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.

(KOCO Oklahoma City)   Oklahoma enacts bill that requires married couples who have children younger than 18 to pay for and attend classes before they can split. Too bad they didn't attend any classes BEFORE they got married   (koco.com) divider line 124
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

2608 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jun 2014 at 7:24 PM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-11 04:06:50 PM  
Well that sounds very small government minded
 
2014-06-11 04:10:04 PM  
Getting married should be three times harder than getting a divorce, not the other way around. And a marriage license should require at least as much coursework/sex ed as a driver's license requires.

Or maybe there can be 2 tiers of legal marriages: those where you just get one and get knocked up like you do now, but which only carry minimal financial incentives (you can file jointly, but have to pay inheritance tax, can't get survivor's benefits, etc), and one where you take the classes and get a whole slew of incentives (no inheritance tax, more tax breaks, school vouchers, etc). Anyone who got married in the first way could take classes at any time to 'upgrade'. Classes wouldn't be too hard or expensive (comparable to driver's ed and a driver's license today), so no socio economic or racial discrimination. Church weddings would be the first class, but ministers could be licensed for the teaching required for second class (but you still take the test at the courthouse).

Maybe I'm being narrowminded or something, but there has to be SOME way to keep the Clevons of the world from breeding us all into extinction...
 
2014-06-11 04:12:40 PM  
Keep the feds out of your business so you can make more room for the state.
 
2014-06-11 04:13:32 PM  

whistleridge: Getting married should be three times harder than getting a divorce, not the other way around. And a marriage license should require at least as much coursework/sex ed as a driver's license requires.

Or maybe there can be 2 tiers of legal marriages: those where you just get one and get knocked up like you do now, but which only carry minimal financial incentives (you can file jointly, but have to pay inheritance tax, can't get survivor's benefits, etc), and one where you take the classes and get a whole slew of incentives (no inheritance tax, more tax breaks, school vouchers, etc). Anyone who got married in the first way could take classes at any time to 'upgrade'. Classes wouldn't be too hard or expensive (comparable to driver's ed and a driver's license today), so no socio economic or racial discrimination. Church weddings would be the first class, but ministers could be licensed for the teaching required for second class (but you still take the test at the courthouse).

Maybe I'm being narrowminded or something, but there has to be SOME way to keep the Clevons of the world from breeding us all into extinction...


How freedom oriented of you.
 
2014-06-11 04:14:57 PM  
I'm not opposed to requiring couples to attend classes before a marriage and pre-divorce. A lot of people rush into things in the heat of the moment. A divorce can be a very traumatic and confusing thing for a child to go through.

/ but then, I'd probably be in favor of requiring couples to attend classes before they have kids

// Earlier this year; a young couple(she was 18, he was 19) in town basically starved and beat their 14 month old child to death. If they had classes or support available or knew they could give up the kid, no questions asked, the whole situation might have been avoided.
 
2014-06-11 04:18:17 PM  
Peter von Nostrand:

How freedom oriented of you.

You're still free to get married. There's absolutely nothing keeping you from getting married the same as you do today. You just don't get as many financial perks is all. Kind of the way states are free to set whatever drinking age they like, but they all choose 21 so they can get those sweet, sweet federal highway dollars...
 
2014-06-11 04:20:18 PM  

whistleridge: Peter von Nostrand:

How freedom oriented of you.

You're still free to get married. There's absolutely nothing keeping you from getting married the same as you do today. You just don't get as many financial perks is all. Kind of the way states are free to set whatever drinking age they like, but they all choose 21 so they can get those sweet, sweet federal highway dollars...


Martial classes probably would be good but I don't think people should be forced to go
 
2014-06-11 04:23:29 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com

Hooray!
 
2014-06-11 04:28:36 PM  

Peter von Nostrand: whistleridge: Peter von Nostrand:

How freedom oriented of you.

You're still free to get married. There's absolutely nothing keeping you from getting married the same as you do today. You just don't get as many financial perks is all. Kind of the way states are free to set whatever drinking age they like, but they all choose 21 so they can get those sweet, sweet federal highway dollars...

Martial classes probably would be good but I don't think people should be forced to go


And I agree. Which is why I didn't say they should be. I said the education should be incentivized. Big difference.

If nothing else, attempting to forcepeople to get a license to have a baby or get married is doomed to fail right from the start. Biology doesn't need permission to have a baby, and forcing licenses would just lead people to not bother. This can't be a carrot and stick thing, because the stick won't work. You just need a little carrot, and then a damn BIG carrot a little further out.
 
2014-06-11 04:31:28 PM  

whistleridge: Peter von Nostrand: whistleridge: Peter von Nostrand:

How freedom oriented of you.

You're still free to get married. There's absolutely nothing keeping you from getting married the same as you do today. You just don't get as many financial perks is all. Kind of the way states are free to set whatever drinking age they like, but they all choose 21 so they can get those sweet, sweet federal highway dollars...

Martial classes probably would be good but I don't think people should be forced to go

And I agree. Which is why I didn't say they should be. I said the education should be incentivized. Big difference.

If nothing else, attempting to forcepeople to get a license to have a baby or get married is doomed to fail right from the start. Biology doesn't need permission to have a baby, and forcing licenses would just lead people to not bother. This can't be a carrot and stick thing, because the stick won't work. You just need a little carrot, and then a damn BIG carrot a little further out.


Rich people marriage and poor people marriage... I don't think you'll find that very popular.
 
2014-06-11 04:36:48 PM  

whistleridge: keep the Clevons of the world from breeding us all into extinction


www.yorubagirldancing.com
 
2014-06-11 04:38:53 PM  
It's not unusual for states to have mandatory classes for separating parents.  It's the family law mantra "interest of the child" that is supposed to justify making the parents attend.  The class is about how to minimize collateral damage to the kids.  It's ... for the snowflakes.
 
2014-06-11 04:41:12 PM  
2.bp.blogspot.com

How bout no?
 
2014-06-11 04:46:58 PM  
Some how I don't think that this will survive the equal protection requirement in the us constitution
 
2014-06-11 04:54:38 PM  
I don't know how this is new. Maybe it was just a judicial thing but they required it when I got divorced over a decade ago.
 
2014-06-11 05:04:14 PM  

ginandbacon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 320x248]

How bout no?


But she's a girl who can't say no.
 
2014-06-11 05:21:04 PM  

whistleridge: Getting married should be three times harder than getting a divorce, not the other way around. And a marriage license should require at least as much coursework/sex ed as a driver's license requires... 
Maybe I'm being narrowminded or something, but there has to be SOME way to keep the Clevons of the world from breeding us all into extinction...


Maybe this is a newsflash for you, but people don't actually have to be married in order to have sex and bear children.
 
2014-06-11 05:22:48 PM  

whistleridge: Biology doesn't need permission to have a baby... You just need a little carrot, and then a damn BIG carrot a little further out.


theinterrobang.com
 
2014-06-11 05:29:06 PM  

Peter von Nostrand: Well that sounds very small government minded


And a laser-like focus on jobs.
 
2014-06-11 05:36:30 PM  

whistleridge: And a marriage license should require at least as much coursework/sex ed as a driver's license requires.


Where do you live that getting a driver's license requires sex ed? What do they teach you? What positions offer the best maneuverability in cramped spaces and how to get jizz stains out of upholstery?
 
2014-06-11 05:39:43 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: ginandbacon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 320x248]

How bout no?

But she's a girl who can't say no.


Oh FFS! It's after 5 and I am doing the best I can! WORK WITH ME!!!!!!
 
2014-06-11 05:49:25 PM  

whistleridge: Peter von Nostrand: whistleridge: Peter von Nostrand:

How freedom oriented of you.

You're still free to get married. There's absolutely nothing keeping you from getting married the same as you do today. You just don't get as many financial perks is all. Kind of the way states are free to set whatever drinking age they like, but they all choose 21 so they can get those sweet, sweet federal highway dollars...

Martial classes probably would be good but I don't think people should be forced to go

And I agree. Which is why I didn't say they should be. I said the education should be incentivized. Big difference.

If nothing else, attempting to forcepeople to get a license to have a baby or get married is doomed to fail right from the start. Biology doesn't need permission to have a baby, and forcing licenses would just lead people to not bother. This can't be a carrot and stick thing, because the stick won't work. You just need a little carrot, and then a damn BIG carrot a little further out.


Whoa, I can't be expected to read that entire comment. I have to still pretend I'm working
 
2014-06-11 05:55:52 PM  

Rustico: Peter von Nostrand: Well that sounds very small government minded

And a laser-like focus on jobs.


Hey, this is about jobs! Someone will have to teach those classes, right?
 
2014-06-11 06:00:16 PM  

Rustico: Peter von Nostrand: Well that sounds very small government minded

And a laser-like focus on jobs.


If couples stuck to 'jobs, then there wouldn't be any kids involved in the first place.
 
2014-06-11 06:11:01 PM  
Not news.

Florida makes it mandatory for divorcing parents to take a class on not dragging their kids into divorce issues, turn kids against the other parents.

I found the class informative though obvious stuff. Unfortunately many of my classmates couldn't leave their anger and bitterness outside the classroom. Divorce sucks. It's stressful. Don't make it worse on your kids.
 
2014-06-11 06:17:27 PM  
If the class includes "don't use your children to punish your ex-spouse" then I think it's a great idea.

If the class is "Suck it up and stay together" then screw that.
 
2014-06-11 06:26:44 PM  

Relatively Obscure: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 178x219]

Hooray!


Exactly.  This is nothing more than a continuation of the "MARRIAGE GOOD! SINGLE BAD!" mentality, especially for women and poors.

/But not poor gays.  They can go fark themselves in Oklahoma.
 
2014-06-11 06:27:48 PM  

whistleridge: Or maybe there can be 2 tiers of legal marriages: those where you just get one and get knocked up like you do now, but which only carry minimal financial incentives (you can file jointly, but have to pay inheritance tax, can't get survivor's benefits, etc), and one where you take the classes and get a whole slew of incentives (no inheritance tax, more tax breaks, school vouchers, etc). Anyone who got married in the first way could take classes at any time to 'upgrade'. Classes wouldn't be too hard or expensive (comparable to driver's ed and a driver's license today), so no socio economic or racial discrimination. Church weddings would be the first class, but ministers could be licensed for the teaching required for second class (but you still take the test at the courthouse).


This has got to be one of the dumbest things I've read in a long time. It's bad, and you should feel bad for writing it.
 
2014-06-11 06:49:37 PM  

Ambivalence: If the class includes "don't use your children to punish your ex-spouse" then I think it's a great idea.

If the class is "Suck it up and stay together" then screw that.


So totally this. The difference between "let's do this right" & "no, don't!" Fark that.

You know what this feels like to me? Almost like some sort of justification for telling the gays they can't get married. I know I've often used divorce as a counter-argument to the "sanctity of marriage" argument. If you're so concerned about how holy marriage is, then why aren't you protesting divorce court?

It also reeks of the pro-life movement: I don't trust you to make the right decision, so here's my idea....
 
2014-06-11 07:03:54 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: whistleridge: Or maybe there can be 2 tiers of legal marriages: those where you just get one and get knocked up like you do now, but which only carry minimal financial incentives (you can file jointly, but have to pay inheritance tax, can't get survivor's benefits, etc), and one where you take the classes and get a whole slew of incentives (no inheritance tax, more tax breaks, school vouchers, etc). Anyone who got married in the first way could take classes at any time to 'upgrade'. Classes wouldn't be too hard or expensive (comparable to driver's ed and a driver's license today), so no socio economic or racial discrimination. Church weddings would be the first class, but ministers could be licensed for the teaching required for second class (but you still take the test at the courthouse).

This has got to be one of the dumbest things I've read in a long time. It's bad, and you should feel bad for writing it.


Unlike your comment, which was a paragon of incisive wit and forward thinking?

I welcome the opportunity to shred YOUR admittedly bad idea. Come on, crap it out there. I'll be happy to show how you reallyrip a stupid idea (which I said it was) to shreds.
 
2014-06-11 07:19:54 PM  
I think marriage should be like passports that expire every 10 years and have to be renewed.
 
2014-06-11 07:28:52 PM  

reported: Where do you live that getting a driver's license requires sex ed?


Does "Don't get a DUI or you'll get raped in prison" count as sex ed?

/true story about my driver's ed
 
2014-06-11 07:29:25 PM  
If only there was a class people under 18 could take that would have helped prevent them from being parents in the first place... but what!
 
rka
2014-06-11 07:30:17 PM  

whistleridge: Pokey.Clyde: whistleridge: Or maybe there can be 2 tiers of legal marriages: those where you just get one and get knocked up like you do now, but which only carry minimal financial incentives (you can file jointly, but have to pay inheritance tax, can't get survivor's benefits, etc), and one where you take the classes and get a whole slew of incentives (no inheritance tax, more tax breaks, school vouchers, etc). Anyone who got married in the first way could take classes at any time to 'upgrade'. Classes wouldn't be too hard or expensive (comparable to driver's ed and a driver's license today), so no socio economic or racial discrimination. Church weddings would be the first class, but ministers could be licensed for the teaching required for second class (but you still take the test at the courthouse).

This has got to be one of the dumbest things I've read in a long time. It's bad, and you should feel bad for writing it.

Unlike your comment, which was a paragon of incisive wit and forward thinking?

I welcome the opportunity to shred YOUR admittedly bad idea. Come on, crap it out there. I'll be happy to show how you reallyrip a stupid idea (which I said it was) to shreds.


Ok, and I'm just spit-ballin' here.

How about we do nothing? Nada. Zip. Zilch.

How about less laws? How about less government in marriage? Because they've done nothing but fark it up thusfar.
 
2014-06-11 07:32:07 PM  

James!: Keep the feds out of your business so you can make more room for the state.


This. It's amusing - wait, no, that's not the right word.

It's farking retarded, the way "conservatives" yap about the sinister power of the federal government (and lots of it is sinister, to be sure), but seem to have no problem whatsoever with states or municipalities passing various regulations/rules that intrude on people's private lives and decisions (like the various anti-abortion measures many states have created).

Either you want government to micromanage our lives or you don't. But if you don't, that attitude should apply to ALL government (or quasi-government, like HOA) entities, not just the ones headed by the secret Muslim Socialist black man. If you biatch about Obamacare, but think it's A-OK for the state to make pregnant women listen to some bullshiat preachy lecture about abortion, plus go through a waiting period in order to get an abortion, you're an asshole.
 
2014-06-11 07:32:41 PM  

timujin: Rustico: Peter von Nostrand: Well that sounds very small government minded

And a laser-like focus on jobs.

Hey, this is about jobs! Someone will have to teach those classes, right?


Yeah. And now I'm wondering who in the legislature has money invested in them.
 
2014-06-11 07:33:12 PM  
What about if it's a divorce due to domestic violence/child abuse? Or what if one parent is in jail?
 
2014-06-11 07:33:19 PM  

rka: Ok, and I'm just spit-ballin' here.

How about we do nothing? Nada. Zip. Zilch.

How about less laws? How about less government in marriage? Because they've done nothing but fark it up thusfar.


This.
 
2014-06-11 07:34:31 PM  
Oklahoma has an incentive for attending marriage counseling before marriage. I can't quite recall what it is, some fee gets waived or something. The classes have to be signed off by the instructor/pastor/whoever. Maybe another Okie can help me out and fill in the blanks.

Also as someone said, you don't have to be married to have kids so why punish the married people only? Unless there is some kind of rule for non-married couples.
 
2014-06-11 07:42:43 PM  

Ambivalence: I think marriage should be like passports that expire every 10 years and have to be renewed.


It would be fascinating to see how that would reconcile with common law marriage.
 
2014-06-11 07:45:26 PM  

Peter von Nostrand: whistleridge: Peter von Nostrand:

How freedom oriented of you.

You're still free to get married. There's absolutely nothing keeping you from getting married the same as you do today. You just don't get as many financial perks is all. Kind of the way states are free to set whatever drinking age they like, but they all choose 21 so they can get those sweet, sweet federal highway dollars...

Martial classes probably would be good but I don't think people should be forced to go


They should also be geared towards being cheap/free.

/parenting classes as well
//not mandatory, but easily accessible if you so desire
 
2014-06-11 07:47:58 PM  
The only thing new and probably unconstitutional is the "pay for" clause. CA has mandatory mediation for parents, but they're free. You can't have a mandatory fee-based legal requirement that prevents the indigent from equal access to the courts.

Otherwise, meh. I'd rather there be mandatory pre-marriage and childbirth counseling.
 
2014-06-11 07:48:21 PM  

rka: How about less government in marriage?


How about less government in this governmental institution?

Guys?

Guys?
 
2014-06-11 07:49:59 PM  
Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas (well, maybe not Kansas), Missouri and Arkansas plan new marriage mills at border crossings.
 
2014-06-11 07:50:49 PM  
Most states have that provision in the law now

Trying to keep warring exes from farking over their kids with their venom and game playing

It does seem to help some
 
2014-06-11 07:55:53 PM  
I think a better approach is to reward those who choose to take the class, not punish those who don't.
 
2014-06-11 07:58:42 PM  

whistleridge: Getting married should be three times harder than getting a divorce, not the other way around. And a marriage license should require at least as much coursework/sex ed as a driver's license requires.

Or maybe there can be 2 tiers of legal marriages: those where you just get one and get knocked up like you do now, but which only carry minimal financial incentives (you can file jointly, but have to pay inheritance tax, can't get survivor's benefits, etc), and one where you take the classes and get a whole slew of incentives (no inheritance tax, more tax breaks, school vouchers, etc). Anyone who got married in the first way could take classes at any time to 'upgrade'. Classes wouldn't be too hard or expensive (comparable to driver's ed and a driver's license today), so no socio economic or racial discrimination. Church weddings would be the first class, but ministers could be licensed for the teaching required for second class (but you still take the test at the courthouse).

Maybe I'm being narrowminded or something, but there has to be SOME way to keep the Clevons of the world from breeding us all into extinction...


I am OK with this. Apply the same tax breaks etc etc to the having kids as well. Take the parenting classes and get the write offs etc or not, your choice. Classes could be free and available at the local public library & community centers. I would fully support that all day long.
 
2014-06-11 07:59:36 PM  

Jacobin: Most states have that provision in the law now

Trying to keep warring exes from farking over their kids with their venom and game playing

It does seem to help some


Apparently, Kentucky has this, and I asked my boyfriend about ti because he got divorced in Kentucky. He said even people getting divorced for domestic violence reasons have to go through it, and it costs $100 in Kentucky. He said that the class he was in was being taught by a pastor who said something like, "In a marriage, each party is responsible for the break up." A woman in the class said "So I'm the one responsible for getting my ass beat?" The pastor said "No, but..." and wisely didn't finish that sentence. It's a bunch of bullshiat
 
2014-06-11 07:59:55 PM  
"If I know we're not in love anymore, I don't feel like I should go to any class, just move on with our lives," Davon Shepherd said.

What an asshole. That class is probably more for him than anyone else.
 
2014-06-11 08:02:14 PM  
Florida has done this for 20 years or more. It's simple stuff. Don't use the kids as leverage against each other. The Father has a right to see the kids, even if he doesn't pay child support. The children should be put first. Other common sense stuff like working out visitation when schedules conflict.

You know, don't be an ass to each other. The class was free (then, don't about now), but mandatory.
 
Displayed 50 of 124 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report