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  
•       •       •

7019 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2014 at 10:09 AM (31 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



407 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-01-15 08:33:51 AM
This brave MP defending the social importance of committed relationships was the same one vigorously opposing the marriage equality bill earlier this year.
 
2014-01-15 08:36:28 AM
Last year rather.
 
2014-01-15 09:02:14 AM
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.
 
2014-01-15 10:03:43 AM
Dear Tories.

Kindly fark off and die in a fire.
 
2014-01-15 10:11:22 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.


Sanctity, man. SANCTITY.

/never forget
 
2014-01-15 10:11:35 AM
Christ.  They're like Republicans, but whinier.
 
2014-01-15 10:11:41 AM
Ironic, considering that their state religion was founded on the concept of divorce.
 
2014-01-15 10:12:17 AM
Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.
 
2014-01-15 10:13:02 AM
Easy: Divorce tax.  The State gets half.
 
2014-01-15 10:13:22 AM
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?
 
2014-01-15 10:14:33 AM

Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.


Your strawman is fat.
 
2014-01-15 10:14:36 AM
Just another reason why government shouldn't be involved in marriage.
 
2014-01-15 10:14:52 AM

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?


Because you signed the contract stating such.
 
2014-01-15 10:15:25 AM

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


Henry VIII introduced the concept of the disposable wife.  Divorce was merely one of many options he made available to him.  It's good to be king.
 
2014-01-15 10:16:34 AM

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


That was foolish of me.

Was it negotiable?
 
2014-01-15 10:16:34 AM
"For the sake of the country, we need to be judgmental. Besides, there are plenty of people who never cease to be judgmental about members of parliament."

That's because their lives are affected by the decisions you make, and they're prefer those decisions to not be farking stupid.
 
2014-01-15 10:18:44 AM
Can we please give the Tories and Repubitards their own country - maybe call it "Derptopia" - and just GET FARKING RID OF THEM!

I know the Conservative MPs aren't yet displaying even a shadow of the derpitude their big brothers in the GOP have, but I think they aspire to it. Out with them all! They clearly hate living in civilization anyway.
 
2014-01-15 10:18:59 AM
Marriage ain't for sissies.
 
2014-01-15 10:19:16 AM
Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.
 
2014-01-15 10:20:47 AM
I am in favor of divorce courts adopting a public shaming approach to marital split ups complete with heated lectures from the judges, wildly argued cases by the marital partners and closing remarks to rival that of Al Pacino's opening remarks in "And Justice For All".  Tape them, edit them and run them through syndication and you'll have rating numbers that will turn Judge Judy into a blubbering mass of tears.
 
2014-01-15 10:20:49 AM

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

Henry VIII introduced the concept of the disposable wife.  Divorce was merely one of many options he made available to him.  It's good to be king.


No, not really.  Plenty of English kings executed/divorced wives they didn't like in history.  Henry 8 was different in that he was married to a woman he couldn't kill without starting a war, and whose family had too many friends in the Vatican to divorce.  Then he married a woman he could behead, being an English noble, and then he did.
 
2014-01-15 10:21:59 AM
The only person who is a bigger than your ex-spouse is the loser who married them in the first place.
 
2014-01-15 10:22:20 AM

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


Like rain on your wedding day?
 
2014-01-15 10:24:26 AM

The Muthaship: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Because you signed the contract stating such

That was foolish of me.

Was it negotiable?


Yes, that's what a pre-nup is for.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:12 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.


Wouldn't work. In order to dissolve a contract, one party has to prove the other was ... at fault.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:15 AM
ITT: Paragons of marital bliss
 
2014-01-15 10:25:16 AM
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.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:20 AM

Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.


"Gerald Howarth told fellow MPs that they were entitled to be "judgemental" about the public because the public were always judging politicians."

Sounds like advice this guy could use.
 
2014-01-15 10:26:06 AM

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.
 
2014-01-15 10:26:29 AM

Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.


whatisthisidonteven
 
2014-01-15 10:26:57 AM
So, the Tories are the British equivalent of the GOP?
 
2014-01-15 10:27:53 AM
I gave my former wife a choice.  A) I file on grounds of adultery, force her and the dude she farked to appear in court,  and seek spousal support (she was an officer in the Navy and was making bank with BAH/BAS). B) I file on grounds of irreconcilable differences, and she signs the separation agreement stating that I get both the dogs, and am absolved of her credit card  and student loan debt.

She chose wisely for once in her life.

She later dragged that moron to California with her, married him in vegas, got deployed to Afghanistan six months later, and subsequently cheated on him during the year she was over there, and now she is getting divorced again.

/CSB
/whore
 
2014-01-15 10:29:20 AM

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
 
2014-01-15 10:29:50 AM

lennavan: Yes, that's what a pre-nup is for.


Oh yeah.

Those things are bulletproof!
 
2014-01-15 10:30:12 AM
The woman half of the couples, amiright?
 
2014-01-15 10:30:16 AM
If I were still married to my ex, I would have killed myself by now.

I thank my lucky stars every day for quick and easy divorce.
 
2014-01-15 10:30:59 AM

pkellmey: Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.


And they will never be the same
 
2014-01-15 10:32:18 AM
Just don't get married. It's an antiquated ritual anyway.
 
2014-01-15 10:33:23 AM

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


Why do you hate men? I mean if the State gets half, and the biatch gets half, why in the hell would a man ever get married?
 
2014-01-15 10:34:32 AM
Never mind his divorce rant his anti feminist "the women are out to get us" rant is even better.

/and when I say better I mean equally nonsensical
//accidentially read the article
///sorry
 
2014-01-15 10:35:05 AM
Done in one.  Last one out get the lights.
 
2014-01-15 10:35:15 AM

DubyaHater: Just don't get married. It's an antiquated ritual anyway.


It's a contract that the state recognizes giving the two partners special status towards each others medical treatment, inheritance, property, and any children they have together. In the United States it also gives them welfare in the form of tax breaks.
 
2014-01-15 10:35:50 AM

The Muthaship: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Because you signed the contract stating such

That was foolish of me.

Was it negotiable?


It's called a pre-nup and it is totally negotiable.
 
2014-01-15 10:39:40 AM
Shame can be good when someone's done a bad thing. But divorce? Are we gonna start covering our women too? Maybe a little pillory in the public square?
 
2014-01-15 10:41:50 AM

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*
 
2014-01-15 10:43:32 AM

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 ?
 
2014-01-15 10:44:20 AM

Slaves2Darkness: DubyaHater: Just don't get married. It's an antiquated ritual anyway.

It's a contract that the state recognizes giving the two partners special status towards each others medical treatment, inheritance, property, and any children they have together. In the United States it also gives them welfare in the form of tax breaks.


As long as you stay married. And 50% of marriages end in divorce. What advantages have you gained at that point?
 
2014-01-15 10:44:48 AM

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*


Maybe they just can't reach climax unless they're screaming ZERO SYMPATHY!
 
2014-01-15 10:48:34 AM
i1.kym-cdn.com
/except it doesn't go far enough
 
2014-01-15 10:49:37 AM
Rapmaster2000

Christ. They're like Republicans, but whinier.

....
techgeek07

So, the Tories are the British equivalent of the GOP?

From the same group that whines like a biatch if someone mentions democrats or mentions politics while not in the political tab. Hypocrites are hypocritical.
 
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 [TotalFark]
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 [TotalFark]
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 [TotalFark]
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?
 
2014-01-15 11:35:53 AM

Rapmaster2000: Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.

Your strawman is fat.


Eyup.  Because the spoons and the marketing made it fat.  Its lack of control or wit had nothing to do with anything.
 
2014-01-15 11:36:33 AM
The rise of feminist thought is scary and we should judge people even though we don't know what is going on in their lives? Wow.
 
2014-01-15 11:36:37 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.


And you can order them right off the internet.
 
2014-01-15 11:37:38 AM

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


So you picked a bad one, then picked a good one, and extrapolated that to million of women in two different countries? Logic isn't your strong point, is it?

I married a really, really bad one, but I don't think every man in America is a psychotic bi-sexual stalker. Because I take responsibility for my part in picking his psycho ass.
 
2014-01-15 11:37:38 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.


lennavan: 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.


See, she wasn't the same person off her meds. No one disclosed that there were happy pills I was supposed to force her to take until after the restraining order and the 72 hour psychiatric hold. Oh, and once you've called the sheriff's deputies out to deal with a psych patient off her meds she's never going to like you again.

And I look back at it now and realize the signs. My "evil monster of a mother-inlaw" was mostly nice, hadn't meant to raise the craze, and my image of her had been distorted by her portrayal by my crazy redhead. She had imaginary country kin built from family VHS tapes she had found somewhere, and if she needed a tale she'd attribute something to them.

Now, for the "gods must be crazy" factor. After all that drama I moved to Tyler, Tx, to go to school and get away from everything. I ran into a taller, pudgier clone of her. Then I ran into a middle aged clone. Then I saw this cute blonde in the grocery store one day I realized was a half scandinavian version of her. I thought I was going mad. And then it was all settled one day when I saw five of them at once on a dune buggy half way between Tyler and Kilgore. There's a whole clan of her kin right there, possibly a bit inbred. After I graduated I thought about hiring a detective to inform her about her kin in Smith county, but I figured they hadn't done anything wrong to me so I shouldn't subject them to her.
 
2014-01-15 11:40:24 AM
cryinoutloud:

I married a really, really bad one, but I don't think every man in America is a psychotic bi-sexual stalker. Because I take responsibility for my part in picking his psycho ass.

Wait, you were married to ex too?

/feel the same way you do, just because I picked a bad one doesn't mean all men suck.
//just the good ones, IYKWIMAITYD  ;)
 
2014-01-15 11:43:25 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.


I've seen films that would appear to contradict your contention...
 
2014-01-15 11:43:37 AM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: 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.


OK, who let the shill for lovelyruskieladieswelikeyoulongtime.com in the door?
 
2014-01-15 11:43:48 AM

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*


It's not like they signed a legal contract or anything... Wait. Yes they did. If you don't like signing papers that bind you to anything, marriage is not your first option.
 
2014-01-15 11:44:36 AM

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.
 
2014-01-15 11:46:13 AM
UK Problems.
 
2014-01-15 11:46:39 AM

techgeek07: 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.

And you can order them right off the internet.


You gotta specify that they put airholes on the box or they'll get cheap and the tramp arrives DOA with no refund.

/learned the hard way
 
2014-01-15 11:46:59 AM
In England during the middle ages weddings were easy they were done anywhere and all you needed was to take vows and you can go hop in bed together. There needed no witnesses no ring nothing.
The problem was this ment that parents had no say in thier children's affairs since the youngest a child could consent was 7 years old. One marriage was a 5 year old to a 80 year old man. The Catholic church of the time started talking about this and desided "Okay that's enough!" and set the rules. The age of marriage had to be at least 12, there had to be a ceremony within the church and witnesses. This was for life because well if disease didn't get ya something else would.
 
2014-01-15 11:47:04 AM

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.
 
2014-01-15 11:49:03 AM

Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.


Look how stupid you are!
 
2014-01-15 11:49:31 AM
Apply this to ALL legal contracts and I'm fine with it.
Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract, by the way.
Want to get out of a bad business deal?  PUNISHMENT
 
2014-01-15 11:49:46 AM

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.



This makes no sense.


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.)

I don't agree that a judge is a religious figurehead.

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.


The story is UK.  It is not your tax money doing anything.

I'm terribly sorry that you feel so strongly against marriage.

Thank you for your views.
 
2014-01-15 11:49:49 AM
Pretty sure the people of the UK (i.e. the sovereigns of the country) hired you to do a job mister MP. They have a right to be critical and judgmental about how well you do it. It is bad form for a public servant to criticize his masters.
 
2014-01-15 11:50:45 AM

pkellmey: 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*

It's not like they signed a legal contract or anything... Wait. Yes they did. If you don't like signing papers that bind you to anything, marriage is not your first option.


So when people dissolve a business or end any number of legal activities they need to hear a lecture?
 
2014-01-15 11:50:52 AM

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.


Yep. Describes my situation as well. Was married 13 years, and despite the occasional fight, we both just kind of realized that we were more just friends and business partners that didn't really have anything in common other than our kids. No animosity, no using the kids as pawns, no hatred or revenge plots.
 
2014-01-15 11:51:35 AM

MBooda: if you got married, you engaged in a spiritual ritual.


This is true of none of the last 3 weddings I've been to.
 
2014-01-15 11:51:39 AM

DrunkBastard: 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.


The disturbing thing here is that you make a joke in jest, but your profile says you're in the right geographical area to meet her... Was she going by Crystal or Katrina when you knew her? I mean, provided we're both talking about a plump redhead with a tendency to collect animals and a penchant for frogs in particular, wanted to study herpetology.

/Yes, I was amused when NOLa got hit by Katrina
//I could have told you that was going to destroy everything.
 
2014-01-15 11:52:07 AM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: You'll get some nibbles.


I nibbled him right into my filter, personally.  thread number + "very misogynistic"

If he was merely trolling, then that's fine - wasn't a fun troller
 
2014-01-15 11:52:18 AM

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

So you picked a bad one, then picked a good one, and extrapolated that to million of women in two different countries? Logic isn't your strong point, is it?

I married a really, really bad one, but I don't think every man in America is a psychotic bi-sexual stalker. Because I take responsibility for my part in picking his psycho ass.


This.  Way to blanket statement, AJ.  Even if you had a number of bad experiences in this country, that doesn't mean ALL women in this country are bad.

So, when you went through these 10 miserable years, were you looking for women with a compatible personality, or just those who'd dress up like whores and pay attention to you for the cost of a few drinks or a dinner?

/hmm, what's the real common denominator in those 10 years of dates...
 
2014-01-15 11:53:40 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.


You sound like a pretty weak individual that can't handle adversity. Your current wife married you in exchange for getting out of her country, that sounds like whoring to me.
 
2014-01-15 11:54:33 AM

cryinoutloud: So you picked a bad one, then picked a good one, and extrapolated that to million of women in two different countries? Logic isn't your strong point, is it?


No, he probably picked one that had her own will and life to lead, and then got a complacent one who was "trained" to let the man make all the decisions.  The "wrong" one was himself, not the other person.
 
2014-01-15 11:54:35 AM
Worse make them stay married.
 
2014-01-15 11:54:54 AM

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*


Because they gave the government that power willingly, by getting married in the first place.

What a racket.
 
2014-01-15 11:55:33 AM

Fano: pkellmey: 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*

It's not like they signed a legal contract or anything... Wait. Yes they did. If you don't like signing papers that bind you to anything, marriage is not your first option.

So when people dissolve a business or end any number of legal activities they need to hear a lecture?


I have no idea where you are getting a lecture from anything I posted. Perhaps you are reading a little too much into fark posts.
 
2014-01-15 11:55:49 AM

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.

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.


My parents during their divorce could have used some shaming because they married when Dad was 21 and Mom was 16 and dropped out of school. Dad didn't rein in his Mom and tell her to go home and leave them alone.
Mom needed to quit looking for someone to replace her Dad after he died two years previously.

So yeah there needs to be blame laid on people who didn't use thier brains and now are divorcing after not having the IQ points to leave someone who was beating them, using them, and had problems and then had the dumbass idea that marriage and having a kid will make it all better.
 
2014-01-15 11:56:56 AM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: MBooda: Satan's Bunny Slippers: MBooda:

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.)

I don't agree that a judge is a religious figurehead.


Exactly. Judges should not be used to conduct religious rituals, like marriages.

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.

The story is UK.  It is not your tax money doing anything.


Don't think the same thing happens in the YewAssEh?

I'm terribly sorry that you feel so strongly against marriage.

Thank you for your views.


Again, I'm NOT against marriage.  Just people using tax revenue and public facilities to conduct it.

Being against marriage is like being against hurricanes, earthquakes or other natural disasters.  They happen, nothing I can do about it.
 
2014-01-15 11:57:51 AM

IamAwake: Satan's Bunny Slippers: You'll get some nibbles.

I nibbled him right into my filter, personally.  thread number + "very misogynistic"

If he was merely trolling, then that's fine - wasn't a fun troller


wherewevent.files.wordpress.com

I went right here with him.
 
2014-01-15 12:00:14 PM

MBooda: Satan's Bunny Slippers: 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.


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

// anyone who's ever had to deal with divorce lawyers, that's punishment enough
// brother is currently divorcing his lawyer (soon-to-be-ex) wife, and both she and her lawyer seem to think this entitles her to everything she wants (to say nothing of their collective, and my brother's individually, negative net worth)
// judge awarded my brother the custody he asked for, essentially agreeing with him that she doesn't quite have the capacity to care for one kid, let alone 3 (under 5 years old, all; thank the gods her parents help)
 
2014-01-15 12:00:34 PM

MBooda: Again, I'm NOT against marriage.  Just people using tax revenue and public facilities to conduct it.


You want my advice? Learn to live with it.


Here is a good coping method. Clearly you do like  some of the things that taxes pay for right? Just imagine the dollars they got from you are the ones they used to pay for those things and the dollars they got from other people pay for the things you don't like.
 
2014-01-15 12:01:03 PM

pkellmey: Fano: pkellmey: 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*

It's not like they signed a legal contract or anything... Wait. Yes they did. If you don't like signing papers that bind you to anything, marriage is not your first option.

So when people dissolve a business or end any number of legal activities they need to hear a lecture?

I have no idea where you are getting a lecture from anything I posted. Perhaps you are reading a little too much into fark posts.


Headline and article.

The consequences of divorce are enough without the "judging" part.
 
2014-01-15 12:01:45 PM
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.
 
2014-01-15 12:02:27 PM

thurstonxhowell: MBooda: if you got married, you engaged in a spiritual ritual.

This is true of none of the last 3 weddings I've been to.


So you attended them for purely legal/economic reasons?
 
2014-01-15 12:03:21 PM

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.


Wait until the Asian time vortex kicks in and she becomes a mamuschka crone overnight.
 
2014-01-15 12:04:01 PM

Dirkax2: "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?


That someone who put himself forward to be judged by the people would biatch that people would judge him and result it people judging him more?

I am torn between finding it to be retarded and funny.
 
2014-01-15 12:06:53 PM

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.
 
2014-01-15 12:08:12 PM

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.
 
2014-01-15 12:08:12 PM

Fano: pkellmey: Fano: pkellmey: 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*

It's not like they signed a legal contract or anything... Wait. Yes they did. If you don't like signing papers that bind you to anything, marriage is not your first option.

So when people dissolve a business or end any number of legal activities they need to hear a lecture?

I have no idea where you are getting a lecture from anything I posted. Perhaps you are reading a little too much into fark posts.

Headline and article.

The consequences of divorce are enough without the "judging" part.


I'm not the subby and never said I was, and as you pointed out consquences are independent of lectures, so it was not part of the post. Don't try to confuse your confusion.
 
2014-01-15 12:08:39 PM

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.
 
2014-01-15 12:08:49 PM
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.
 
2014-01-15 12:09:14 PM
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.
 
2014-01-15 12:10:03 PM

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.
 
2014-01-15 12:10:35 PM
Yeah because we *really* need to force people who hate each other to stay married. That never used to result in domesatic violence, lives full of misery or anything bad at all.

Go fark yourself politician.
 
2014-01-15 12:11:16 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.


This, I had to wait three months to get divorced, but I could get married tomorrow if I wanted to. The waiting period is on the wrong part of the process.
 
2014-01-15 12:11:54 PM

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 first statement, 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.


Fark filter strikes again.
 
2014-01-15 12:12:38 PM

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.
 
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.
 
2014-01-15 12:54:15 PM
It devalues the word marriage.

DRINK!

 
2014-01-15 12:55:13 PM

Dr Dreidel: 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


The classes are taught by a social worker who who works for "Lutheran Child and Family services," Someone comes to the church and teach how to make a lasting marriage. How to stay faithful to each other, solve disputes and argue fair.
 
2014-01-15 12:55:59 PM

Gothnet: Sometimes people drift apart regardless of best intentions


It's really farking sad that you think marriage is about intentions rather than effort or actions.  Sorry, I totally intended to give a shiat about you, it just didn't happen.  Oh well.

Gothnet: forcing them to stay together


You dipshiat, I'm not for less people getting divorced, I'm for less people getting married.
 
2014-01-15 12:56:13 PM

lennavan: 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.



The minimum requirements are going to the courthouse and getting a piece of paper signed. I did that. Twice. I met your standard. While I was married I was no less her husband than you are to your wife. Divorce doesn't make marriage meaningless.
 
2014-01-15 12:58:07 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: 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?


So a happy relationship that people entered into after a mature, mutual understanding of each other that serves as the foundation for a happy life is now as unlikely as "strawberry flavored unicorn piss?"  That illustrates my point exactly.  By and large, marriage has become a joke to the point where I get crap for suggesting that it shouldn't be a joke.

Further, I realize I'm commenting against the grain of "those crazy Tories," but I never said I supported the MP in the article.  Shaming people who get divorces is not a remedy for what I perceive as a lack of commitment when a couple is getting married.
 
2014-01-15 12:58:35 PM

jcb274: 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.


It took a lot of thought  before I decided to divorce my kids mom. But in talking to several peers whose parents stayed together "for the kid" it became apparent to me that staying together in a bitter loveless co-existence was likely to be more toxic than divorce.

I don't know that I made the right choice but I think and hope so, for their sake and for mine.
 
2014-01-15 12:59:15 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: It devalues the word marriage.

DRINK!


Seriously, I thought the gay marriage thread was over there.
 
2014-01-15 12:59:54 PM

jst3p: I don't know how you figure I shouldn't have gotten married because I got divorced


Well, you shouldn't have gotten married because... you got divorced.  When you got married, it was a contract until you died.  When you got divorced, you told a judge you were wrong about that whole until death bit and you didn't want that contract anymore.

jst3p: Both marriages relationships are part of what made me the person I am today, one gave me two great children


FTFY.  I'm not against relationships, even long-term committed ones.

jst3p: I am in a happy committed (though no marriage likely)


Why aren't you going to get married?  Because you realized you shouldn't have gotten married in those first two, right?
 
2014-01-15 01:01:54 PM

lennavan: It's really farking sad that you think marriage is about intentions rather than effort or actions. Sorry, I totally intended to give a shiat about you, it just didn't happen. Oh well.


It might have happened for 30 years, and then stopped. People are odd like that. That you would judge a multi-decade commitment as a waste of time and wrong to embark upon is bizarre and judgemental.

lennavan: You dipshiat, I'm not for less people getting divorced, I'm for less people getting married.


I didn't say you were for less divorce you pompous twat, that's what TFA is about. I said your views were judgemental and bizarre. And I stand by it.
 
2014-01-15 01:02:17 PM
jcb274:
So a happy relationship that people entered into after a mature, mutual understanding of each other that serves as the foundation for a happy life is now as unlikely as "strawberry flavored unicorn piss?"  That illustrates my point exactly.  By and large, marriage has become a joke to the point where I get crap for suggesting that it shouldn't be a joke.

Further, I realize I'm commenting against the grain of "those crazy Tories," but I never said I supported the MP in the article.  Shaming people who get divorces is not a remedy for what I perceive as a lack of commitment when a couple is getting married.


No.  Who are you to say what constitutes an acceptable degree of "mature, mutual understanding"?

You are the one who says marriage has become a joke.  I am divorced. So then, how dare you devalue me and my decisions to marry? By what delineation am I a failure to you?

Show your work.
 
2014-01-15 01:02:25 PM

jst3p: jcb274: 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.

It took a lot of thought  before I decided to divorce my kids mom. But in talking to several peers whose parents stayed together "for the kid" it became apparent to me that staying together in a bitter loveless co-existence was likely to be more toxic than divorce.

I don't know that I made the right choice but I think and hope so, for their sake and for mine.


Well of course I hope you made the right choice too.  I'm sure it was an incredibly difficult decision and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.  And I wouldn't assume that you are a person who didn't put in the effort to make sure that the relationship is going to work.  But I think we can agree that there are lots of people who don't put the work in before or during a marriage and end up "after" one.
 
2014-01-15 01:02:42 PM

jcb274: So a happy relationship that people entered into after a mature, mutual understanding of each other that serves as the foundation for a happy life is now as unlikely as "strawberry flavored unicorn piss?"  That illustrates my point exactly.  By and large, marriage has become a joke to the point where I get crap for suggesting that it shouldn't be a joke.


You make good point. On the other hand there are many scientists who conclude that lifetime monogamy among humans is a forced societal structure rather than a natural state.
 
2014-01-15 01:04:08 PM

jst3p: The minimum requirements are going to the courthouse and getting a piece of paper signed. I did that. Twice. I met your standard.


Was it just any random blank piece of paper?  Or perhaps are you being dishonest in your summary here?

jst3p: While I was married I was no less her husband than you are to your wife.


I'm not saying you were.

jst3p: Divorce doesn't make marriage meaningless.


A pretty decent definition of the word divorce would be "to render a marriage null/void/meaningless."  So uh, yeah it does.  Divorce doesn't make the relationship meaningless.
 
2014-01-15 01:06:43 PM

lennavan: jst3p: I don't know how you figure I shouldn't have gotten married because I got divorced

Well, you shouldn't have gotten married because... you got divorced.


I normally like you but this is one of the dumbest things I have seen in awhile. Getting divorced isn't saying I don't think I should have gotten married. It is saying I don't want to be in this marriage any longer. An annulment is saying "I never should have been married".


jst3p: I am in a happy committed (though no marriage likely)

Why aren't you going to get married?  Because you realized you shouldn't have gotten married in those first two, right?


Not at all. It has more to do with co-mingling finances when we both have kids but none common. We are both high wage earners and it is simpler to remain unmarried.
 
2014-01-15 01:07:21 PM

jst3p: Satan's Bunny Slippers: It devalues the word marriage.

DRINK!

Seriously, I thought the gay marriage thread was over there.


Oh, okay so you disagree that this devalues the word marriage.  Got it.

jst3p: jcb274: So a happy relationship that people entered into after a mature, mutual understanding of each other that serves as the foundation for a happy life is now as unlikely as "strawberry flavored unicorn piss?" That illustrates my point exactly. By and large, marriage has become a joke to the point where I get crap for suggesting that it shouldn't be a joke.

You make good point
.


Oh, okay, so you agree this devalues the word marriage.  Wait, what?
 
2014-01-15 01:07:51 PM

lennavan: A pretty decent definition of the word divorce would be "to render a marriage null/void/meaningless." So uh, yeah it does. Divorce doesn't make the relationship meaningless.


Meh. Marriage is a scoail construct and means what we want it to mean.

I'm sorry you're upset that we're moving to a time when it means what the two people in the marriage say it means instead of what's imposed on them by society,
 
2014-01-15 01:08:34 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: 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.


THIS.
 
2014-01-15 01:08:46 PM
lennavan:

A pretty decent definition of the word divorce would be "to render a marriage null/void/meaningless."  So uh, yeah it does.  Divorce doesn't make the relationship meaningless.

No.

Divorce =/= Annulment

Divorce (or the  dissolution of marriage) is the termination of a marital union, the canceling and/or reorganizing of the legal duties and responsibilities of marriage, thus dissolving the bonds of matrimony between a married couple under the rule of law of the particular country/state.

Divorce is unlike annulment, which declares the marriage null and void.
 
2014-01-15 01:09:23 PM

lennavan: jst3p: While I was married I was no less her husband than you are to your wife.

I'm not saying you were.


I'm saying your saying so doesn't make it true.

lennavan: jst3p: Divorce doesn't make marriage meaningless.

A pretty decent definition of the word divorce would be "to render a marriage null/void/meaningless."  So uh, yeah it does.


Now you are just being silly (I am trying to be nice because I still like you). My divorce doesn't make the word "marriage" meaningless. My divorce doesn't even make my marriage meaningless. Like I said, I learned a lot that changed who I am today because of those marriage and divorces.
 
2014-01-15 01:09:58 PM

alice_600: The classes are taught by a social worker who who works for "Lutheran Child and Family services," Someone comes to the church and teach how to make a lasting marriage. How to stay faithful to each other, solve disputes and argue fair.


Even though I've never tried to get married, church or not, I managed to learn some of those things on my own. It took several years of dating and cohabitation, but I learned. (And I've heard of such things before - they range from "here's what the Bible says about marriage: 'Be faithful; god's watching.' Now have fun, you crazy kids!" to "Leading relationship experts have the following 64,872 tips on how to nurture a successful, long-term relationship...")

Also, none of that has any bearing on why it should be OK - or mandatory - for a judge to reprimand people for daring to dissolve their union.
 
2014-01-15 01:10:30 PM

lennavan: Oh, okay, so you agree this devalues the word marriage.  Wait, what?


I meant the former part not the latter.
 
2014-01-15 01:10:53 PM

Gothnet: 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?


Hey Gothnet did you see what I did there?
In my made up marriage law I made it so that when you did divorce it wouldn't be that much of a financial burden for both parties possibly eliminating the need for child support.
They are educated enough by that they get the skills they need to make the marriage work. Make it more hurdles for them to jump over they start to see the other guy for who they really are. Making you double think about getting married.
But then again there will always be a stigma to anything because people are assholes.
 
2014-01-15 01:11:31 PM

jst3p: Not at all. It has more to do with co-mingling finances when we both have kids but none common. We are both high wage earners and it is simpler to remain unmarried.


Also known as marriage has meaning and you made a conscious decision that the meaning did not fit your desires.

jst3p: Getting divorced isn't saying I don't think I should have gotten married. It is saying I don't want to be in this marriage any longer. An annulment is saying "I never should have been married".


No, an annulment is saying "I was never married."  If you're admitting you were married, that's a divorce.
 
2014-01-15 01:12:13 PM

Gothnet: lennavan: A pretty decent definition of the word divorce would be "to render a marriage null/void/meaningless." So uh, yeah it does. Divorce doesn't make the relationship meaningless.

Meh. Marriage is a scoail construct and means what we want it to mean.

I'm sorry you're upset that we're moving to a time when it means what the two people in the marriage say it means instead of what's imposed on them by society,


This. More people should focus on their own family and not get so worked up about what others do if it doesn't affect them.
 
2014-01-15 01:13:13 PM

Dr Dreidel: alice_600: The classes are taught by a social worker who who works for "Lutheran Child and Family services," Someone comes to the church and teach how to make a lasting marriage. How to stay faithful to each other, solve disputes and argue fair.

Even though I've never tried to get married, church or not, I managed to learn some of those things on my own. It took several years of dating and cohabitation, but I learned. (And I've heard of such things before - they range from "here's what the Bible says about marriage: 'Be faithful; god's watching.' Now have fun, you crazy kids!" to "Leading relationship experts have the following 64,872 tips on how to nurture a successful, long-term relationship...")

Also, none of that has any bearing on why it should be OK - or mandatory - for a judge to reprimand people for daring to dissolve their union.


I was just saying we should do more to prevent divorce. It's really too easy for people to get married.
 
2014-01-15 01:13:20 PM

Gothnet: Meh. Marriage is a scoail construct and means what we want it to mean.


While you have your opinion and will no doubt clearly stick to it, you might want to read up on the relevant state laws before you get married.  Whether you want marriage to mean something or not won't help you in court.

Gothnet: I'm sorry you're upset that we're moving to a time when it means what the two people in the marriage say it means instead of what's imposed on them by society,


It doesn't matter how much you stomp your feet in court, there are state and federal laws that help define what marriage means.  Your opinion has no bearing on reality.
 
2014-01-15 01:15:05 PM

lennavan: Gothnet: Meh. Marriage is a scoail construct and means what we want it to mean.

While you have your opinion and will no doubt clearly stick to it, you might want to read up on the relevant state laws before you get married.  Whether you want marriage to mean something or not won't help you in court.

Gothnet: I'm sorry you're upset that we're moving to a time when it means what the two people in the marriage say it means instead of what's imposed on them by society,

It doesn't matter how much you stomp your feet in court, there are state and federal laws that help define what marriage means.  Your opinion has no bearing on reality.


BTW goths are kinda...last century.
 
2014-01-15 01:15:11 PM

jst3p: This. More people should focus on their own family and not get so worked up about what others do if it doesn't affect them.


Says the guy who wrote:

jst3p: This, I had to wait three months to get divorced, but I could get married tomorrow if I wanted to. The waiting period is on the wrong part of the process.

You do realize, you and I are arguing the exact same thing.  I'm just more open and honest about it.
 
2014-01-15 01:15:16 PM

lennavan: jst3p: Not at all. It has more to do with co-mingling finances when we both have kids but none common. We are both high wage earners and it is simpler to remain unmarried.

Also known as marriage has meaning and you made a conscious decision that the meaning did not fit your desires.


You are trying WAY too hard. It has nothing to do with the "meaning" of marriage and EVERYTHING to do with the legal aspects of it.

jst3p: Getting divorced isn't saying I don't think I should have gotten married. It is saying I don't want to be in this marriage any longer. An annulment is saying "I never should have been married".

No, an annulment is saying "I was never married."  If you're admitting you were married, that's a divorce.


That does not make divorce mean "I should have gotten married".

You seem to like to tell others what they should feel about something. When I got divorced I never once thought "I should not have been married." I was saying, quite simply, "I don't want to be in this marriage any longer."
 
2014-01-15 01:16:28 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: jcb274:
So a happy relationship that people entered into after a mature, mutual understanding of each other that serves as the foundation for a happy life is now as unlikely as "strawberry flavored unicorn piss?"  That illustrates my point exactly.  By and large, marriage has become a joke to the point where I get crap for suggesting that it shouldn't be a joke.

Further, I realize I'm commenting against the grain of "those crazy Tories," but I never said I supported the MP in the article.  Shaming people who get divorces is not a remedy for what I perceive as a lack of commitment when a couple is getting married.

No.  Who are you to say what constitutes an acceptable degree of "mature, mutual understanding"?

You are the one who says marriage has become a joke.  I am divorced. So then, how dare you devalue me and my decisions to marry? By what delineation am I a failure to you?

Show your work.


I don't know anything about you or your marriage.  So it's pretty presumptuous to accuse me of calling you a failure.  But, if you feel that, in hindsight, you didn't know your partner well enough to marry them, then by your own definition, you did not have that "mature, mutual understanding" that you should have had before you got married.   It's okay to admit that you regret one decision and wish you had made another, if that's the case.  It's also okay to want people to be as prepared as possible before making a decision that they may regret.  A lot of people are wholly unprepared to make that decision, and a lot of people are hurt because they, by their own definition, made the "wrong" one.  Is it wrong to want peopleto make decisions that lead to them being happy?
 
2014-01-15 01:17:38 PM

jst3p: Now you are just being silly (I am trying to be nice because I still like you). My divorce doesn't make the word "marriage" meaningless.


No your single individual divorce doesn't.  But a 50%+ countrywide divorce rate does.  Two people get married and promise to be together until death.  Wanna know how much that promise is worth?  Flip a coin.

jst3p: My divorce doesn't even make my marriage meaningless. Like I said, I learned a lot that changed who I am today because of those marriage and divorces


You are conflating the word "marriage" with "relationship" again.  You should stop.
 
2014-01-15 01:18:36 PM

lennavan: jst3p: This, I had to wait three months to get divorced, but I could get married tomorrow if I wanted to. The waiting period is on the wrong part of the process.

You do realize, you and I are arguing the exact same thing.  I'm just more open and honest about it.


That would be fine, until you try and tell me what marriage should "mean" to me. It is a social construct and there are laws that define what a marriage is. Legally my marriages are no more or less valid than yours. If you think your marriage "means" more, knock yourself out but when you try and tell me what it should "mean" to me I am going to tell you to pound sand.
 
2014-01-15 01:18:41 PM

jst3p: It has nothing to do with the "meaning" of marriage and EVERYTHING to do with the legal aspects of it.


How the fark are those different things in your mind?  In your mind, marriage means something and has nothing at all to do with the legal aspects?  One of us is being "silly" that's for sure.
 
2014-01-15 01:19:56 PM

lennavan: jst3p: Now you are just being silly (I am trying to be nice because I still like you). My divorce doesn't make the word "marriage" meaningless.

No your single individual divorce doesn't.  But a 50%+ countrywide divorce rate does.  Two people get married and promise to be together until death.  Wanna know how much that promise is worth?  Flip a coin.


Pretty strong indicator that we aren't meant to be monogamous for life, eh?

jst3p: My divorce doesn't even make my marriage meaningless. Like I said, I learned a lot that changed who I am today because of those marriage and divorces

You are conflating the word "marriage" with "relationship" again.  You should stop.


I have marriage certificates and the marriages are a matter of public record. They were marriages.
 
2014-01-15 01:20:12 PM

Dr Dreidel: Also, none of that has any bearing on why it should be OK - or mandatory - for a judge to reprimand people for daring to dissolve their union.


Seems to be just another example of conservatives of one stripe or another harkening back to a golden age that never existed. Whether it was through mistresses, milkmen, or any number of other ways and means, people have always managed to find a way to get the attention they desire if they're not getting it in their marriage. No fault divorce just made it easy to not have to stay in the miserable marriage in the first place.

But, it's not the actual marriages themselves that is concerning to these people. It's the appearance that matters. Making it more difficult to get divorced is probably likely to reduce the number of divorces simply due to some people not wanting to get slapped with a "reprimand" if they do so. That's the aim, even if it means those people have to stay in loveless marriages to make it happen.
 
2014-01-15 01:20:54 PM

lennavan: jst3p: It has nothing to do with the "meaning" of marriage and EVERYTHING to do with the legal aspects of it.

How the fark are those different things in your mind?  In your mind, marriage means something and has nothing at all to do with the legal aspects?  One of us is being "silly" that's for sure.


You have to this point done a HORRIBLE job of articulating what is in my mind. This post is no exception.
 
2014-01-15 01:22:07 PM

jst3p: That would be fine, until you try and tell me what marriage should "mean" to me.


I will try my best.  Here I go.  The definition of marriage should include amongst other things the legal, financial ties to each other.

jst3p: It has nothing to do with the "meaning" of marriage and EVERYTHING to do with the legal aspects of it.


Oh, okay you think the meaning of marriage has nothing to do with the legal aspects.  So why again aren't you getting married to your current long-term girlfriend?

jst3p: It has more to do with co-mingling finances


Ah, right, the legal financial aspects.  Well, all along you have been arguing we should all be able to define marriage however we like.  Why don't you and your girlfriend just define marriage to not mean co-mingling finances and get married?
 
2014-01-15 01:22:21 PM

jcb274: Satan's Bunny Slippers: jcb274:
So a happy relationship that people entered into after a mature, mutual understanding of each other that serves as the foundation for a happy life is now as unlikely as "strawberry flavored unicorn piss?"  That illustrates my point exactly.  By and large, marriage has become a joke to the point where I get crap for suggesting that it shouldn't be a joke.

Further, I realize I'm commenting against the grain of "those crazy Tories," but I never said I supported the MP in the article.  Shaming people who get divorces is not a remedy for what I perceive as a lack of commitment when a couple is getting married.

No.  Who are you to say what constitutes an acceptable degree of "mature, mutual understanding"?

You are the one who says marriage has become a joke.  I am divorced. So then, how dare you devalue me and my decisions to marry? By what delineation am I a failure to you?

Show your work.

I don't know anything about you or your marriage.  So it's pretty presumptuous to accuse me of calling you a failure.  But, if you feel that, in hindsight, you didn't know your partner well enough to marry them, then by your own definition, you did not have that "mature, mutual understanding" that you should have had before you got married.   It's okay to admit that you regret one decision and wish you had made another, if that's the case.  It's also okay to want people to be as prepared as possible before making a decision that they may regret.  A lot of people are wholly unprepared to make that decision, and a lot of people are hurt because they, by their own definition, made the "wrong" one.  Is it wrong to want peopleto make decisions that lead to them being happy?


I'm glad you're so all knowing of what a marriage should be.  You are presumptuous in that you seem to think that you know what's best for all people considering marriage. Pompous, even.  And your seeming to think that people make conscious decisions that will eventually make them unhappy is even moreso.  You seem to be as uneducated about the human condition as anyone I know.

I was not young, unprepared or stupid when I married.  Why you think I would regret anything is funny.

Good luck to you, sir/madam.  I hope that no one ever judges and publicly shames you for your choices.
 
2014-01-15 01:22:50 PM

Lady J: 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.


A healthy relationship requires good communication in order to thrive.  There is a balance that you have to maintain.  So while you may not want to talk about your depression, you at least need to acknowledge that you have depression.
 
2014-01-15 01:22:54 PM

vicioushobbit: 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.


I love that he calls American women whores, and then goes on to describe the personal whore he basically bought from Russia.
 
2014-01-15 01:23:33 PM

jst3p: jst3p: My divorce doesn't even make my marriage meaningless. Like I said, I learned a lot that changed who I am today because of those marriage and divorces

You are conflating the word "marriage" with "relationship" again. You should stop.

I have marriage certificates and the marriages are a matter of public record. They were marriages.



And yet it was the relationship bit and the children that made you who you are today.  Not the fact that you were married.  Your ex didn't get pregnant when you signed the piece of paper.
 
2014-01-15 01:24:11 PM

lennavan: Ah, right, the legal financial aspects.  Well, all along you have been arguing we should all be able to define marriage however we like.  Why don't you and your girlfriend just define marriage to not mean co-mingling finances and get married?


Because legally that is impossible...
 
2014-01-15 01:24:25 PM
Looks like we have some prescient farkers as loyal as Horton the Elephant.
 
2014-01-15 01:26:35 PM

lennavan: jst3p: jst3p: My divorce doesn't even make my marriage meaningless. Like I said, I learned a lot that changed who I am today because of those marriage and divorces

You are conflating the word "marriage" with "relationship" again. You should stop.

I have marriage certificates and the marriages are a matter of public record. They were marriages.

And yet it was the relationship bit and the children that made you who you are today.  Not the fact that you were married.  Your ex didn't get pregnant when you signed the piece of paper.


I refer to them as marriages because they were marriages. You making a distinction with no real difference.
 
2014-01-15 01:27:10 PM

Wingchild: 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.


Especially not for any children who may be involved or the mental health of either partner. Oh, and let's "help" by shaming them when they do decide to call it quits.

Admitting that it didn't work is NOT admitting that you should never have gotten married. It's admitting that a lesson was learned and a chapter is ending.

Leave your moralizing at the door and MYOB.
 
2014-01-15 01:29:30 PM

jst3p: lennavan: Ah, right, the legal financial aspects.  Well, all along you have been arguing we should all be able to define marriage however we like.  Why don't you and your girlfriend just define marriage to not mean co-mingling finances and get married?

Because legally that is impossible...


Holy crap, welcome to my side of the conversation.

jst3p: That would be fine, until you try and tell me what marriage should "mean" to me


I'm not trying to tell you at all what your marriage should mean to you.  I'm telling you what it actually already does mean.  Or as I phrased it an hour ago:

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.
 
2014-01-15 01:30:46 PM

jst3p: I refer to them as marriages because they were marriages. You making a distinction with no real difference.


You don't see the difference between the word marriage and relationship.  Meanwhile I'm arguing the word marriage is being devalued.  Thank you for making my point much more effectively than I think I ever could.
 
2014-01-15 01:33:11 PM

lennavan: I'm not trying to tell you at all what your marriage should mean to you.  I'm telling you what it actually already does mean.


If it has no meaning beyond the legal definition and that meaning is the same for everyone then you should have no issue with no fault divorce or frivolous marriages as they meet those legal definitions. You have come a long way from:

It devalues the word marriage.
 
2014-01-15 01:33:19 PM

jst3p: That would be fine, until you try and tell me what marriage should "mean" to me. It is a social construct and there are laws that define what a marriage is. Legally my marriages are no more or less valid than yours. If you think your marriage "means" more, knock yourself out but when you try and tell me what it should "mean" to me I am going to tell you to pound sand.


Out of curiosity, did you tell the judge to go pound sand during your divorce proceedings?  I mean, I never once said or thought your marriage was any less valid or meant any less or more.  I'm just telling you no matter how hard you pound that sand, there are state laws governing what marriage means.
 
2014-01-15 01:33:26 PM

lennavan: jst3p: I refer to them as marriages because they were marriages. You making a distinction with no real difference.

You don't see the difference between the word marriage and relationship.  Meanwhile I'm arguing the word marriage is being devalued.  Thank you for making my point much more effectively than I think I ever could.


How is it being devalued? You haven't made any coherent argument as to why divorce "devalues" marriage.
 
2014-01-15 01:34:03 PM

lennavan: jst3p: I refer to them as marriages because they were marriages. You making a distinction with no real difference.

You don't see the difference between the word marriage and relationship.  Meanwhile I'm arguing the word marriage is being devalued.  Thank you for making my point much more effectively than I think I ever could.


If my divorce "devalues" the word marriage for you then the problem is yours not mine.
 
2014-01-15 01:34:33 PM

lennavan: Gothnet: Sometimes people drift apart regardless of best intentions

It's really farking sad that you think marriage is about intentions rather than effort or actions.  Sorry, I totally intended to give a shiat about you, it just didn't happen.  Oh well.

Gothnet: forcing them to stay together

You dipshiat, I'm not for less people getting divorced, I'm for less people getting married.


Then don't get married to so many people, you dipshiat.

/and quit trying to tell us how anybody else should live their lives
 
2014-01-15 01:35:21 PM

lennavan: jst3p: That would be fine, until you try and tell me what marriage should "mean" to me. It is a social construct and there are laws that define what a marriage is. Legally my marriages are no more or less valid than yours. If you think your marriage "means" more, knock yourself out but when you try and tell me what it should "mean" to me I am going to tell you to pound sand.

Out of curiosity, did you tell the judge to go pound sand during your divorce proceedings?  I mean, I never once said or thought your marriage was any less valid or meant any less or more.  I'm just telling you no matter how hard you pound that sand, there are state laws governing what marriage means.


Nope, because he wasn't arrogant enough to try and tell me "So you are saying you never should have been married in the first place." That would have been a dick move.
 
2014-01-15 01:35:56 PM
dywed88:

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.

"Meaningless" in terms of secular law, certainly not meaningless to the religious institution. The equation of a religious or private official with a "special notary" or other state official is hazy at best.

Like most married couples, my wife and I had both a "religious" or "private" wedding, as well as a state wedding.

The state wedding was in the morning at a Washington Parish JP's home way out in the sticks, so our state tax revenue footprint was pretty small.  But I still regard that ritual, and it was a ritual, as an annoying necessity we were compelled to perform in order for hotels, revenue offices, hospitals and all sorts of other institutions public and private to recognize our "special status" and confer upon us special perks and privileges that only people with the lofty ability to sign both their names to a piece of notarized paper can enjoy.

Our "private" ceremony was conducted that afternoon, unaffiliated with any church, but presided over by a minister we knew through my stepdaughter.  It was conducted at a private facility (the Louisiana Castle http://www.louisianacastle.com/ , cool place, you should see it), not any religious institution.  But even had it been presided over by Madalyn Murray O'Hair in our accountant's office, I still would have regarded it as a ritual.  The difference is that we paid for it.

We've lasted ten years and are still going strong.  If we face any consequences of our actions, it will be consequences dictated by the state, not by our uncompelled choice, as opposed to consequences dictated by any institution of our choice outside the state.  Which I regard as unfair and tyrannical, but that's just me. We've put in our lot with the laws of the State of Louisiana, and that's the way it is, until someone starts wising up and recognizes state-sanctioned marriages as state sponsorship of religious ritual.
 
2014-01-15 01:36:08 PM

lennavan: jst3p: The minimum requirements are going to the courthouse and getting a piece of paper signed. I did that. Twice. I met your standard.

Was it just any random blank piece of paper?  Or perhaps are you being dishonest in your summary here?

jst3p: While I was married I was no less her husband than you are to your wife.

I'm not saying you were.

jst3p: Divorce doesn't make marriage meaningless.

A pretty decent definition of the word divorce would be "to render a marriage null/void/meaningless."  So uh, yeah it does.  Divorce doesn't make the relationship meaningless.


Somebody else getting divorced doesn't magically make your marriage null/void/meaningless. Stop trying to convince us that it does or that this is somehow a slippery slope we've only just found ourselves on.
 
2014-01-15 01:36:10 PM
Satan's Bunny Slippers: jcb274: Satan's Bunny Slippers: jcb274:

I don't know anything about you or your marriage.  So it's pretty presumptuous to accuse me of calling you a failure.  But, if you feel that, in hindsight, you didn't know your partner well enough to marry them, then by your own definition, you did not have that "mature, mutual understanding" that you should have had before you got married.   It's okay to admit that you regret one decision and wish you had made another, if that's the case.  It's also okay to want people to be as prepared as possible before making a decision that they may regret.   A lot of people are wholly unprepared to make that decision, and a lot of people are hurt because they, by their own definition, made the "wrong" one.  Is it wrong to want peopleto make decisions that lead to them being happy?

I purposely made every effort to not specifically apply what I said to you personally, and yet you took it personally.  If I'm pompous, you are certainly in the running to be narcissistic. 

I'm glad you're so all knowing of what a marriage should be.  You are presumptuous in that you seem to think that you know what's best for all people considering marriage. Pompous, even.  And your seeming to think that people make conscious decisions that will eventually make them unhappy is even moreso.  You seem to be as uneducated about the human condition as anyone I know.

I was not young, unprepared or stupid when I married.  Why you think I would regret anything is funny.

Good luck to you, sir/madam.  I hope that no one ever judges and publicly shames you for your choices.
 

I haven't said anything specifically about what a marriage should be, except that it should make the people in it happy.  I feel like that's a pretty low bar, but it's still too high to not offend you.  We can't even agree on this?  I haven't defined a marriage, roles, members, anything, but I'm still condescending to suggest that the people in it should be happy?  What are you trying to contribute to this conversation exactly?  There is nothing to discuss if you can't accept any statement about marriage because it's a statement about marriage.

Also, in the futile hope that you read it this time, I'm not asking for people to publicly shame anyone for their decision.  Further, it's a pretty ridiculous premise to suggest that you could never regret a decision and that no one should ever ask you if you do.
 
2014-01-15 01:37:04 PM

lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.


I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.
 
2014-01-15 01:37:34 PM

Fano: Looks like we have some prescient farkers as loyal as Horton the Elephant.


It's not like I'm making stuff up here.  People who are willing to commit to a marriage are sarcastically labeled as a a cartoon character.
 
2014-01-15 01:38:00 PM
Somebody sounds really bitter, and it's not the people arguing for divorce.

/just sayin'
 
2014-01-15 01:39:25 PM

dywed88: In all jurisdictions I am aware off, a religious ceremony is meaningless unless you file a signed marriage certificate with the sate.


Not true.

Common law marriage exists in Colorado still. If you live as if you were married, present yourself to the world as married (wearing rings is a biggie) and call yourselves married you are married. Filing taxes as married filing joint is a pretty solid way to be common law married (not applicable to the gays as we have an amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman).

/that amendment can't last much longer
 
2014-01-15 01:40:43 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: /and quit trying to tell us how anybody else should live their lives

 

I imagine there are a number of people in the country who would have appreciated a good kick in the pants and a "think twice" when they were thinking about getting married to the crazy biatch they did.  See for instance, this thread.
 
2014-01-15 01:41:53 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.


I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?
 
2014-01-15 01:42:13 PM

lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: /and quit trying to tell us how anybody else should live their lives
 

I imagine there are a number of people in the country who would have appreciated a good kick in the pants and a "think twice" when they were thinking about getting married to the crazy biatch they did.  See for instance, this thread.


Can't help but notice that it's automatically the woman's fault in your example. You sound bitter in your marriage, but it's a good thing laws have loopholes and divorce is an option.

/you really, REALLY need to take care of your own house before taking offense at what others do in their own
//seriously
 
2014-01-15 01:44:04 PM

lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?


Why is a 50% divorce rate a bad thing? Sure there are negative aspects associated with divorce but can you say for sure that they would be happier had they not married or not divorced.

Clearly some would but can you even say most? That's kind of presumptuous,
 
2014-01-15 01:44:27 PM

lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?


And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.
 
2014-01-15 01:47:36 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Wingchild: 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.

Especially not for any children who may be involved or the mental health of either partner. Oh, and let's "help" by shaming them when they do decide to call it quits.

Admitting that it didn't work is NOT admitting that you should never have gotten married. It's admitting that a lesson was learned and a chapter is ending.

Leave your moralizing at the door and MYOB.


HI again!! How are you? Did you have a good day today?
 
2014-01-15 01:50:36 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Gothnet: Sometimes people drift apart regardless of best intentions

It's really farking sad that you think marriage is about intentions rather than effort or actions.  Sorry, I totally intended to give a shiat about you, it just didn't happen.  Oh well.

Gothnet: forcing them to stay together

You dipshiat, I'm not for less people getting divorced, I'm for less people getting married.

Then don't get married to so many people, you dipshiat.

/and quit trying to tell us how anybody else should live their lives


Well tell us how we should live because people haven't figured it all out yet?
 
2014-01-15 01:52:21 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: /and quit trying to tell us how anybody else should live their lives
 

I imagine there are a number of people in the country who would have appreciated a good kick in the pants and a "think twice" when they were thinking about getting married to the crazy biatch they did.  See for instance, this thread.

Can't help but notice that it's automatically the woman's fault in your example. You sound bitter in your marriage, but it's a good thing laws have loopholes and divorce is an option.

/you really, REALLY need to take care of your own house before taking offense at what others do in their own
//seriously


Hon, he's already been shamed just drop it.
 
2014-01-15 01:52:32 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Can't help but notice that it's automatically the woman's fault in your example.


It wasn't my example.  When I wrote "See for instance, this thread" I actually meant you should look in this thread for the example.  You clearly didn't.  I can't help but notice you're derpin without thinkin.

The My Little Pony Killer: You sound bitter in your marriage, but it's a good thing laws have loopholes and divorce is an option.


I'm not against divorce, dipshiat.
 
2014-01-15 01:53:40 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.


I'm not against divorce, dipshiat.  See for instance this thread where I have posted that over and over again.
 
2014-01-15 01:55:15 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Somebody sounds really bitter, and it's not the people arguing for divorce.

/just sayin'


You sound bitter a lot too I am bitter a lot of people are bitter because we all were harmed in the past. What makes us better is when we learn from those mistakes and not keep repeating them.
 
2014-01-15 01:56:35 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: /and quit trying to tell us how anybody else should live their lives
 

I imagine there are a number of people in the country who would have appreciated a good kick in the pants and a "think twice" when they were thinking about getting married to the crazy biatch they did.  See for instance, this thread.

Can't help but notice that it's automatically the woman's fault in your example. You sound bitter in your marriage, but it's a good thing laws have loopholes and divorce is an option.

/you really, REALLY need to take care of your own house before taking offense at what others do in their own
//seriously


Only if you do the same.
 
2014-01-15 01:57:10 PM
People are addicted to infatuation and the "honey-moon period" these days. They'll seek out those good feelings just like any other drug user. They can't drop the Disney shiat and move onto the comfortable stage of a relationship. I have no problem with divorce or different lifestyle choices, but a lot of folks need to stop pretending they're compatible with longterm/lifetime monogamy.

/judgemental 2cents
 
2014-01-15 01:57:32 PM

pottie: Marriage ain't for sissies.


The supreme court is still ruling on that
 
2014-01-15 01:57:37 PM

jst3p: Why is a 50% divorce rate a bad thing?


This is a joke, isn't it.  Marriage has a meaning.  What you are searching for is a term that means everything marriage does, except without the "until death" bit.  You can have all the legal obligations, except now you don't even need the hassle of getting a divorce.  How about we coin a new term that means that, we'll call it jst3page.  I'm all for jst3page.  If you want to get married, or jst3ped, I don't care.

A 50%+ marriage divorce rate means the majority of people getting married are unclear on the definition of the word marriage.  They should have gotten jst3ped instead.
 
2014-01-15 01:58:40 PM

jcb274: Fano: Looks like we have some prescient farkers as loyal as Horton the Elephant.

It's not like I'm making stuff up here.  People who are willing to commit to a marriage are sarcastically labeled as a a cartoon character.


That's not what he meant and it's obvious. Either learn to farking read or come down off your cross. Playing stupid only makes you look like you're not playing.
 
2014-01-15 01:58:41 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.


Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10
 
2014-01-15 02:01:08 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Somebody else getting divorced doesn't magically make your marriage null/void/meaningless. Stop trying to convince us that it does or that this is somehow a slippery slope we've only just found ourselves on.


Did you go to college?  Let's pretend yes.  You got a college degree.  One guy at your college is a complete dumbass.  Does that devalue your degree?  No of course not.  When you hit the job market, employers will know the vast majority of people from your college with your degree are good smart people.

Now what if 50%+ of the people at your college are complete dumbasses.  Does that devalue your degree?  Yes.  When you hit the job market and your degree says Florida State University, employers will have no idea if you're a dumbass or smart.

See how maybe a single instance might not matter but they can add up?
 
2014-01-15 02:02:18 PM

lennavan: jst3p: Why is a 50% divorce rate a bad thing?

This is a joke, isn't it.  Marriage has a meaning.  What you are searching for is a term that means everything marriage does, except without the "until death" bit.


Isn't it pretty obvious that in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore? It hasn't been for thousands of years actually, ever since Moses told guys "How about you divorce instead of killing your wives when you get tired of them? God said it was cool."
 
2014-01-15 02:03:17 PM

lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: Somebody else getting divorced doesn't magically make your marriage null/void/meaningless. Stop trying to convince us that it does or that this is somehow a slippery slope we've only just found ourselves on.

Did you go to college?  Let's pretend yes.  You got a college degree.  One guy at your college is a complete dumbass.  Does that devalue your degree?  No of course not.  When you hit the job market, employers will know the vast majority of people from your college with your degree are good smart people.

Now what if 50%+ of the people at your college are complete dumbasses.  Does that devalue your degree?  Yes.  When you hit the job market and your degree says Florida State University, employers will have no idea if you're a dumbass or smart.

See how maybe a single instance might not matter but they can add up?


A marriage is not a credential. This is a bad analogy. Very bad.
 
2014-01-15 02:10:03 PM

jst3p: Isn't it pretty obvious that in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?


Are you suggesting the word has lost meaning and value, say perhaps been "devalued?"  As someone I've known and respected on Fark.com for awhile, I feel obligated to give you a heads up -- you're gonna get derped by idiots in this thread when they see what you posted.

But I agree with you.
 
2014-01-15 02:11:49 PM

jst3p: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: Somebody else getting divorced doesn't magically make your marriage null/void/meaningless. Stop trying to convince us that it does or that this is somehow a slippery slope we've only just found ourselves on.

Did you go to college?  Let's pretend yes.  You got a college degree.  One guy at your college is a complete dumbass.  Does that devalue your degree?  No of course not.  When you hit the job market, employers will know the vast majority of people from your college with your degree are good smart people.

Now what if 50%+ of the people at your college are complete dumbasses.  Does that devalue your degree?  Yes.  When you hit the job market and your degree says Florida State University, employers will have no idea if you're a dumbass or smart.

See how maybe a single instance might not matter but they can add up?

A marriage is not a credential. This is a bad analogy. Very bad.


Analogies do not have to be identical in all ways.  That is a bad counter argument.  Very bad.
 
2014-01-15 02:13:28 PM

MBooda: thurstonxhowell: MBooda: if you got married, you engaged in a spiritual ritual.

This is true of none of the last 3 weddings I've been to.

So you attended them for purely legal/economic reasons?


Marriages serve a social purpose even when you strip religion away. I attended them for social reasons.
 
2014-01-15 02:13:34 PM

lennavan: jst3p: Isn't it pretty obvious that in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

Are you suggesting the word has lost meaning and value, say perhaps been "devalued?"


No, marriage hasn't literally mean "until death under any circumstances" for thousands of years. Even the Catholics who hate divorce invented "annulment" because people get divorced and remarried.

It hasn't been devalued at all.
 
2014-01-15 02:14:14 PM
"Bob" has the perfect answer for this:

Every marriage has an expiration date.
 
2014-01-15 02:14:40 PM

alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10


So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?
 
2014-01-15 02:15:34 PM

jcb274: .



You know what?  Never the fark mind.

You go on with "but WHY can't people be forced make all the right decisions according to MEEEEEE?" and be happy.

Good day
 
2014-01-15 02:16:05 PM

Slaves2Darkness: and any children they have together


This is not particularly true. In some places marriage provides an assumption of paternity at the time of birth. Otherwise being married to someone's parent does not bestow any parental rights on you, nor does being unmarried preclude you from asserting any such rights.
 
2014-01-15 02:16:34 PM

lennavan: Analogies do not have to be identical in all ways.


A degree is a credential that, in theory, demonstrates to someone else that you have learned something and will be able to contribute in a positive way to their industry.

Your marriage says nothing to anyone else except that you are married. 50% divorce rate does not make your marriage any less of a marriage. It is a piss poor analogy.
 
2014-01-15 02:16:57 PM

vicioushobbit: alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10

So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?


I'm confused as well.  Especially since it was at first nice to MLPK, then turned and lashed out.  Perhaps medication needs to be adjusted.
 
2014-01-15 02:20:54 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: Isn't it pretty obvious that in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

Are you suggesting the word has lost meaning and value, say perhaps been "devalued?"

No, marriage hasn't literally mean "until death under any circumstances" for thousands of years. Even the Catholics who hate divorce invented "annulment" because people get divorced and remarried.

It hasn't been devalued at all.


Where the fark did that "under any circumstances" part come from?  Holy shiat dude, at least let me WATCH the goalposts move.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore

jst3p: It hasn't been devalued at all.


jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore

jst3p: It hasn't been devalued at all.


I dunno dude.  I think along the way you got the impression I was arguing you're less of a person or I'm better than you or something like that.  I'm not, hell with most of your posts over the years I've gotten the impression you're a better person than I am.  But for some reason here you're just so dug in to "win" your side of the argument that you refuse to even admit what words mean.

Yes, it has been devalued.  The specific value that it lost was the "til death" part.  We used to think "marriage" meant "blah blah blah... until death."  It has since lost that "until death part."

Now that we have agreed to that, I would like to emphatically state again that I do not think any less of you, nor did I ever all along, nor was that ever a possibility.
 
2014-01-15 02:23:44 PM

jst3p: Your marriage says nothing to anyone else except that you are married.


Worst definition ever -- marriage = married.  You haven't just taken some meaning out of the word marriage, you have taken all meaning out of it and made it a meaningless term.

Hey, I had a marriage!  What does that mean?  Why I'm married of course!  Anything else?  Nope!
 
2014-01-15 02:24:16 PM

Slaves2Darkness: It's a contract that the state recognizes giving the two partners special status towards each others medical treatment, inheritance, property


Those can all be contracted separately; the agreements among the partners in a marriage are largely available through non-marriage civil contracts, and could be made easily available as pro forma documents just like real estate sales.

Unfortunately that's not true of all the rights and privileges that the state chooses to bestow upon married people -- I think we should either eliminate those or make them available on any individually assignable basis, without respect to a more comprehensive concept of "marriage" or any of the restrictions and social conventions that entails.
 
2014-01-15 02:24:23 PM

lennavan: Yes, it has been devalued.  The specific value that it lost was the "til death" part.  We used to think "marriage" meant "blah blah blah... until death."  It has since lost that "until death part."


If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament. My divorce nor the current 50% divorce rate had anything to do with it.

And I think you are OK too.
 
2014-01-15 02:24:51 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: jcb274: .


You know what?  Never the fark mind.

You go on with "but WHY can't people be forced make all the right decisions according to MEEEEEE?" and be happy.

Good day


Not really sure what your issue is, but I have never forced or suggested that we force anyone to make any decision.  I think you assumed that I had a variety of opinions that I don't and got offended over these opinions that I didn't have.  But it's ok.  I'll go on hoping that people are happy, you go along doing that crazy reactionary thing that you did.  I don't particularly care what decisions you have made, but, really, I hope you continue to do things that make you happy.
 
2014-01-15 02:25:12 PM

Slaves2Darkness: GORDON: Easy: Divorce tax.  The State gets half.

Why do you hate men? I mean if the State gets half, and the biatch gets half, why in the hell would a man ever get married?


Why would a man ever get married now?
 
2014-01-15 02:26:27 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: vicioushobbit: alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10

So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?

I'm confused as well.  Especially since it was at first nice to MLPK, then turned and lashed out.  Perhaps medication needs to be adjusted.


No I'm not, I used to get into spats with her but when she said her dad left her when she she was a kid I felt sorry for her and wanted to befriend her and do the good thing and help her not feel so alone. It's tough I know, but it doesn't need to be.
 
2014-01-15 02:28:02 PM

jst3p: A degree is a credential that, in theory, demonstrates to someone else that you have learned something and will be able to contribute in a positive way to their industry.

cre·den·tial
krəˈdenCHəl/
noun
noun: credential; plural noun: credentials
1
.
a qualification, achievement, personal quality, or aspect of a person's background, typically when used to indicate that they are suitable for something.


What aspect of a person's background do you think doctors typically use to indicate whether or not you are suitable to make medical decisions for someone?

College degree, amirite?
 
2014-01-15 02:28:02 PM

alice_600: 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!


Either you're one hell of a troll, or weapon's grade stupid.
 
2014-01-15 02:28:48 PM

lennavan: A 50%+ marriage divorce rate means the majority of people getting married are unclear on the definition of the word marriage.


This is false for several reasons.
First, the divorce rate is below 50%.

Second, people who have already been divorced are more likely to be divorced again. They would count twice for the percentage despite not being multiple people.

Third, a divorce is only evidence that one half of the couple wanted to end the marriage. It is not necessary that both have that desire, common though that may be.

Fourth, and I think this is where it get interesting, it does not require being unclear on the definition of marriage for irreconcilable differences to occur. You yourself have stated that you are only against no-fault divorces. It is not logically consistent to claim to believe that some divorces are for good reason and that all divorce is evidence of people who don't understand marriage.
 
2014-01-15 02:29:11 PM

lennavan: Marriage has a meaning. What you are searching for is a term that means everything marriage does, except without the "until death" bit.


The clause about marriage being until death was instituted back when people were lucky to survive past their 30s.  It was also a time back when marriages were a lot more to do with politics than love.  Having an arranged marriage fall apart might result in some nasty consequences between families.

In the modern world, I see nothing wrong about divorce.  People change over time, and sometimes that means that people grow apart.  Since arranged marriages and shotgun marriages are now things of the past, we're a little more free to have marriage on our own terms.

Does that mean that I think everyone should get a divorce at the first sign of trouble?  Mostly, no.  As long as physical abuse isn't involved, in which case a divorce attorney should be the second person you call after the cops, I think you should work on resolving issues before separating.  But to suggest that divorce should be off the table except for the most grievous of circumstances is rather old fashioned.
 
2014-01-15 02:29:59 PM

lennavan: jst3p: A degree is a credential that, in theory, demonstrates to someone else that you have learned something and will be able to contribute in a positive way to their industry.

cre·den·tial
krəˈdenCHəl/
noun
noun: credential; plural noun: credentials
1.
a qualification, achievement, personal quality, or aspect of a person's background, typically when used to indicate that they are suitable for something.

What aspect of a person's background do you think doctors typically use to indicate whether or not you are suitable to make medical decisions for someone?


None, they use the legal contract you are engaged in that gives you the legal right to make those medical decisions.
 
2014-01-15 02:41:53 PM

jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament


That is not the only place marriage lost value.
 
2014-01-15 02:43:09 PM

lennavan: jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament

That is not the only place marriage lost value.


That is where the "till death" part became decoration.
 
2014-01-15 02:46:12 PM

thurstonxhowell: First, the divorce rate is below 50%.


Marriage rate: 6.8 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate: 3.6 per 1,000 population (44 reporting States and D.C.)

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm

thurstonxhowell: Second, people who have already been divorced are more likely to be divorced again. They would count twice for the percentage despite not being multiple people.


Their marriages would also count twice.

thurstonxhowell: Third, a divorce is only evidence that one half of the couple wanted to end the marriage. It is not necessary that both have that desire, common though that may be.


And?

thurstonxhowell: You yourself have stated that you are only against no-fault divorces.


I'd really love to see that quote because I'm for no-fault divorces.
 
2014-01-15 02:47:19 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament

That is not the only place marriage lost value.

That is where the "till death" part became decoration.


And yet the vast majority of people still took it seriously until 1970.  It's almost as if it wasn't decoration.
 
2014-01-15 02:48:52 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: A degree is a credential that, in theory, demonstrates to someone else that you have learned something and will be able to contribute in a positive way to their industry.

cre·den·tial
krəˈdenCHəl/
noun
noun: credential; plural noun: credentials
1.
a qualification, achievement, personal quality, or aspect of a person's background, typically when used to indicate that they are suitable for something.

What aspect of a person's background do you think doctors typically use to indicate whether or not you are suitable to make medical decisions for someone?

None, they use the legal contract you are engaged in that gives you the legal right to make those medical decisions.



A marriage is a legal contract.  Therefore my analogy holds up, even by your overzealous standards.  Hurray!
 
2014-01-15 02:49:29 PM
THEAETETUS:Ironic, considering that their state religion was founded on the concept of divorce.

WIN!!
 
2014-01-15 02:50:48 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: A degree is a credential that, in theory, demonstrates to someone else that you have learned something and will be able to contribute in a positive way to their industry.

cre·den·tial
krəˈdenCHəl/
noun
noun: credential; plural noun: credentials
1.
a qualification, achievement, personal quality, or aspect of a person's background, typically when used to indicate that they are suitable for something.

What aspect of a person's background do you think doctors typically use to indicate whether or not you are suitable to make medical decisions for someone?

None, they use the legal contract you are engaged in that gives you the legal right to make those medical decisions.

A marriage is a legal contract.  Therefore my analogy holds up, even by your overzealous standards.  Hurray!


But not a credential. Your marriage is not less likely to get the doctor to allow you to make medical decisions for your wife because there is a high divorce rate. Your analogy is still bad.
 
2014-01-15 02:51:46 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament

That is not the only place marriage lost value.

That is where the "till death" part became decoration.

And yet the vast majority of people still took it seriously until 1970.  It's almost as if it wasn't decoration.


And the fact that divorce existed in 1969 didn't devalue anyone else's marriage.
 
2014-01-15 02:52:27 PM

alice_600: Satan's Bunny Slippers: vicioushobbit: alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10

So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?

I'm confused as well.  Especially since it was at first nice to MLPK, then turned and lashed out.  Perhaps medication needs to be adjusted.

No I'm not, I used to get into spats with her but when she said her dad left her when she she was a kid I felt sorry for her and wanted to befriend her and do the good thing and help her not feel so alone. It's tough I know, but it doesn't need to be.


That's adorable, airing somebody else's laundry to make yourself look better.
 
2014-01-15 02:55:51 PM

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.


Yeah, if a grown adult refuses to take their meds, that's on them.
 
2014-01-15 02:58:45 PM

Pokey.Clyde: alice_600: 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!

Either you're one hell of a troll, or weapon's grade stupid.


Nope just work with weapon's grade stupid every day.
 
2014-01-15 02:59:07 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament

That is not the only place marriage lost value.

That is where the "till death" part became decoration.

And yet the vast majority of people still took it seriously until 1970.  It's almost as if it wasn't decoration.


Not if the number of film noir from the 30s to the sixties that revolved around obtaining a quick divorce in Reno or bumping off the spouse because divorce couldn't be granted.
 
2014-01-15 02:59:11 PM

lennavan: thurstonxhowell: Third, a divorce is only evidence that one half of the couple wanted to end the marriage. It is not necessary that both have that desire, common though that may be.

And?


If the divorce rate is 50% and we assume that every person who initiates divorce does not understand marriage, then we only know that at least 25% of people don't understand marriage. 25% is less than a majority, so a 50% divorce rate does not prove that half of all people don't understand marriage. It is possible that's true, but the evidence provided is not sufficient to prove it.

This is even using the assumption that the initiator of a divorce necessarily does not understand marriage, which I do not agree with. Which brings me to my next point.

lennavan: I'd really love to see that quote because I'm for no-fault divorces.


lennavan: I think everyone who files for a no-fault divorce is basically admitting they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.


Fair enough. I suppose you could support the divorce, but think that people who file for it are stupid. I still think your statement strongly implies that you believe that there exists a form of divorce that allows for the initiator to have understood marriage but still file for divorce. If you did not believe that, you could have omitted "no-fault" from that sentence.
 
2014-01-15 03:01:44 PM

Pokey.Clyde: alice_600: 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!

Either you're one hell of a troll, or weapon's grade stupid.


vicioushobbit: alice_600: Satan's Bunny Slippers: vicioushobbit: alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10

So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?

I'm confused as well.  Especially since it was at first nice to MLPK, then turned and lashed out.  Perhaps medication needs to be adjusted.

No I'm not, I used to get into spats with her but when she said her dad left her when she she was a kid I felt sorry for her and wanted to befriend her and do the good thing and help her not feel so alone. It's tough I know, but it doesn't need to be.

That's adorable, airing somebody else's laundry to make yourself look better.


Well how was I suppose to explain my point?
 
2014-01-15 03:05:04 PM

vicioushobbit: alice_600: Satan's Bunny Slippers: vicioushobbit: alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10

So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?

I'm confused as well.  Especially since it was at first nice to MLPK, then turned and lashed out.  Perhaps medication needs to be adjusted.

No I'm not, I used to get into spats with her but when she said her dad left her when she she was a kid I felt sorry for her and wanted to befriend her and do the good thing and help her not feel so alone. It's tough I know, but it doesn't need to be.

That's adorable, airing somebody else's laundry to make yourself look better.


Ya know you're right I shouldn't have I shouldn't care about another's suffering, so here's what I am going to do from now on. I am not going to care about anyone's feelings or opinions. Or if they need a hug or a meal. I am not going to donate any money, toys, clothing, food, or my time to anyone at any time. I am going to throw it all away because I'm just trying to make myself look better.
 
2014-01-15 03:05:35 PM

alice_600: Pokey.Clyde: alice_600: 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!

Either you're one hell of a troll, or weapon's grade stupid.

vicioushobbit: alice_600: Satan's Bunny Slippers: vicioushobbit: alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10

So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?

I'm confused as well.  Especially since it was at first nice to MLPK, then turned and lashed out.  Perhaps medication needs to be adjusted.

No I'm not, I used to get into spats with her but when she said her dad left her when she she was a kid I felt sorry for her and wanted to befriend her and do the good thing and help her not feel so alone. It's tough I know, but it doesn't need to be, but after talking to her over time, I've decided to treat her gently.

That's adorable, airing somebody else's laundry to make yourself look better.

Well how was I suppose to explain my point?


Or something similar.  It's not hard, dude. 

Do unto others, unless you'd like somebody randomly spouting shiat you've vented about in other threads, and using it against you.
 
2014-01-15 03:06:25 PM

jst3p: But not a credential.


jst3p: cre·den·tial
krəˈdenCHəl/
noun
noun: credential; plural noun: credentials
1.
a qualification, achievement, personal quality, or aspect of a person's background, typically when used to indicate that they are suitable for something.


A credential is an "aspect of a person's background typically used to indicate they are suitable for something."

When a doctor wants to know if you are suitable to make medical decisions, typically they want to know if you have a legal contract allowing you to.

A marriage is a legal contract saying you are suitable to (amongst other things) make medical decisions.

jst3p:
But not a credential.

But you do not believe marriage is a credential.

jst3p: Your marriage is not less likely to get the doctor to allow you to make medical decisions for your wife because there is a high divorce rate.


True/False:  Being married is typically utilized by a doctor to determine that you are suitable to make a medical decision for someone.

I will grant you, this tangential argument about the analogy is negligibly relevant.  But it demonstrates how you're dug in so far you refuse to even acknowledge the meaning of words.  Normally I'd just hammer this one home over and over again to constantly point out the stupidity here.  I'm gonna go ahead and give you a pass.  But you gotta do your part, take a step back, read what you're writing and at least tone down the stupidity.
 
2014-01-15 03:07:09 PM

alice_600: vicioushobbit: alice_600: Satan's Bunny Slippers: vicioushobbit: alice_600: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: The My Little Pony Killer: lennavan: Your opinion has no bearing on reality.

I'm glad we agree upon this point, and yet you still keep spouting your opinions as though they were reality.

I know.  Here I am with the opinion "with a 50%+ divorce rate, people should probably take getting married a bit more seriously" and yet here we are with the divorce rate unchanged.  How crazy am I?

And yet, divorce has been a thing since the founding of this country, and the meaning of marriage has yet to change.

How crazy are you? You totes cray-cray. Seek help.

Cray-cray? How old are you, 12?

0/10

So, is this lennavan's retribution alt, or something?

I'm confused as well.  Especially since it was at first nice to MLPK, then turned and lashed out.  Perhaps medication needs to be adjusted.

No I'm not, I used to get into spats with her but when she said her dad left her when she she was a kid I felt sorry for her and wanted to befriend her and do the good thing and help her not feel so alone. It's tough I know, but it doesn't need to be.

That's adorable, airing somebody else's laundry to make yourself look better.

Ya know you're right I shouldn't have I shouldn't care about another's suffering, so here's what I am going to do from now on. I am not going to care about anyone's feelings or opinions. Or if they need a hug or a meal. I am not going to donate any money, toys, clothing, food, or my time to anyone at any time. I am going to throw it all away because I'm just trying to make myself look better.


Way to take the martyr angle.  What you SHOULDN"T do is talk about other people's life drama in a FARK thread, when it is irrelevant to the conversation. 

What a troll.
 
2014-01-15 03:07:41 PM

thurstonxhowell: lennavan: thurstonxhowell: Third, a divorce is only evidence that one half of the couple wanted to end the marriage. It is not necessary that both have that desire, common though that may be.

And?

If the divorce rate is 50% and we assume that every person who initiates divorce does not understand marriage, then we only know that at least 25% of people don't understand marriage. 25% is less than a majority, so a 50% divorce rate does not prove that half of all people don't understand marriage. It is possible that's true, but the evidence provided is not sufficient to prove it.

This is even using the assumption that the initiator of a divorce necessarily does not understand marriage, which I do not agree with. Which brings me to my next point.

lennavan: I'd really love to see that quote because I'm for no-fault divorces.

lennavan: I think everyone who files for a no-fault divorce is basically admitting they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.

Fair enough. I suppose you could support the divorce, but think that people who file for it are stupid. I still think your statement strongly implies that you believe that there exists a form of divorce that allows for the initiator to have understood marriage but still file for divorce. If you did not believe that, you could have omitted "no-fault" from that sentence.


Well adults should know what marriage means and what's beyond the wedding dayif not why were they even married to begin with.
 
2014-01-15 03:08:21 PM

thurstonxhowell: If the divorce rate is 50%


If this is a serious discussion and we're now talking that the divorce rate is 50%, I'm gonna go ahead and ask for an apology and/or retraction.

thurstonxhowell: This is false for several reasons.
First, the divorce rate is below 50%.


Because if I cannot get you to agree you were wrong about knowable, cited facts, there's really no point in discussing anything with you, now is there?
 
2014-01-15 03:09:26 PM
Meh - my wife and I will be getting divorced because it makes the taxman happier and it will limit our debt liability.

Legal marriage is signing a piece of paper.
Legal divorce is signing a different piece of paper.

Don't confuse either for love or a good relationship.
 
2014-01-15 03:09:28 PM

alice_600: adults should know what marriage means and what's beyond the wedding day


Adults should also know marriage and wedding are two completely different words with two completely different meanings and that it's fully possible to have a marriage without a wedding.
 
2014-01-15 03:10:39 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament

That is not the only place marriage lost value.

That is where the "till death" part became decoration.

And yet the vast majority of people still took it seriously until 1970.  It's almost as if it wasn't decoration.

And the fact that divorce existed in 1969 didn't devalue anyone else's marriage.


The fact that after 1970 you could divorce someone for no reason at all did.
 
2014-01-15 03:20:07 PM

lennavan: Because if I cannot get you to agree you were wrong about knowable, cited facts, there's really no point in discussing anything with you, now is there?


Nice dodge.
 
2014-01-15 03:21:23 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament

That is not the only place marriage lost value.

That is where the "till death" part became decoration.

And yet the vast majority of people still took it seriously until 1970.  It's almost as if it wasn't decoration.

And the fact that divorce existed in 1969 didn't devalue anyone else's marriage.

The fact that after 1970 you could divorce someone for no reason at all did.


Multiple surveys have been given to the American people requesting their opinions regarding no-fault divorce.[23] The surveys revealed that 50% of Americans are disappointed with no-fault divorce and would like alterations to the system to make no-fault divorce more difficult.[23] A no-fault divorce is much easier to obtain than a fault divorce. [24] They save time and money plus neither party has to provide evidence.[24] A no-fault divorce also allows the divorcing parties to have privacy, which can allow them to work with each other during the difficult time.[24]

(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grounds_for_divorce_%28United_States%29 #S hift_of_acceptance   yeah, wikipedia, blah blah)

Why are people against letting individuals work together during a time of a marriage dissolving? Are we this desperate for sensational news?

CSB:

My divorce was an no-fault divorce.  But it took counseling for me to be able look at the possibility, because I WAS looking at it "Til death do us part", and was miserable in my existence.  He showed no intention of trying anything different, refused to go to counseling, so it became "my" problem.  By the time I was talking suicide to my counselor to get out of the relationship to which I had fully committed myself, and he suggested divorce, I wasn't ready to tell the whole world about the problems that led me to that point.  And thank the gods I didn't have to.  Now happily married, to a man who is a considerate partner.

My rambling point is this: Just because you think no-fault divorces are a bad thing, doesn't mean that they are.  They can be a way for people to dissolve a marriage that doesn't need to be.

My (best) counselor once told me, people grow and change as they get older.  The younger you marry, the more likelihood of growing in opposite directions.  The goal is that the partners will grow alongside each other, compliment and enhance each other.  But what DOES often happen, is one person grows slightly in a different direction, and maybe it's on a topic that the other is hard-lined on.  If you cannot work in your relationship to grow together, if you are past that point, it's better to move on and find somebody with whom you CAN grow.
 
2014-01-15 03:21:40 PM

alice_600: Well adults should know what marriage means and what's beyond the wedding dayif not why were they even married to begin with.


Yes, they should. You'll find nary a word I said that disagrees with that.

lennavan: Adults should also know marriage and wedding are two completely different words with two completely different meanings and that it's fully possible to have a marriage without a wedding.


You sure picked the hell out of that nit. Congratulations.
 
2014-01-15 03:25:11 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: If it did, in fact, lose value when it lost the "until death" part it happened in the old testament

That is not the only place marriage lost value.

That is where the "till death" part became decoration.

And yet the vast majority of people still took it seriously until 1970.  It's almost as if it wasn't decoration.

And the fact that divorce existed in 1969 didn't devalue anyone else's marriage.

The fact that after 1970 you could divorce someone for no reason at all did.


How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?
 
2014-01-15 03:29:55 PM

thurstonxhowell: lennavan: Because if I cannot get you to agree you were wrong about knowable, cited facts, there's really no point in discussing anything with you, now is there?

Nice dodge.


I didn't dodge, the very first thing you wrote:

thurstonxhowell: This is false for several reasons.
First, the divorce rate is below 50%.


My response:

lennavan: Marriage rate: 6.8 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate: 3.6 per 1,000 population (44 reporting States and D.C.)

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm


I want to make sure the very first thing you wrote was settled.  These are knowable, verifiable facts.  Were you right, or were you wrong?
 
2014-01-15 03:31:41 PM

jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?


We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

 
2014-01-15 03:33:07 PM

thurstonxhowell: You sure picked the hell out of that nit. Congratulations.


Hehe yeah, that's an irrelevant nit to pick, unless of course a major religion like Catholicism uses religion as a reason against gay marriage, in which case the response religions perform WEDDINGS and that nit is relevant.

Dipshiat.
 
2014-01-15 03:33:25 PM

jst3p: 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.


As a child whose parents stayed togetherfor years "for the kids" I can support that statement.

Do you think it is good for a kid to wake up at 3 am only to listen to his mother crying on a regular basis? I know the damage it did to my parents, and my mother never recovered. And there was no abuse in the relationship, no questions in the divorce, and they got along well after (though have had little contact as the kids grew up).

I have nothing but contempt for people that want to force me through that for years longer.

As for comparing it to an informal relationship, it may have the same requirements to end, but a divorce is never simple and I don't know anyone who took it as an easy decision.
 
2014-01-15 03:42:26 PM

lennavan: jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?

We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?


How does the fact that many people don't adhere to the "till death" vow affect your marriage at all?
 
2014-01-15 03:45:34 PM

lennavan: 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.


Marriage has a meaning. Look up your local statutes and/or case history.

And divorce is part of that.

And divorce doesn't necessarily remove those onligations you speak of. Even if a person gets divorced who financially supported their spouse, they will continue to support the spouse through alimony.
 
2014-01-15 03:47:25 PM

vicioushobbit: Why are people against letting individuals work together during a time of a marriage dissolving? Are we this desperate for sensational news?


I'm not against divorce.  If you are currently married and unhappy to the point of wanting one, you should get one.  I'm for people spending some thought before entering a marriage.  I'm for people thinking marriage should be intended forever and means more than just in a relationship.

Instead you get people who think marriage is the same thing as a relationship and it's just a meaningless piece of paper so they marry on a whim and divorce on a whim.  Then you skip forward a few decades of that and hey this is my wife is the equivalent of this is just some chick of the moment who might be gone tomorrow and suddenly in society being married is meaningless.

I'm for words having meaning.  I think married has a meaning, I think wife/husband has a meaning and I think those meanings should remain.

vicioushobbit: But it took counseling for me to be able look at the possibility, because I WAS looking at it "Til death do us part", and was miserable in my existence.


That's as far as my opinion takes me.  You went in thinking it WAS til death do us part.  Not everyone goes in that way.  Look through this thread for some alternative views such as "it only means whatever you want it to mean" or "marriage means married, nothing more" or there is no difference between relationship and marriage.

vicioushobbit: My rambling point is this: Just because you think no-fault divorces are a bad thing, doesn't mean that they are.


In your case, your husband was a dick and that is a bad thing.  He was at fault and presumably you filed "no-fault" because it was easier.  When I think "no-fault" I think "we grew apart."  "We grew apart" means we didn't try.  We means both of us because both have to try.

vicioushobbit: He showed no intention of trying


He's at fault.  There was no hope, this is why I'm all for divorce.

vicioushobbit: Now happily married, to a man who is a considerate partner.


Right, and presumably you are working toward making this second marriage being forever.  If you intend and act in a manner that works towards being together forever, then you're doing things perfectly.  If you got re-married thinking "eh, we'll be together til things don't work out because these things happen" then I'm suggesting you shouldn't have gotten remarried and simply stayed in a long-term committed relationship.
 
2014-01-15 03:48:17 PM

dywed88: And divorce doesn't necessarily remove those onligations you speak of. Even if a person gets divorced who financially supported their spouse, they will continue to support the spouse through alimony.


Thank goodness not always.


/she should have gotten a lawyer
 
2014-01-15 03:52:29 PM

lennavan: jst3p: The minimum requirements are going to the courthouse and getting a piece of paper signed. I did that. Twice. I met your standard.

Was it just any random blank piece of paper?  Or perhaps are you being dishonest in your summary here?

jst3p: While I was married I was no less her husband than you are to your wife.

I'm not saying you were.

jst3p: Divorce doesn't make marriage meaningless.

A pretty decent definition of the word divorce would be "to render a marriage null/void/meaningless."  So uh, yeah it does.  Divorce doesn't make the relationship meaningless.


That would be an annullment, which litterally says "this marriage never happened). A divorce ends it on a go forward basis and many implications remain after a divorce.
 
2014-01-15 03:52:56 PM

vicioushobbit: My (best) counselor once told me, people grow and change as they get older. The younger you marry, the more likelihood of growing in opposite directions. The goal is that the partners will grow alongside each other, compliment and enhance each other. But what DOES often happen, is one person grows slightly in a different direction, and maybe it's on a topic that the other is hard-lined on. If you cannot work in your relationship to grow together, if you are past that point, it's better to move on and find somebody with whom you CAN grow.


This I think is the most important part of your post.  There are a lot of things that should happen before you get married.

1) You gotta know yourself and where you're going
2) Your partner has to know themselves and where they are going
3) You gotta know each other and where each other is going
4) You gotta enter the marriage with the intention of growing together and working together
5) While you are married, you gotta constantly put in the effort

If you meet all of those criteria, you should get married.  Not all of those marriages will work out, yay for divorce.  What I'm arguing in this thread is I think most of the divorces are a result of not meeting those criteria and people would do well to stay as long term committed partners and hold off getting married until they do.  Now of course you can never meet all of those criteria perfectly but you should probably give it a decent try.  I'm not suggesting we police it or legislate it, I'm suggesting I post that opinion on an internet forum, other people read it and maybe hold off getting married until they know things like what career path they're going on.
 
2014-01-15 03:53:05 PM

lennavan: Dipshiat


Mods? Nothing? This isn't his first time.
 
2014-01-15 03:55:07 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?

We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

How does the fact that many people don't adhere to the "till death" vow affect your marriage at all?


It affects society's perception of my marriage.  You might remember my college degree analogy.
 
2014-01-15 03:55:28 PM
lennavan:

In your case, your husband was a dick and that is a bad thing.  He was at fault and presumably you filed "no-fault" because it was easier.  When I think "no-fault" I think "we grew apart.""We grew apart" means we didn't try.  We means both of us because both have to try.

 And I am asking you to rethink that, because based upon my experience and those I know who filed no-fault, it wasn't because they didn't try, it's because it was faster, cheaper, and caused least amount of damage to their families/kids.
 
2014-01-15 03:56:25 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?

We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

How does the fact that many people don't adhere to the "till death" vow affect your marriage at all?

It affects society's perception of my marriage.  You might remember my college degree analogy.


You really care too much about what other people think about your marriage.
 
2014-01-15 03:57:08 PM

dywed88: Marriage has a meaning. Look up your local statutes and/or case history.


I cannot tell you how many times in this thread I have attempted to argue that.  Yet the people you just sided with have been arguing marriage means whatever you want it to mean, or marriage means "married" and nothing more.

I cannot tell you how happy I am to have you on my side.  I just wanted you to know that we agree.
 
2014-01-15 03:59:10 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?

We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

How does the fact that many people don't adhere to the "till death" vow affect your marriage at all?

It affects society's perception of my marriage.  You might remember my college degree analogy.


And that harms you or your marriage how specifically? In your bad college degree analogy someone with that degree will have a harder time getting a job.
 
2014-01-15 04:00:30 PM

lennavan: dywed88: Marriage has a meaning. Look up your local statutes and/or case history.

I cannot tell you how many times in this thread I have attempted to argue that.  Yet the people you just sided with have been arguing marriage means whatever you want it to mean, or marriage means "married" and nothing more.


Your claim is that marriage should be till death. No law requires this.
 
2014-01-15 04:02:42 PM

vicioushobbit: And I am asking you to rethink that, because based upon my experience


In your experience, he was clearly at fault and you filed no-fault because it was easier for you.  I don't know why that would make me rethink it.

vicioushobbit: You really care too much about what other people think about your marriage.


You care too, you just aren't willing to admit it.  That's why you introduce him as your husband to other people, that's why you had a wedding and invited people.  That's why when you or your husband is in the hospital, the first thing out of your mouth will be "I'm his wife."  Because you want those people to know you are married and what that means and you also know if you tell the doctor you're just his partner, you'll be kindly escorted to the waiting room.
 
2014-01-15 04:03:32 PM

jst3p: Your claim is that marriage should be till death. No law requires this.


If the "till death" part of the contract is invalid, then why isn't the "50/50 split regardless of fault" part invalid as well?
 
2014-01-15 04:04:28 PM

lennavan: vicioushobbit: And I am asking you to rethink that, because based upon my experience

In your experience, he was clearly at fault and you filed no-fault because it was easier for you.  I don't know why that would make me rethink it.

vicioushobbit: You really care too much about what other people think about your marriage.

You care too, you just aren't willing to admit it.  That's why you introduce him as your husband to other people, that's why you had a wedding and invited people.  That's why when you or your husband is in the hospital, the first thing out of your mouth will be "I'm his wife."  Because you want those people to know you are married and what that means and you also know if you tell the doctor you're just his partner, you'll be kindly escorted to the waiting room.


Ok, I'm not going to argue with you about your perception of what goes on in my head.

Fark off, busybody troll.
 
2014-01-15 04:06:13 PM

jst3p: Your claim is that marriage should be till death. No law requires this.


Yes, even though I have probably stated at least a dozen times in this thread I am perfectly fine with divorce, my position can be summarized as "marriage should be until death."

The laws say nothing about the "til death part."  The timeline is completely up in the air.  That's why on the marriage form I filled out, they had a "how long do you want to be married" fill in the blank.  I put "til I get bored."  What did you put?
 
2014-01-15 04:07:42 PM

vicioushobbit: vicioushobbit: You really care too much about what other people think about your marriage.

You care too, you just aren't willing to admit it. That's why you introduce him as your husband to other people, that's why you had a wedding and invited people. That's why when you or your husband is in the hospital, the first thing out of your mouth will be "I'm his wife." Because you want those people to know you are married and what that means and you also know if you tell the doctor you're just his partner, you'll be kindly escorted to the waiting room.

Ok, I'm not going to argue with you about your perception of what goes on in my head.


OH THE IRONY.
 
2014-01-15 04:11:29 PM

lennavan: vicioushobbit: vicioushobbit: You really care too much about what other people think about your marriage.

You care too, you just aren't willing to admit it. That's why you introduce him as your husband to other people, that's why you had a wedding and invited people. That's why when you or your husband is in the hospital, the first thing out of your mouth will be "I'm his wife." Because you want those people to know you are married and what that means and you also know if you tell the doctor you're just his partner, you'll be kindly escorted to the waiting room.

Ok, I'm not going to argue with you about your perception of what goes on in my head.

OH THE IRONY.


No, jackass, it's why I'm not arguing with you on it.

Irony, another word whose definition you decide as you go along, it seems.
 
2014-01-15 04:11:48 PM

lennavan: jst3p: Your claim is that marriage should be till death. No law requires this.

Yes, even though I have probably stated at least a dozen times in this thread I am perfectly fine with divorce, my position can be summarized as "marriage should be until death."

The laws say nothing about the "til death part."  The timeline is completely up in the air.  That's why on the marriage form I filled out, they had a "how long do you want to be married" fill in the blank.  I put "til I get bored."  What did you put?


You claim that marriage has a meaning and that "till death do us part" is integral to that meaning.

You claim that marriage is defined by what the law says it is.

There is nothing in the law that requires it be until death.

 the people you just sided with have been arguing marriage means whatever you want it to mean

It sounds like you are the one ascribing meaning to it beyond what the law says.


/I don't remember the application asking how long I intended to be married.
//if there were, the second marriage I would have written "Forever, just like last time!"
 
2014-01-15 04:13:44 PM

dywed88: Even if a person gets divorced who financially supported their spouse, they will continue to support the spouse through alimony.


Not in all states, they won't.
 
2014-01-15 04:17:21 PM

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.


Thank god someone else realized this!

Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract granting inheritance rights to a non-related person.
 
2014-01-15 04:22:07 PM

shortymac: 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.

Thank god someone else realized this!

Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract granting inheritance rights to a non-related person.


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-01-15 04:22:46 PM

jst3p: shortymac: 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.

Thank god someone else realized this!

Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract granting inheritance rights to a non-related person.

[25.media.tumblr.com image 338x301]


Well, it grants some other legal rights and protections too.
 
2014-01-15 04:23:32 PM

jst3p: There is nothing in the law that requires it be until death.


So you think I can go to the city clerk's office and ask for a 10 year marriage?  I think you and I have a very different factual understanding of the world.
 
2014-01-15 04:24:31 PM

jst3p: jst3p: shortymac: 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.

Thank god someone else realized this!

Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract granting inheritance rights to a non-related person.

[25.media.tumblr.com image 338x301]

Well, it grants some other legal rights and protections too.


img.fark.net
 
2014-01-15 04:26:28 PM

lennavan: jst3p: There is nothing in the law that requires it be until death.

So you think I can go to the city clerk's office and ask for a 10 year marriage?  I think you and I have a very different factual understanding of the world.


I can get married and end it in 10 years.
 
2014-01-15 04:27:11 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?

We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

How does the fact that many people don't adhere to the "till death" vow affect your marriage at all?

It affects society's perception of my marriage.  You might remember my college degree analogy.

And that harms you or your marriage how specifically? In your bad college degree analogy someone with that degree will have a harder time getting a job.


Still waiting to hear a response to this.
 
2014-01-15 04:40:49 PM

GBB: 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?"


I would want my spouse to say whatever it is that has you feeling unsatisfied or unhappy I'm willing to work with you to fix it, not run away from the problem. After all we did choose to be partners in life, and I won't give up on my partner.

Marriage is work, the work is what makes it worth it. Otherwise you're just roommates with benefits. NTTIAWWT, just don't call that situation a marriage
 
2014-01-15 04:47:45 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: There is nothing in the law that requires it be until death.

So you think I can go to the city clerk's office and ask for a 10 year marriage?  I think you and I have a very different factual understanding of the world.

I can get married and end it in 10 years.


But you cannot file and get a 10 year marriage.
 
2014-01-15 04:48:29 PM

jst3p: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?

We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

How does the fact that many people don't adhere to the "till death" vow affect your marriage at all?

It affects society's perception of my marriage.  You might remember my college degree analogy.

And that harms you or your marriage how specifically? In your bad college degree analogy someone with that degree will have a harder time getting a job.

Still waiting to hear a response to this.


Re-read the college degree analogy.  The answer was there.  It's getting tiresome constantly re-quoting myself.
 
2014-01-15 04:49:40 PM

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: 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.


That works the other way to. Working on this relationship makes me feel icky and I just don't feel like it really so I won't.

What's mature? Putting effort into something or just blowing it off, you know because you have better things to do
 
2014-01-15 04:50:02 PM

vicioushobbit: lennavan: vicioushobbit: vicioushobbit: You really care too much about what other people think about your marriage.

You care too, you just aren't willing to admit it. That's why you introduce him as your husband to other people, that's why you had a wedding and invited people. That's why when you or your husband is in the hospital, the first thing out of your mouth will be "I'm his wife." Because you want those people to know you are married and what that means and you also know if you tell the doctor you're just his partner, you'll be kindly escorted to the waiting room.

Ok, I'm not going to argue with you about your perception of what goes on in my head.

OH THE IRONY.

No, jackass, it's why I'm not arguing with you on it.

Irony, another word whose definition you decide as you go along, it seems.



Right after you got done telling me what your perception of what goes on in my head, you got upset at my perception of what goes on in your head.  That'd be textbook irony right there.
 
2014-01-15 04:50:30 PM

lennavan: jst3p: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: How is your marriage less valued because othrer people get divorced?

We've been over this.

jst3p: in reality that "till death" part is decoration, not part of the meaning of the word anymore?

How does the fact that many people don't adhere to the "till death" vow affect your marriage at all?

It affects society's perception of my marriage.  You might remember my college degree analogy.

And that harms you or your marriage how specifically? In your bad college degree analogy someone with that degree will have a harder time getting a job.

Still waiting to hear a response to this.

Re-read the college degree analogy.  The answer was there.  It's getting tiresome constantly re-quoting myself.


So you can't explain how you or your marriage are actually harmed by the devaluation of marriage. Got it.
 
2014-01-15 04:51:29 PM

GrizzlyPouch: What's mature? Putting effort into something or just blowing it off, you know because you have better things to do


Both can be, depending on the circumstances.
 
2014-01-15 05:02:32 PM

jst3p: So you can't explain


I already explained it and if you weren't willing to read it the first time and aren't willing to hit "CTRL F" and search for "college" to find the answer now, then clearly you're not actually interested in knowing the answer.  I think it's pretty clear what's the case here.

jst3p: how you or your marriage are actually harmed by the devaluation of marriage


You don't understand how someone's marriage is harmed by the devaluation of marriage.  I know you're not trolling, I know you're not stupid.  This is someone else posting, isn't it?
 
2014-01-15 05:04:06 PM

jst3p: GrizzlyPouch: What's mature? Putting effort into something or just blowing it off, you know because you have better things to do

Both can be, depending on the circumstances.


True raking the leaves would be somewhat immature if say your house is burning down. Blowing off the most important relationship in your life? Not much you could justify doing over that
 
2014-01-15 05:10:44 PM

lennavan: jst3p: So you can't explain

I already explained it and if you weren't willing to read it the first time and aren't willing to hit "CTRL F" and search for "college" to find the answer now, then clearly you're not actually interested in knowing the answer.  I think it's pretty clear what's the case here.

jst3p: how you or your marriage are actually harmed by the devaluation of marriage

You don't understand how someone's marriage is harmed by the devaluation of marriage.  I know you're not trolling, I know you're not stupid.  This is someone else posting, isn't it?



You have yet to give any specific way your marriage is harmed by the devaluation of marriage. Your marriage isn't any different. You are afforded all of the same legal protections and rights that marriage gives.

Your college analogy is thus:

Did you go to college?  Let's pretend yes.  You got a college degree.  One guy at your college is a complete dumbass.  Does that devalue your degree?  No of course not.  When you hit the job market, employers will know the vast majority of people from your college with your degree are good smart people.

Now what if 50%+ of the people at your college are complete dumbasses.  Does that devalue your degree?  Yes.  When you hit the job market and your degree says Florida State University, employers will have no idea if you're a dumbass or smart.


That does not give any indication of any harm done to you or your marriage because of this "devaluation" of marriage. You have not answered the question. Not eve once.
 
2014-01-15 05:12:55 PM

GrizzlyPouch: jst3p: GrizzlyPouch: What's mature? Putting effort into something or just blowing it off, you know because you have better things to do

Both can be, depending on the circumstances.

True raking the leaves would be somewhat immature if say your house is burning down. Blowing off the most important relationship in your life? Not much you could justify doing over that


Sometimes the mature thing to do is to realize that something isn't going to work and move on for all involved.

I loved her, I really did. But there were repeated breaches of trust and they killed me every single time. And I had no reason to believe it was going to stop.

I wouldn't say I blew it off though.
 
2014-01-15 05:19:13 PM

jst3p: Your college analogy is thus:


That analogy explains how a large number of people acting in a manner could devalue my college degree.  By analogy, a large number of people acting in a certain manner could devalue my marriage.

jst3p: You have yet to give any specific way your marriage is harmed by the devaluation of marriage.


Devaluation of marriage IS the specific way it is harmed.  Society VALUES marriage and because of that, it affords married people protections and rights.  If we no longer VALUE it, then we can no longer make an argument to keep those protections and rights.

jst3p: You are afforded all of the same legal protections and rights that marriage gives.


Sure, until people start arguing married couples should no longer enjoy all of those protections and rights.  For an obvious, current example see for instance tax code.  When you see people getting married because they want to get on someone's insurance rather than because they want to spend their lives together, amongst others you get responses like maybe we shouldn't let spouses on insurance anymore.
 
2014-01-15 05:26:09 PM

lennavan: Sure, until people start arguing married couples should no longer enjoy all of those protections and rights.


Since no one is doing that I fail to see the problem. The damage done to you and your marriage is damage that might happen someday?

lennavan: For an obvious, current example see for instance tax code.  When you see people getting married because they want to get on someone's insurance rather than because they want to spend their lives together, amongst others you get responses like maybe we shouldn't let spouses on insurance anymore.


Spouses no longer being on insurance plans if the spouse's employer offers insurance has NOTHING to do with people getting married just to get insurance and everything to do with the new economic reality of health insurance post PPACA.

This is a HIGHLY disingenuous argument and you know it.
 
2014-01-15 05:42:13 PM
lennavan:

 amongst others you get responses likemaybe we shouldn't let spouses on insurance anymore.

Now I don't have a dog in this fight, but I have to chime in, Saying that someones actions might, at some possible future time, have a negative impact on your current level of privilege and should therefore be regulated to prevent such erosion......

Wow..

Speaking of words, and their meanings:

img.fark.net
 
2014-01-15 05:53:21 PM

jst3p: Spouses no longer being on insurance plans if the spouse's employer offers insurance has NOTHING to do with people getting married just to get insurance and everything to do with the new economic reality of health insurance post PPACA.


Yeah, that's not what I was talking about at all.  People were getting married for insurance benefits and tax breaks before Obama was even a Senator.  I love that you pretend like it's new though.

jst3p: I fail to see the problem.


I agree you fail to see the problem.  That does not mean it does not exist.

jst3p: The damage done to you and your marriage is damage that might happen someday?


On the contrary, read many of your posts in this thread -- the damage is already done.  You have posted many times in this thread that marriage has been devalued.  That's the damage.  This only question is how much worse will it get?

It seems to you, marriage holds absolutely no value.  That's fine.  But I don't know why that empowers you to be a dick and take away that value from the rest of society.  As a society, we have given value to marriage and encoded it in our laws.  You think "marriage" is synonymous with "relationship."  That's fine.  Why are you trying to impose that definition on me?  Society already gave value to the word marriage.
 
2014-01-15 05:55:04 PM

morcoth: Now I don't have a dog in this fight, but I have to chime in, Saying that someones actions might, at some possible future time, have a negative impact on your current level of privilege and should therefore be regulated to prevent such erosion......


To be fair, he didn't call for regulation, but he did claim that:

Marriage is being devalued. I can't get him to clearly state what devalued marriage looks like or demonstrate that it is actually happening.

and

This devaluation of marriage is affecting him in a negative way. And by affecting him in a negative way he means that someday someone might think about taking away the rights and protections that marriage provides because it is valued less than it used to be.

Now I will give him that marriage rates are down and in that he might have a point that people don't value getting married as much as they used to as a personal choice, but I don't see how that diminishes the "value" of his marriage in any way.
 
2014-01-15 05:57:18 PM

morcoth: Saying that someones actions might, at some possible future time, have a negative impact on your current level of privilege and should therefore be regulated to prevent such erosion......


I actually directly stated in the thread I'm not suggesting regulations, so ...

That said, I know you currently aren't a murderer.  However, at some possible future time, murdering me would indeed have a negative impact on my current level of privilege and as such, is against the law.  Now I hear that makes you pouty stompy mad but there it is.
 
2014-01-15 05:58:52 PM

lennavan: On the contrary, read many of your posts in this thread -- the damage is already done.  You have posted many times in this thread that marriage has been devalued.  That's the damage.


What damage? How is your marriage any different because of this damage?

lennavan: It seems to you, marriage holds absolutely no value.


Not at all true.

lennavan: But I don't know why that empowers you to be a dick and take away that value from the rest of society.


I never advocated taking anything away from anyone.

 As a society, we have given value to marriage and encoded it in our laws.  You think "marriage" is synonymous with "relationship."

Absolutely not as evidenced by the fact that I clearly said I have been in marriages but am currently in a relationship.

 That's fine.  Why are you trying to impose that definition on me?

I am not.
 
2014-01-15 06:06:21 PM

jst3p: I can't get him to clearly state what devalued marriage looks like


What devalued marriage might look like:

jst3p: I can get married and end it in 10 years.

jst3p: Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract granting inheritance rights to a non-related person.
[That's a Bingo.jpg]

Gothnet: we're moving to a time when it means what the two people in the marriage say it means

jst3p: The minimum requirements [for marriage] are going to the courthouse and getting a piece of paper signed.
jst3p: to me marriage is more than dating, but forever? Hopefully, but probably not.

jst3p: I look at three levels of serious commitment, and marriage is the "lowest" one.
Marriage. ...
Buying a house together. This is the next step of commitment.


Dude, you take buying a house more seriously than marriage.  And you don't understand how marriage has been devalued.  That's because you yourself place zero value in it.  I cannot demonstrate how something you hold no value for lost value.  I'd have to convince you to give a shiat about marriage and you clearly don't.
 
2014-01-15 06:09:49 PM

lennavan: jst3p: I can't get him to clearly state what devalued marriage looks like

What devalued marriage might look like:

jst3p: I can get married and end it in 10 years.
jst3p: Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract granting inheritance rights to a non-related person.
[That's a Bingo.jpg]
Gothnet: we're moving to a time when it means what the two people in the marriage say it means
jst3p: The minimum requirements [for marriage] are going to the courthouse and getting a piece of paper signed.
jst3p: to me marriage is more than dating, but forever? Hopefully, but probably not.

jst3p: I look at three levels of serious commitment, and marriage is the "lowest" one.
Marriage. ...
Buying a house together. This is the next step of commitment.

Dude, you take buying a house more seriously than marriage.  And you don't understand how marriage has been devalued.  That's because you yourself place zero value in it.  I cannot demonstrate how something you hold no value for lost value.  I'd have to convince you to give a shiat about marriage and you clearly don't.


My having different feelings regarding marriage and it's intent does nothing to diminish the value of YOUR marriage. And you keep saying marriage has no value to me and that is completely false. There are some circumstances I could leading to my getting married again.
 
2014-01-15 06:10:31 PM

lennavan: jst3p: I can't get him to clearly state what devalued marriage looks like

What devalued marriage might look like:

jst3p: I can get married and end it in 10 years.
jst3p: Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract granting inheritance rights to a non-related person.
[That's a Bingo.jpg]
Gothnet: we're moving to a time when it means what the two people in the marriage say it means
jst3p: The minimum requirements [for marriage] are going to the courthouse and getting a piece of paper signed.
jst3p: to me marriage is more than dating, but forever? Hopefully, but probably not.

jst3p: I look at three levels of serious commitment, and marriage is the "lowest" one.
Marriage. ...
Buying a house together. This is the next step of commitment.

Dude, you take buying a house more seriously than marriage.  And you don't understand how marriage has been devalued.  That's because you yourself place zero value in it.  I cannot demonstrate how something you hold no value for lost value.  I'd have to convince you to give a shiat about marriage and you clearly don't.


Ok, people on the internet are saying things you don't like about marriage. Poor thing. Now, show us where the actual DAMAGE is.

Dipshiat.
 
2014-01-15 06:12:55 PM
Perhaps the rising divorce rate is an indication that historically people overvalued bad marriages.
 
2014-01-15 06:14:03 PM

jst3p: What damage?


I'd kinda like my kid to grow up taking marriage seriously.  If that means he never gets married and just has long-term girlfriends, that's perfectly fine by me.  It's one of those my word is my bond kinda deals.  Except the world is full of "I promise to love you forever" but eh, divorce happens, these things happen, what are ya gonna do.  Promises don't matter.

You're a member of society.  Society impacts people.  I know you want to pretend you live in a vacuum and what you do doesn't effect the rest of us but when you live in a society, it does.  I didn't know any of the people during 9/11, I don't know any of the families in Newtown but you're crazy if you think shiat like that doesn't impact others.

Now not you personally but it seems you're fine with others just getting married and not on a whim (your britney spears example).  That impacts people.  That teaches kids marriage is a farking joke.  That changes the perception of marriage as less meaningful.  I know you want to pretend it doesn't but it does.

jst3p: I never advocated taking anything away from anyone.


Then stop devaluing marriages.  You're taking away value.
 
2014-01-15 06:18:14 PM

jst3p: Perhaps the rising divorce rate is an indication that historically people overvalued bad marriages.


Perhaps it's both.
 
2014-01-15 06:23:35 PM

lennavan: jst3p: jst3p: My divorce doesn't even make my marriage meaningless. Like I said, I learned a lot that changed who I am today because of those marriage and divorces

You are conflating the word "marriage" with "relationship" again. You should stop.

I have marriage certificates and the marriages are a matter of public record. They were marriages.

And yet it was the relationship bit and the children that made you who you are today.  Not the fact that you were married.  Your ex didn't get pregnant when you signed the piece of paper.


So you are saying marriage does not affect a relationship?

The idea that everyone just wakes up one morning and decides "I am going to get divorced" is silly.

Most people do their best to make their marriage work and avoid divorce.

But some times people change, and they need to go their separate ways.

It doesn't necessarily mean you didn't consider things or know your spouse well enough before getting married. It often means that life happened.

When my mother and father got married they were in the 20s living in the city looking towards careers in nursing and computers.

Then life arrived, working a a nursing home broke my mother from any nursing and my father's dad got sick and they moved to the country to take over the farm. Then his computers career path ends when some drunk hits his car and he can't get to school for a while so he focusses on the farm and raising his kids.

Fifteen years after they married they are living on a farm 2+ hours from her family. She works retail, he runs the family farm, and they have 3 young kids.

Ten years later we are living in a small town and she works retail while he runs the office at a local factor.

Nobody could have predicted these things would happen or how they would happen or the effects on each person.

To say that they made a bad or wrong decision to get married is ludicrous.

Also, the weekend marriage of Britney Spears you brought up several times was annulled, not a divorce. Same with Henry VIII, he was never divorced, he had two annulments.
 
2014-01-15 06:23:44 PM

lennavan: jst3p: I never advocated taking anything away from anyone.

Then stop devaluing marriages.  You're taking away value.


How, specifically, do you propose I do this?
 
2014-01-15 06:28:10 PM

jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: I never advocated taking anything away from anyone.

Then stop devaluing marriages.  You're taking away value.

How, specifically, do you propose I do this?


You might start by not telling people marriage is a less serious decision than purchasing a house.  Maybe move on to at least understand that other people assign additional value to the word "marriage" versus "relationship."  Maybe you don't hold that extra value but you could keep that one to yourself.
 
2014-01-15 06:29:10 PM

dywed88: The idea that everyone just wakes up one morning and decides "I am going to get divorced" is silly.


Yeah I'm not against divorce.  I'm for taking the decision to get married more seriously.

dywed88: Also, the weekend marriage of Britney Spears you brought up


I didn't bring it up.
 
2014-01-15 06:30:34 PM

lennavan: jst3p: lennavan: jst3p: I never advocated taking anything away from anyone.

Then stop devaluing marriages.  You're taking away value.

How, specifically, do you propose I do this?

You might start by not telling people marriage is a less serious decision than purchasing a house.  Maybe move on to at least understand that other people assign additional value to the word "marriage" versus "relationship."  Maybe you don't hold that extra value but you could keep that one to yourself.


In order for your marriage to retain value you need opinions of those who feel differently to be silenced?

Yeah, sorry but no.


 And I never said it was a less serious decision just a more difficult commitment to remove yourself from. Because, it is.
 
2014-01-15 06:39:55 PM
All I know is that I'm exceptionally grateful for no-fault divorce in my case. I was already damn near wiped out by my divorce-- I gave her almost everything-- But if there were actually a requirement for one or the other of us to have to make payments or maintain any kind of contact? SCREW THAT.

We broke clean. She took her stuff and lots of my stuff. I got my freedom. I consider that a good deal.
 
2014-01-15 06:40:18 PM

jst3p: In order for your marriage to retain value you need opinions of those who feel differently to be silenced?


Oh my gosh, you're so oppressed.  jst3p, you asked me.  I never once argued or suggested you silence your opinion.  For the entire goddamn thread, post after post, I replied to your comments.  And here we are now, your honest attempt at summarizing my argument is I want to silence you.  I had no idea suggesting people who are interested in allowing the word marriage to retain it's value should probably not make a public mockery of it meant you were being SILENCED.  My poor oppressed friend, does it hurt being nailed to that cross?

Sonofabiatch.  I dunno man, I posted something about public perception of marriage as a whole and you changed it into me silencing you for my personal marriage.  No one is forcing you to be a dick, yet you choose to be.  I'm gonna go ahead and chalk this one up to you're having a bad day or I hit a nerve with you or something.

Try not to be so goddamn disingenuous, it doesn't fit your usual MO.
 
2014-01-15 06:51:22 PM

lennavan: jst3p: In order for your marriage to retain value you need opinions of those who feel differently to be silenced?

Oh my gosh, you're so oppressed.  jst3p, you asked me.  I never once argued or suggested you silence your opinion.  For the entire goddamn thread, post after post, I replied to your comments.  And here we are now, your honest attempt at summarizing my argument is I want to silence you.  I had no idea suggesting people who are interested in allowing the word marriage to retain it's value should probably not make a public mockery of it meant you were being SILENCED.  My poor oppressed friend, does it hurt being nailed to that cross?

Sonofabiatch.  I dunno man, I posted something about public perception of marriage as a whole and you changed it into me silencing you for my personal marriage.  No one is forcing you to be a dick, yet you choose to be.  I'm gonna go ahead and chalk this one up to you're having a bad day or I hit a nerve with you or something.

Try not to be so goddamn disingenuous, it doesn't fit your usual MO.


In fairness I meant to type "silent". The point still stands.

This ENTIRE THREAD you have gone on about the "devaluing" of your marriage while never ONCE showing any actual damage to your marriage or demonstrating how this devaluing has affected you AT ALL.

And then you suggest that I should stop devaluing your marriage. How? By not voicing my opinion about marriage. If the value of your marriage is so fragile that other people not valuing the institution as highly as you do puts it at risk the problem is you, not the people who don't "value" marriage as highly as you do.

I don't feel oppressed, as a matter of fact the one playing the victim card is you! Somehow I and those like me are threatening the value of not only your marriage but your childeren's likelihood of respecting marriage?

Society's attitude regarding the importance of marriage is shifting, I will give you that. But that isn't because people like me are posting their opinions and it doesn't affect YOUR marriage at all.
 
2014-01-15 07:16:12 PM
Back to the article:


"For the sake of the country, we need to be judgmental. Besides, there are plenty of people who never cease to be judgmental about members of parliament." He added: "Some will say that in a free society people should be entitled to live any lifestyle they want. However, overwhelmingly it is the taxpayer who is picking up the tab, so the state cannot be an idle bystander..."

So, how is the taxpayer subsidizing divorces? This is the troubling stuff. Evidently the State should put its grimy nose into every aspect of your life because somehow, somewhere, taxpayers have to pay one thin dime for some behavior that isn't ideal, according to some quibbledick authoritarian. Piss on him.
 
2014-01-15 08:51:30 PM
"We cannot afford to continue subsidising people who live these kind of dysfunctional lifestyles," he said.

He's 100% correct. His only problem is he's talking about himself. We can't allow these politicians to keep ruining this planet and not call them on it.
 
2014-01-15 09:52:11 PM

dj_spanmaster: The woman half of the couples, amiright?


What year did you just come from?
 
2014-01-15 10:00:03 PM
Judges that make getting divorced harder should be tarred and feathered and then forced to marry the biggest two-faced psycho biatch society can muster, then not long after the honeymoon's over, denied a divorce at the last second on a technicality.

Then tarred and feathered again.
 
2014-01-16 12:15:30 AM

menschenfresser: Can we please give the Tories and Repubitards their own country - maybe call it "Derptopia" - and just GET FARKING RID OF THEM!

I know the Conservative MPs aren't yet displaying even a shadow of the derpitude their big brothers in the GOP have, but I think they aspire to it. Out with them all! They clearly hate living in civilization anyway.


Who peed in your cornflakes this morning, sunshine?
 
2014-01-16 12:32:22 AM

jst3p: Not true.

Common law marriage exists in Colorado still. If you live as if you were married, present yourself to the world as married (wearing rings is a biggie) and call yourselves married you are married. Filing taxes as married filing joint is a pretty solid way to be common law married (not applicable to the gays as we have an amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman).

/that amendment can't last much longer


And how does a religious ceremony affect that?

A religious official can sign off on a marriage license (at least in some jurisdictions), but without filing that form, the religious ceremony is meaningless in a legal sense.
 
2014-01-16 12:39:31 AM

lennavan: dywed88: Marriage has a meaning. Look up your local statutes and/or case history.

I cannot tell you how many times in this thread I have attempted to argue that.  Yet the people you just sided with have been arguing marriage means whatever you want it to mean, or marriage means "married" and nothing more.

I cannot tell you how happy I am to have you on my side.  I just wanted you to know that we agree.


Divorce is a part of marriage law, usually no fault divorce
 
2014-01-16 12:41:07 AM
Time to face the facts: the occupation of judge attracts as many judgmental people as you'd think it would. Most of them should probably be removed from the bench just as soon as the sticks up their asses can be unscrewed from it.
 
2014-01-16 01:18:58 AM

dywed88: jst3p: Not true.

Common law marriage exists in Colorado still. If you live as if you were married, present yourself to the world as married (wearing rings is a biggie) and call yourselves married you are married. Filing taxes as married filing joint is a pretty solid way to be common law married (not applicable to the gays as we have an amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman).

/that amendment can't last much longer

And how does a religious ceremony affect that?

A religious official can sign off on a marriage license (at least in some jurisdictions), but without filing that form, the religious ceremony is meaningless in a legal sense.


Again not true. Common law marriage does not require ANY forms be filed to be recognized.
 
2014-01-16 01:46:24 AM
i don't believe there are that many cases where nobody is at fault.

90% of the time, somebody is guilty 100% of the time.
 
2014-01-16 01:47:56 AM

jst3p: Again not true. Common law marriage does not require ANY forms be filed to be recognized.


Once again, this has no relevance to the religious ceremony. They only way it is relevant is if you file the certificate. No ceremony is relevant to any common law marriage.
 
2014-01-16 01:53:42 AM

dywed88: jst3p: Again not true. Common law marriage does not require ANY forms be filed to be recognized.

Once again, this has no relevance to the religious ceremony. They only way it is relevant is if you file the certificate. No ceremony is relevant to any common law marriage.


You can have a religious ceremony without filing a certificate and it still be a legal marriage. I am not sure what point you are trying to make anymore. You originally said:

In all jurisdictions I am aware off, a religious ceremony is meaningless unless you file a signed marriage certificate with the sate.

Which is simply not true.
 
2014-01-16 02:44:36 AM

jst3p: You can have a religious ceremony without filing a certificate and it still be a legal marriage. I am not sure what point you are trying to make anymore. You originally said:

In all jurisdictions I am aware off, a religious ceremony is meaningless unless you file a signed marriage certificate with the sate.

Which is simply not true.


If you are in a common law marriage, whether you had a religious ceremony or not is irrelevant. You can have one and be in a common law marriage, but from the state's perspective the ceremony is irrelevant as a couple in the exact same situation that did not have a religious ceremony will almost certainly qualify as common-law as well.

The only case where the religious ceremony is relevant for the state is if the priest (or whatever) is the one who signs off on the marriage certificate that is later filed with the state.
 
2014-01-16 03:25:47 AM
politicians need to be slut-shamed as well.
 
Displayed 407 of 407 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report