do not want the 'State' involved in any facet of my life. Period.



We will miss you!
 
2014-01-15 11:20:46 AM  

Clemkadidlefark: I do not want the 'State' involved in any facet of my life. Period.


Racist.
 
2014-01-15 11:21:40 AM  
MBooda: Satan's Bunny Slippers: MBooda: [i1.kym-cdn.com image 165x115]
/except it doesn't go far enough

care to explain "not far enough"?

Idiots treating marriage and divorce like an automatic trash disposal are just one of many reasons to bring this back:


Oh, I see. So people should stay together forever?  Despite humans changing/growing/coming to opposing ideals?


/ever wonder why marriage should be a secular/civil institution instead of a purely religious one?

No, never.  I don't really care.  Was just interested in your point of view, since it lacked any details at all.
 
2014-01-15 11:22:29 AM  

mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.


7.5/10


You'll get some nibbles.
 
2014-01-15 11:22:35 AM  

Slartibartfaster: lennavan: Just like any contract you sign

Ive signed lots of contracts, they usually outline definitions.... how is this one different ?

Specifically state the clause.


The one that says it can only be dissolved by divorce.
 
2014-01-15 11:23:46 AM  

mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.



1.5/10

Too obvious.  I think it was the "whore" part that sent it over the top.
 
GBB
2014-01-15 11:25:55 AM  

wildcardjack: I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.

So, get married, no meds, suddenly she's MY burden! fark that shiat, I ditched that crazy redhead. And I do mean craaazy. Delusional, pathological liar that got brutally violent when you picked at her lies.

She'd be great on Fox News.


Holy hell.  I had to check your profile to make sure you weren't the best man at my wedding.
Eerily similar.
 
2014-01-15 11:27:13 AM  

urbangirl: mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.


1.5/10

Too obvious.  I think it was the "whore" part that sent it over the top.



He should have said "woman of negotiable virtue."
 
2014-01-15 11:27:42 AM  

MyRandomName: vudukungfu: How about requiring them to sign a legitimate contract that is legally binding and can be dissolved if one party reneges on their part?
Then all the other voo doo mumbo jumbo they do can be moot, which it is.

This.


Nebulous defined contracts whose terms are decided during dissolution is a farked up way to do marriage.

Stop state sponsored marriages. Let the state do what they do and enforce defined contracts. If you want a state licensed marriage, sign a contract with terms. This would solve so many of the issues in family courts.


Yeah, replacing one standard contract with a multitude of different contracts will make things more straightforward.

The only people that would benefit from this are divorce lawyers and those drafting the contracts.
 
2014-01-15 11:28:59 AM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: MBooda: Satan's Bunny Slippers: MBooda: [i1.kym-cdn.com image 165x115]
/except it doesn't go far enough

care to explain "not far enough"?

Idiots treating marriage and divorce like an automatic trash disposal are just one of many reasons to bring this back:

Oh, I see. So people should stay together forever?  Despite humans changing/growing/coming to opposing ideals?


Depends on the institution under which they were married. Personally I'd say yes except it's insufficient punishment.

/ever wonder why marriage should be a secular/civil institution instead of a purely religious one?

No, never.  I don't really care.  Was just interested in your point of view, since it lacked any details at all.


So you don't care whether your marriage/divorce is enforced by the religious institution that controls it (and, except for some fundamentalist sects, lacks any economical or physical enforcement power), or by the state?
 
2014-01-15 11:29:03 AM  

urbangirl: mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.


1.5/10

Too obvious.  I think it was the "whore" part that sent it over the top.


Actually real, I speak from experience. 10 miserable years before I found out that better women can be found outside of the country.
 
2014-01-15 11:30:48 AM  

mister aj: urbangirl: mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.


1.5/10

Too obvious.  I think it was the "whore" part that sent it over the top.

Actually real, I speak from experience. 10 miserable years before I found out that better women can be found outside of the country.


Good god, you were serious?  Ouch.
 
2014-01-15 11:32:05 AM  

Clemkadidlefark: I do not want the 'State' involved in any facet of my life. Period.


Hope you don't like a functioning society.  But seriously, I'm not sure why you perceive the lack of state involvement as equal to being left alone.
 
2014-01-15 11:33:19 AM  
MBooda:

So you don't care whether your marriage/divorce is enforced by the religious institution that controls it (and, except for some fundamentalist sects, lacks any economical or physical enforcement power), or by the state?

Well, since I never got married by a "religious institution", and don't subscribe to religion, yeah, I'm ok with the state.  I was married at the courthouse.

You seem very argumentative.  I assure you I wasn't leading it that way.  I was merely interested in the background of your "not far enough" comment, which to me seemed to say "we need to shame all the divorcers!  SHAME THEM PUBLICLY AND FOREVER!"

And that just seems silly to me.
 
2014-01-15 11:34:04 AM  

mister aj: urbangirl: mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.


1.5/10

Too obvious.  I think it was the "whore" part that sent it over the top.

Actually real, I speak from experience. 10 miserable years before I found out that better women can be found outside of the country.


Ah.  Sure.
 
2014-01-15 11:34:11 AM  

mister aj: urbangirl: mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.


1.5/10

Too obvious.  I think it was the "whore" part that sent it over the top.

Actually real, I speak from experience. 10 miserable years before I found out that better women can be found outside of the country.


Yes, indeed.  They're great.  Right up until they get their green card, they couldn't be nicer.
 
2014-01-15 11:35:00 AM  

urbangirl: mister aj: urbangirl: mister aj: This is only a problem if you marry American women. Entitled, biatchy, withhold sex and pork up once they're 'securely' married. My current wife grew up in Russia, where it seems they don't raise little girls to be whores.


1.5/10

Too obvious.  I think it was the "whore" part that sent it over the top.

Actually real, I speak from experience. 10 miserable years before I found out that better women can be found outside of the country.

Good god, you were serious?  Ouch.



So...are you going to award him style points?
 
2014-01-15 11:35:42 AM  
"Speaking during a Westminster Hall debate, Gerald Howarth told fellow MPs that they were entitled to be "judgemental" about the public because the public were always judging politicians."

Does anybody else find this extremely childish?
 
Displayed 50 of 407 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report