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  
•       •       •

7029 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2014 at 10:09 AM (45 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 12:15:29 PM  

mister aj: jst3p: vicioushobbit: mister aj: The ten years I speak of wasn't ten years of dating; if only. Ten years of marriage. I stuck around for the sake of young children, and for the sake of not losing half of my hard-earned wealth. After ten years of disrespect and piling on the pounds though, I just couldn't take it any more. Fortunately, Russian women have less hang-ups about sex and more respect for their body and their partner.

Yeah, still blanket statementing, dude.  10 years with 1 woman isn't the same as knowing all the women in a single nation, and you may have just gotten lucky with your current wife.  Getting married for citizenship isn't a new thing.

Less hangups about sex? The fark have you been going to meet women? I know plenty personally who have no problems with one night stands, kink, threesomes, etc, but who are also decent people who, when they find a good match, stick with that person.

You seem far more concerned with saving your money.  People who stay together "for the kids" end up doing more harm to those kids.  If you are suffering 10 years of unhappiness, and your kids see you and your wife going through it, who's teaching these kids what a real relationship looks like? They are learning by watching you.

/you should have quit after your Boobies, and just let us all think you were only being a troll.  That'd have ended better for you.

That's OK, after getting beat up here he can go home to his mail order bride and she can tell him what a smart man he really is.

Why talk when we can skip straight to sex? And, amazingly, sex without anybody insisting that the lights are off, or that I do the housework first, or any number of manipulative episodes of bullshiat.


Aaaaand the reason you had to get a mail-order bride is clear.
Such a keeper.  Grats to your wife for landing you.
 
2014-01-15 12:16:31 PM  

Theaetetus: Ironic, considering that their state religion was founded on the concept of divorce.



That doesn't mean they can't want to publicly shame people who are different than them and who they really don't know anything about.
 
2014-01-15 12:18:28 PM  

mister aj: jst3p: vicioushobbit: mister aj: The ten years I speak of wasn't ten years of dating; if only. Ten years of marriage. I stuck around for the sake of young children, and for the sake of not losing half of my hard-earned wealth. After ten years of disrespect and piling on the pounds though, I just couldn't take it any more. Fortunately, Russian women have less hang-ups about sex and more respect for their body and their partner.

Yeah, still blanket statementing, dude.  10 years with 1 woman isn't the same as knowing all the women in a single nation, and you may have just gotten lucky with your current wife.  Getting married for citizenship isn't a new thing.

Less hangups about sex? The fark have you been going to meet women? I know plenty personally who have no problems with one night stands, kink, threesomes, etc, but who are also decent people who, when they find a good match, stick with that person.

You seem far more concerned with saving your money.  People who stay together "for the kids" end up doing more harm to those kids.  If you are suffering 10 years of unhappiness, and your kids see you and your wife going through it, who's teaching these kids what a real relationship looks like? They are learning by watching you.

/you should have quit after your Boobies, and just let us all think you were only being a troll.  That'd have ended better for you.

That's OK, after getting beat up here he can go home to his mail order bride and she can tell him what a smart man he really is.

Why talk when we can skip straight to sex? And, amazingly, sex without anybody insisting that the lights are off, or that I do the housework first, or any number of manipulative episodes of bullshiat.


Good for you if it works for you, I am just saying some of us have good relationships without having to buy them on the internet. I am not dissing you for being happy but your maligning an entire culture of women then use of the easy button says way more about you than it does American women.

And don't get me wrong, I am divorced (twice) so I know how it feels to make a crappy decision. I think the difference between me and you is that I focused on what led me to make the mistakes I made and adjust as I go along. I took ownership for my mistakes. You decided that it couldn't be you, it must be ALL American women, so fark it just buy one.

Good luck.
 
2014-01-15 12:18:52 PM  

jst3p: alice_600: Laobaojun: miss diminutive: 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.

Ah!  The real traditional approach.
Seriously, the European and Latin tradition of mistresses has a lot to do with not divorcing even though the passion and romance are out of the marriage.  Wifey has perpetual headache, hubby doesn't, no need for violence or the courts.  Amazing what adults can sort out if they are rational about it.

Yeah it's nice till the mistress gets pregnant so the mistress needs money now to take care of Daddy's little secret.

Falling down the stairs is free.


Not the defence lawyer though.
 
2014-01-15 12:19:02 PM  

MBooda: Dr Dreidel:

"Punishment"? Because they want to end their marriage, they deserve judicial "punishment", even just a reprimand?

Only if it was a judicial marriage.  You live by the sword, you die by the sword.


The fark does that even mean? Because a judge signed off on a marriage, a (different) judge has to make sure both of you "suffer" for agreeing that it's time to end the marriage? If a judge agrees with the decision to split, can he sign off on a divorce without berating the couple? How many "bad" words is the court allowed to use in this "punishment", or is it free to express its disgust using whatever language the court feels is appropriate? Should this scorn be equally split among the soon-to-be-divorced, split according to any "division of property" agreements, or is that up to the judge's discretion?

And AFAIK, in locales that require an "ordained person" or JoP (or whatever) to sign off, even if a priest/holyperson "marries" you, the licensure document they sign, they sign in their capacity as JoP, not "holyperson". So even Father Damian marrying you would be a "judicial marriage" (else you run into church/state problems, n'est-ce pas?). So WTF are you talking about?

Is this just an "Other people need to face consequences for doing things I find morally wrong" thing?
 
2014-01-15 12:19:09 PM  

vicioushobbit: Aaaaand the reason you had to get a mail-order bride is clear.
Such a keeper.  Grats to your wife for landing you.


As a transaction they are both getting what they paid for.
 
2014-01-15 12:21:07 PM  

jst3p: vicioushobbit: Aaaaand the reason you had to get a mail-order bride is clear.
Such a keeper.  Grats to your wife for landing you.

As a transaction they are both getting what they paid for.


This is true.  I wonder what country he'll turn to next when she decides she wants something more to life than receiving his noodle in exchange for citizenry?  He'll probably write off Russia as a whole, move to a tropical region.
 
2014-01-15 12:21:09 PM  
mister aj:


Wow,  Why would ANY woman not want to drop her panties and suck your dick?

I still don't believe you and think you're just here to troll.  But that is neither here nor there.

Enjoy your fantasy life.

And BTW, here's your fantastic lights on take it up the ass russian beauty in 25 years.

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com

of course, by then you will have dumped her for the next model, you studman69 you.
 
2014-01-15 12:22:30 PM  

wildcardjack: No one disclosed that there were happy pills I was supposed to force her to take


How do you not know your fianceé is taking happy pills on a regular basis to stop her psychotic episodes?

wildcardjack: And I look back at it now and realize the signs.


Fair enough.  I guess all I'm sayin is people need to be a bit more careful about who they marry.  It's supposed to have an actual meaning and I don't think people take it as seriously as it should be.I think pretty much every single divorce should have happened but in some of those divorces those people shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.  See for instance comments like these:

Satan's Bunny Slippers: Oh, I see. So people should stay together forever? Despite humans changing/growing/coming to opposing ideals?


No, of course not.  Marriage is a promise to change and grow together.  If that's not you, then don't get married.

The Muthaship: When one person totally sabotages the relationship and contributes way less than the other person, why should there be no difference in equity at the separation?


Marriage is an equal sharing of everything in the relationship.  If that's not you, then don't get married.

It seems to many people marriage is a promise "as long as things are still good, we'll split things equally and stick together."  What an earth shattering promise.  That's called "having a girlfriend."  Marriage is a promise "if shiat hits the fan, we'll still work it out."

If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.  If you don't like it, don't get married or have kids.
 
2014-01-15 12:22:40 PM  

vicioushobbit: jst3p: vicioushobbit: Aaaaand the reason you had to get a mail-order bride is clear.
Such a keeper.  Grats to your wife for landing you.

As a transaction they are both getting what they paid for.

This is true.  I wonder what country he'll turn to next when she decides she wants something more to life than receiving his noodle in exchange for citizenry?  He'll probably write off Russia as a whole, move to a tropical region.


He seems to value docile and obedient. I would go with Asia. You need an exit strategy though, don't want to hold on too long...

i.imgur.com
 
2014-01-15 12:24:53 PM  

Laobaojun: Ya' know, just maybe there would be less incentive for this sort of law, if it was a little harder to get married.  Any pair of drunken dumb butts can get married with minimal effort or thought, and want to get divorced just as easily.

If you had to go thru as much education and testing to get married as you do to get a drivers license,  maybe the demand for divorce would drop off.

/witnessed way too many people in marriages that were too immature to be married to anyone much less an equally immature person.


We should then add parents and family to the shaming business too. They should have done more to prevent them from making the worse mistake they will ever made. Bad marriages make more bad marriages when the kids grow up in said marriage.
 
2014-01-15 12:25:00 PM  

jst3p: He seems to value docile and obedient. I would go with Asia. You need an exit strategy though, don't want to hold on too long...

i.imgur.com


I can't stop laughing at the age 120 lady.  Does that make me racist or heightist?
 
2014-01-15 12:29:56 PM  

lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.


Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.
 
2014-01-15 12:30:01 PM  

Dr Dreidel: MBooda: Dr Dreidel:

"Punishment"? Because they want to end their marriage, they deserve judicial "punishment", even just a reprimand?

Only if it was a judicial marriage.  You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

The fark does that even mean? Because a judge signed off on a marriage, a (different) judge has to make sure both of you "suffer" for agreeing that it's time to end the marriage? If a judge agrees with the decision to split, can he sign off on a divorce without berating the couple? How many "bad" words is the court allowed to use in this "punishment", or is it free to express its disgust using whatever language the court feels is appropriate? Should this scorn be equally split among the soon-to-be-divorced, split according to any "division of property" agreements, or is that up to the judge's discretion?

And AFAIK, in locales that require an "ordained person" or JoP (or whatever) to sign off, even if a priest/holyperson "marries" you, the licensure document they sign, they sign in their capacity as JoP, not "holyperson". So even Father Damian marrying you would be a "judicial marriage" (else you run into church/state problems, n'est-ce pas?). So WTF are you talking about?

Is this just an "Other people need to face consequences for doing things I find morally wrong" thing?


I know in my church you have to take a class in order to get married in a church wedding also have to be going to church on Sunday for a few month.
So if we want to give blame here let's blame secularism for making it so easy since they are the ones who run the Las Vegas drive though weddings
 
2014-01-15 12:31:13 PM  

Dr Dreidel: MBooda: Dr Dreidel:

"Punishment"? Because they want to end their marriage, they deserve judicial "punishment", even just a reprimand?

Only if it was a judicial marriage.  You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

The fark does that even mean? Because a judge signed off on a marriage, a (different) judge has to make sure both of you "suffer" for agreeing that it's time to end the marriage? If a judge agrees with the decision to split, can he sign off on a divorce without berating the couple? How many "bad" words is the court allowed to use in this "punishment", or is it free to express its disgust using whatever language the court feels is appropriate? Should this scorn be equally split among the soon-to-be-divorced, split according to any "division of property" agreements, or is that up to the judge's discretion?

And AFAIK, in locales that require an "ordained person" or JoP (or whatever) to sign off, even if a priest/holyperson "marries" you, the licensure document they sign, they sign in their capacity as JoP, not "holyperson". So even Father Damian marrying you would be a "judicial marriage" (else you run into church/state problems, n'est-ce pas?). So WTF are you talking about?

Is this just an "Other people need to face consequences for doing things I find morally wrong" thing?


Some Ordained need you to take a class at the church before they sign or have a consultation.
 
2014-01-15 12:31:18 PM  
"We are told Britain has changed and we have to accept it but don't we have a responsibility to speak out for what's right?"
www.zap2it.com
 
2014-01-15 12:32:02 PM  

lennavan: Marriage is an equal sharing of everything in the relationship.  If that's not you, then don't get married.

It seems to many people marriage is a promise "as long as things are still good, we'll split things equally and stick together."  What an earth shattering promise.  That's called "having a girlfriend."  Marriage is a promise "if shiat hits the fan, we'll still work it out."


Maybe marriage means different things to different people and you should let them decide for themselves what they want it to be. So long as the two people who are getting married have similar expectations it's all good, right?
 
2014-01-15 12:32:38 PM  

alice_600: I know in my church you have to take a class in order to get married in a church wedding also have to be going to church on Sunday for a few month.
So if we want to give blame here let's blame secularism for making it so easy since they are the ones who run the Las Vegas drive though weddings


Why should anyone be blamed?
Why is it wrong that two people who drift apart should be able to split?

You're applying a whole heap of moral judgement there. First explain to me why a rising divorce rate is a bad thing.
 
2014-01-15 12:32:59 PM  

jst3p: lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.

Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.


That's the point.  "Choosing" to be together unless things get sticky is dating.  Marriage is a commitment to stay together, to become family.
 
2014-01-15 12:34:33 PM  

jst3p: lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.

Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.


I would think if you chose to be with someone, that would be a stronger obligation than if you did not choose to be with them.  Not that I disagree with your conclusion, I just think the reason is awkward.  Either way, after your kid turns 18, if you "grow apart" from your kid, I still think you're a shiatty parent.

I'm not against divorce, I just think marriage shouldn't be taken so lightly.  I think everyone who files for a no-fault divorce is basically admitting they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.
 
2014-01-15 12:34:35 PM  

jcb274: That's the point. "Choosing" to be together unless things get sticky is dating. Marriage is a commitment to stay together, to become family.


And if both decide that's not what they want any more, who are you to tell them they must stay together in a loveless marriage and grow to hate the other as a burden?

Why is that a desirable situation?
 
2014-01-15 12:34:41 PM  
lennavan:

Marriage is a promise to change and grow together.  If that's not you, then don't get married. stay together no matter what, and become so completely miserable one of you will resort to the last resort.  Murder/suicide, take your pick.  That's the only way to end a marriage.

Gotcha.
 
2014-01-15 12:35:22 PM  

jst3p: lennavan: Marriage is an equal sharing of everything in the relationship.  If that's not you, then don't get married.

It seems to many people marriage is a promise "as long as things are still good, we'll split things equally and stick together."  What an earth shattering promise.  That's called "having a girlfriend."  Marriage is a promise "if shiat hits the fan, we'll still work it out."

Maybe marriage means different things to different people and you should let them decide for themselves what they want it to be. So long as the two people who are getting married have similar expectations it's all good, right?


This sounds fine in principle.  But what, exactly, is the difference between dating and marriage if they are both such loose commitments?
 
2014-01-15 12:35:37 PM  

jcb274: jst3p: lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.

Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.

That's the point.  "Choosing" to be together unless things get sticky is dating.   Marriage is a commitment to stay together, to become family.


No matter what? What if my wife drowns my kid in the bathtub?
 
2014-01-15 12:36:41 PM  

Gothnet: jcb274: That's the point. "Choosing" to be together unless things get sticky is dating. Marriage is a commitment to stay together, to become family.

And if both decide that's not what they want any more, who are you to tell them they must stay together in a loveless marriage and grow to hate the other as a burden?

Why is that a desirable situation?


That's fine.  I'm more arguing against flippant marriages than divorces of flippant marriages.
 
2014-01-15 12:37:50 PM  

jcb274: jst3p: lennavan: Marriage is an equal sharing of everything in the relationship.  If that's not you, then don't get married.

It seems to many people marriage is a promise "as long as things are still good, we'll split things equally and stick together."  What an earth shattering promise.  That's called "having a girlfriend."  Marriage is a promise "if shiat hits the fan, we'll still work it out."

Maybe marriage means different things to different people and you should let them decide for themselves what they want it to be. So long as the two people who are getting married have similar expectations it's all good, right?

This sounds fine in principle.  But what, exactly, is the difference between dating and marriage if they are both such loose commitments?


Well, if it does work out forever (as is the hope for most people I assume) then there are plenty of legal benefits that married couples enjoy. And it isn't a "loose" commitment. Divorce is "easy", but it often isn't simple. The idea that two people should stay together even if both are unhappy is an unhealthy one in my opinion.
 
2014-01-15 12:38:35 PM  
As big of a decision as getting married is maybe it should be a little tougher to do, or get out of (not counting infidelity or abuse).

If we made it tougher to get out of maybe people would think harder about doing it in the first place
 
2014-01-15 12:39:01 PM  

jst3p: jcb274: jst3p: lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.

Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.

That's the point.  "Choosing" to be together unless things get sticky is dating.   Marriage is a commitment to stay together, to become family.

No matter what? What if my wife drowns my kid in the bathtub?


Sure. Ok. You can have your bathtub drowning exception.  Can we discuss the real prevalent issue: that people who don't know each other get married and divorced because marriage is not a commitment to them?
 
2014-01-15 12:39:38 PM  

jcb274: jst3p: lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.

Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.

That's the point.  "Choosing" to be together unless things get sticky is dating.  Marriage is a commitment to stay together, to become family.


I dunno, I've dropped a lot of family over the years, never to care about them again.  Something about having "family" steal from you, or come out with a molester history, it just doesn't encourage fellowship.

There are times when "sticky" situations can be pushed through.  There are times that they can't be.  Who are YOU to decide what these times are, for the individuals getting divorced?
 
2014-01-15 12:40:34 PM  

alice_600: I know in my church you have to take a class in order to get married in a church wedding also have to be going to church on Sunday for a few month.
So if we want to give blame here let's blame secularism for making it so easy since they are the ones who run the Las Vegas drive though weddings


So what? That's about STARTING the marriage; we're discussing what does or should happen when they END the marriage.

// unless...are you saying that that same priest/holyperson should be the one doing the moralizing when they apply for divorce?
// I've seen what happens to religious folk when they have unhappy marriages - same things that happen in secular marriages that fall apart: sometimes it's like a gentle breeze briefly upsetting a sheaf of papers, sometimes it's an F5 tornado that levels a town
// so I don't think "secularism" is to blave either
 
2014-01-15 12:40:35 PM  

lennavan: I'm not against divorce, I just think marriage shouldn't be taken so lightly.  I think everyone who files for a no-fault divorce is basically admitting they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.


For you that is great. If Brittany Spears gets married then divorced in the same weekend how has that affected you at all? It is interesting how many people feel entitled to tell others how they should treat marriage.
 
2014-01-15 12:41:12 PM  
People get married and divorced.  Sometimes for reasons others don't agree with/approve of.  So farking what?  Since when is peer approval of a marriage or divorce required?

Whole lotta judgmental nellies ITT who think that whatever THEY believe is what the rest of the population should do.

Fark that.
 
2014-01-15 12:41:38 PM  

jcb274: Sure. Ok. You can have your bathtub drowning exception. Can we discuss the real prevalent issue: that people who don't know each other get married and divorced because marriage is not a commitment to them?


I don't really see why that's much of an issue. What other people do is up to them. They define their relationship, not the rest of us.
 
2014-01-15 12:42:12 PM  

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.

Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.

I would think if you chose to be with someone, that would be a stronger obligation than if you did not choose to be with them.  Not that I disagree with your conclusion, I just think the reason is awkward.  Either way, after your kid turns 18, if you "grow apart" from your kid, I still think you're a shiatty parent.

I'm not against divorce, I just think marriage shouldn't be taken so lightly.  I think everyone who files for a no-fault divorce is basically admitting they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.


I wonder what the statistics on "no-fault" divorces are, for people who file that way because neither wants to publicly shame the ex, particularly when there are children caught in the mix?
 
2014-01-15 12:43:22 PM  

jst3p: lennavan: Marriage is an equal sharing of everything in the relationship.  If that's not you, then don't get married.

It seems to many people marriage is a promise "as long as things are still good, we'll split things equally and stick together."  What an earth shattering promise.  That's called "having a girlfriend."  Marriage is a promise "if shiat hits the fan, we'll still work it out."

Maybe marriage means different things to different people and you should let them decide for themselves what they want it to be. So long as the two people who are getting married have similar expectations it's all good, right?


As someone who said in the thread has been divorced twice, you will know darn well there are many things about marriage people don't get to decide for themselves.  I'm sure you are very familiar with the relevant laws.

jst3p: No matter what? What if my wife drowns my kid in the bathtub?


No, not no matter what.  I'm not against divorce.  But if you filed for a "no fault" divorce, that means you shouldn't have gotten married.  I haven't gotten a divorce yet, nor am I a divorce lawyer, but I would be shocked if a judge wouldn't grant you a divorce because your wife drowned your kids in the bathtub.
 
2014-01-15 12:44:12 PM  
We must defend the sanctity of marriage by forcing unhappy people to remain together past their breaking points. This action will have no ill consequence.
 
2014-01-15 12:45:41 PM  

vicioushobbit: jcb274: jst3p: lennavan: If my kid turned out to be a psychotic violent douchebag, or we "grew apart" or I no longer wanted to financially support my kid, I imagine you'd all think I was an asshole parent because I should love my kid no matter what.  That's what marriage is.

Not the same. You and another adult choose to be together. The child didn't choose to be born thus your obligation to support the child is stronger than your obligation to stay in a marriage.

That's the point.  "Choosing" to be together unless things get sticky is dating.  Marriage is a commitment to stay together, to become family.

I dunno, I've dropped a lot of family over the years, never to care about them again.  Something about having "family" steal from you, or come out with a molester history, it just doesn't encourage fellowship.

There are times when "sticky" situations can be pushed through.  There are times that they can't be.  Who are YOU to decide what these times are, for the individuals getting divorced?


Gothnet: jcb274: Sure. Ok. You can have your bathtub drowning exception. Can we discuss the real prevalent issue: that people who don't know each other get married and divorced because marriage is not a commitment to them?

I don't really see why that's much of an issue. What other people do is up to them. They define their relationship, not the rest of us.


I guess I feel the same about both of these.  I haven't decided anything for anyone, except that it's ok to divorce your spouse if they drown your kid in a bathtub.  But there seems to be tremendous hurt and pain, even mentioned in this thread, that could have been avoided by showing more discretion about marriage.  Is it bad to ask for that?
 
2014-01-15 12:45:44 PM  
Did subby link to the wrong article or something?


Subby:
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

Actual article:
Politicians should judge parents who split up and criticise their life choices, a prominent Tory MP has said.
 
2014-01-15 12:45:51 PM  

GrizzlyPouch: As big of a decision as getting married is maybe it should be a little tougher to do, or get out of (not counting infidelity or abuse).

If we made it tougher to get out of maybe people would think harder about doing it in the first place


You are giving people way too much credit.  No one who is worth marrying goes into it thinking about getting out of it.  If you are going to legislate thought into the process, put it up front.
 
2014-01-15 12:46:54 PM  

jcb274: Sure. Ok. You can have your bathtub drowning exception.


So you agree marriage isn't always forever.


Can we discuss the real prevalent issue: that people who don't know each other get married and divorced because marriage is not a commitment to them?

I look at three levels of serious commitment, and marriage is the "lowest" one.

Marriage. I see it as a level of commitment, but it is the easiest of the three to get out of. It really is a "Let's do our best to make this work, we both want it to be forever" commitment.

Buying a house together. This is the next step of commitment. It the largest purchase most people will make in their life. And deciding you want out is a little trickier. With marriage, even if one doesn't want out it is going to happen. With a house you have to either both agree to get out at the same time, buy the other out or give up your equity. Breaking up with joint owning a house requires some real effort.

Having kids. This one will bind you for life. Even when the kids are grown you will see the ex at family functions, when grand kids are born etc. This is a pretty strong commitment to at least having that person in your life (and treating them with respect for the sake of the kid) for a very long time.


So, yeah to me marriage is more than dating, but forever? Hopefully, but probably not.
 
2014-01-15 12:47:01 PM  

lennavan: No, not no matter what. I'm not against divorce. But if you filed for a "no fault" divorce, that means you shouldn't have gotten married.


What judgemental crap.

Sometimes people drift apart regardless of best intentions, forcing them to stay together and then get involved in a blame game would be cruel, and saying they had no business getting married in the first place is bizarre. Maybe they stayed together a couple of decades, raised some kids and now find themselves with totally different goals in life. Doesn't mean the relationship was a sham from the start and nor does it mean it was a failure.
 
2014-01-15 12:47:04 PM  

Gothnet: alice_600: I know in my church you have to take a class in order to get married in a church wedding also have to be going to church on Sunday for a few month.
So if we want to give blame here let's blame secularism for making it so easy since they are the ones who run the Las Vegas drive though weddings

Why should anyone be blamed?
Why is it wrong that two people who drift apart should be able to split?

You're applying a whole heap of moral judgement there. First explain to me why a rising divorce rate is a bad thing.


Because some parents like what happened to my dad and my Mom should be tried for fraud and child abuse. My Mom had untreated psychological issues was forced to quit high school and his mother in law didn't tell him of the abuse in the family she just made it look like one big shiny happy Beaver Cleaverville. Also my Mom's age when she got married was 16, he was 21. Normally we would be in an uproar if we heard that in this modern age.
My Dad didn't grow a pair and tell his mother to get out of their house and leave my Mom alone. So she shares some blame in this marriage failing by not realizing her son is a man now and she needs to a get a life too.

You want my Opinion here is how I think it should be.

If you want to get married before 25 you need to be 18, have a drivers licence and at least an associates degree. You must attend six months of couples counselling, marriage classes, and parenting classes, (miss more than 3 classes of any combo you have to start all over again) submit to a drug and STDs test and then wam wedding day!
 
2014-01-15 12:47:13 PM  

Fano: Mentalpatient87: pkellmey: Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.

Just admit it, you want to watch people suffer. You're a sadist without a whip. A hastily built facade of Morality only serves to make you look like a sociopath AND a busybody.

This. Why should people that decided they can't stand to be together have to listen to some useless fellow in a poncy wig telling them they should, because *reasons*


The shameful decision is not getting divorced it's marrying the wrong person.
 
2014-01-15 12:48:53 PM  

MBooda: Satan's Bunny Slippers: 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.

Oh man, you used the people's public courthouse to carry out your ritual?  I bet you put up a Festivus pole there too.

You can say you don't subscribe to religion, but if you got married, you engaged in a spiritual ritual. Unless it was conducted by your lawyer or accountant in his office. (A cow-orker of mine actually did this.)

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.

Nope, I just think that people who engage in a spiritual ritual like marriage should stick to their dogmas.  And not use my tax money to make or clean up their messes.


Marriage has nothing to do with religion unless you choose to have a religious marriage.

Marriage has been a civil contract longer than a religious custom. Sure, religion has influenced it over the centuries, but that is the same as every other aspect of society.

In all jurisdictions I am aware off, a religious ceremony is meaningless unless you file a signed marriage certificate with the sate. In this aspect, the priest (or other official presiding) is effectively a special notary.
 
2014-01-15 12:49:03 PM  
Why should it be any harder to get out of a marriage then it was to get into it?  Getting into it requires planning, commitment, arrangements, etc.  Getting out is nothing more than realizing you've made a mistake.  Based on the judges logic we should also make it more difficult to terminate a pregnancy then it is to conceive one.  Lets have the courts go there and see how people react.
 
2014-01-15 12:50:10 PM  

jcb274:   But there seems to be tremendous hurt and pain, even mentioned in this thread, that could have been avoided by showing more discretion about marriage.  Is it bad to ask for that?


Might as well as for strawberry flavored unicorn piss.

Look, your ideal isn't a bad one, but when it comes to "lets shame people for their decisions", well that's just overstepping the bounds of just about everything and heading back to arranged marriages and the like.  It really is.  Just because you look at things one way, doesn't mean everyone has to see things your way.  And I don't know anyone who got married thinking "hey, I'll just get divorced later, no big deal".  Not even me, and I've been divorced twice as well.  Neither were no fault, just so you know.

But if a couple has a situation that while they don't want to continue to be married, yet neither has a desire to drag all their dirty laundry out into the open, who are you to say they must be forced to?

See what I'm getting at?
 
2014-01-15 12:51:29 PM  

alice_600: Because some parents like what happened to my dad and my Mom should be tried for fraud and child abuse. My Mom had untreated psychological issues was forced to quit high school and his mother in law didn't tell him of the abuse in the family she just made it look like one big shiny happy Beaver Cleaverville. Also my Mom's age when she got married was 16, he was 21. Normally we would be in an uproar if we heard that in this modern age.
My Dad didn't grow a pair and tell his mother to get out of their house and leave my Mom alone. So she shares some blame in this marriage failing by not realizing her son is a man now and she needs to a get a life too.

You want my Opinion here is how I think it should be.

If you want to get married before 25 you need to be 18, have a drivers licence and at least an associates degree. You must attend six months of couples counselling, marriage classes, and parenting classes, (miss more than 3 classes of any combo you have to start all over again) submit to a drug and STDs test and then wam wedding day!


Or we could make divorce easier and remove the social stigma, so people like your folks didn't feel forced to stay together when everything was obviously farked beyond recognition.

I'm sorry for your bad experiences, but I'm not sure that making marriage even more of a binding social contract would really help.

Also what about people who like drugs or don't want kids? No marriage for them?
 
2014-01-15 12:51:50 PM  

jst3p: Well, if it does work out forever (as is the hope for most people I assume) then there are plenty of legal benefits that married couples enjoy.


I'm all for non-married couples being allowed to enjoy those benefits a la carte.

jst3p: For you that is great. If Brittany Spears gets married then divorced in the same weekend how has that affected you at all?


It devalues the word marriage.  If people pick and choose what marriage means, then it means nothing.  Right now, when my wife is in the hospital and I show up and say "I'm her husband" the doctor knows that means I have made a legal obligation to care for her in many ways including financially for the rest of my life.  Because of that, the doctor will share her information with me and allow me to make medical decisions for her.  If marriage becomes meaningless, then those societal "perks" will begin to erode.

I don't care what you do or what you want to do.  Here, I am arguing words have meaning, the word marriage has a meaning and if you too would like to utilize that word to describe yourself, then you need to follow the minimum requirements of that meaning.  By all means, if you don't like it, do as you please but you don't get to change the meaning of words.
 
2014-01-15 12:52:34 PM  

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: Marriage is an equal sharing of everything in the relationship.  If that's not you, then don't get married.

It seems to many people marriage is a promise "as long as things are still good, we'll split things equally and stick together."  What an earth shattering promise.  That's called "having a girlfriend."  Marriage is a promise "if shiat hits the fan, we'll still work it out."

Maybe marriage means different things to different people and you should let them decide for themselves what they want it to be. So long as the two people who are getting married have similar expectations it's all good, right?

As someone who said in the thread has been divorced twice, you will know darn well there are many things about marriage people don't get to decide for themselves.  I'm sure you are very familiar with the relevant laws.


What does divorce have to do with people not getting to decide what getting married means to an individual. I am not following.

jst3p: No matter what? What if my wife drowns my kid in the bathtub?

No, not no matter what.  I'm not against divorce.  But if you filed for a "no fault" divorce, that means you shouldn't have gotten married.  I haven't gotten a divorce yet, nor am I a divorce lawyer, but I would be shocked if a judge wouldn't grant you a divorce because your wife drowned your kids in the bathtub.


I don't regret either of those marriages, I don't know how you figure I shouldn't have gotten married because I got divorced. Both marriages are part of what made me the person I am today, one gave me two great children. I am in a happy committed (though no marriage likely) relationship and I don't at all doubt that my past experiences contributed to my happiness today.
 
2014-01-15 12:53:46 PM  

jst3p: jcb274: Sure. Ok. You can have your bathtub drowning exception.

So you agree marriage isn't always forever.


Can we discuss the real prevalent issue: that people who don't know each other get married and divorced because marriage is not a commitment to them?

I look at three levels of serious commitment, and marriage is the "lowest" one.

Marriage. I see it as a level of commitment, but it is the easiest of the three to get out of. It really is a "Let's do our best to make this work, we both want it to be forever" commitment.

Buying a house together. This is the next step of commitment. It the largest purchase most people will make in their life. And deciding you want out is a little trickier. With marriage, even if one doesn't want out it is going to happen. With a house you have to either both agree to get out at the same time, buy the other out or give up your equity. Breaking up with joint owning a house requires some real effort.

Having kids. This one will bind you for life. Even when the kids are grown you will see the ex at family functions, when grand kids are born etc. This is a pretty strong commitment to at least having that person in your life (and treating them with respect for the sake of the kid) for a very long time.


So, yeah to me marriage is more than dating, but forever? Hopefully, but probably not.


Yeah.  Why would I tie myself to that absolute?  There are probably plenty of marriages filled with toxic terrible people that shouldn't be together.  My real point is that we commit to marriage without really  committingto it.  And maybe if we did, people would be a little happier in their relationships.
 
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 »






Report