Some conservatives want to make it a lot harder to dissolve a marriage.
Before the 1960s, it was really hard to get divorced in America.
Typically, the only way to do it was to convince a judge that your spouse had committed some form of wrongdoing, like adultery, abandonment, or “cruelty” (that is, abuse). This could be difficult: “Even if you could prove you had been hit, that didn’t necessarily mean it rose to the level of cruelty that justified a divorce,” said Marcia Zug, a family law professor at the University of South Carolina.
Then came a revolution: In 1969, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan of California (who was himself divorced) signed the nation’s first no-fault divorce law, allowing people to end their marriages without proving they’d been wronged. The move was a recognition that “people were going to get out of marriages,” Zug said, and gave them a way to do that without resorting to subterfuge. Similar laws soon swept the country, and rates of domestic violence and spousal murder began to drop as people — especially women — gained more freedom to leave dangerous situations.
Today, however, a counter-revolution is brewing: Conservative commentators and lawmakers are calling for an end to no-fault divorce, arguing that it has harmed men and even destroyed the fabric of society. Oklahoma state Sen. Dusty Deevers, for example, introduced a bill in January to ban his state’s version of no-fault divorce. The Texas Republican Party added a call to end the practice to its 2022 platform (the plank is preserved in the 2024 version). Federal lawmakers like Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) and House Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, have spoken out in favor of tightening divorce laws.
They're saying that about every religion. I guess the Muslims are also having a bunch of kids. Idk, I think a war fought with pussy is a war in which everyone loses.
And with child marriage looking to make a comeback, you can bet your ass that arranged marriage will also return.
Turns out the full Biblical definition of marriage is again, women and girls have no say in who they marry. Just wait. First they legalize child marriage, then they legalize arranged marriage. Got a debt to pay off? Just offer the guy you owe money to your daughter. Want to move up the social ladder at work? Have your daughter marry into a higher class. Don't worry about what she wants. Marriage isn't about "love", whatever that is. It's a tool for moving up in the world. /s
But it's almost like they want European-style feudalism back. The CEOs and billionaires become the new nobility, and we all become serfs, and we are basically already there. But, I have a plan. I'll join my liege lord's army and hopefully I'll serve honorably enough that he shall award me a fief and small parcel of land. Then y'all can move in and become my serfs!
I was married, later divorced, and am now in a position where I've been in a committed relationship for more than 10 years, but we aren't married.
The benefits are clear and pushed onto us: I can't share health care with my partner if we aren't married. The system is rigged to make people in relationships eventually get married.
This is why my husband and I got married after 10 years together.
Originally neither of us cared because we were essentially already married. But doing it officially then I could be on his insurance, and if anything happens where one of us gets incapacitated the other can make healthcare decisions. Sucks that's how it works though.
I was in the same boat as you. However, I met my wife while working overseas. We dated and lived together for two years.
The only reason we got married was for immigration reasons. If she could have came to the US easier then we would still be "dating."
Once she got to the US, she asked why we divorce so much. I explained for 99% of people we get married for 3 reasons; pregnant, religion, or financial. Once one of those are resolved we split.
It is due to the system pushing you into young marriage. To produce kids young and never own anything but work non stop.
Remember work 50 years for the possibility to enjoy 10, maybe.
There's like 1200 legal benefits to marriage iirc. Things like being able to visit in the hospital outside of visiting hours, possessions going to your spouse after death if there's no will, stuff like that.
What state do you live in if you don't mind me asking. Many states have rules that would allow you to add them to their insurance if you live together for a length of time. A year for AZ is what popped up when I went to search because I'm here on a work trip.
The concept of the European style family is a tool of conservative control. When you create specific boundaries on what is considered kinship you create subjects of economic categories. If you get a bunch of kickbacks for playing by the rules then there are also people who are purposefully excluded from playing to create additional economic goads. Like if you are disowned from your family you can lose generational wealth and support which is designed to keep young people in line by way of fear . Welfare and social securities weakens the economic ties of the family politic control to make you reliant on the support of the people you are related to by blood and to keep people who might be your chosen family at a distance unable to help.
So called "family values" aren't lovely dovey nice things. They are to make being an individual with different needs a failure state.
Isn't this the same argument as "if women can't have abortions, they will stop having sex"?
Nobody gets married under the assumption they will get divorced. Marriage is supposed to be a gesture of a life long commitment.
On top of that, there are financial benefits to getting married.
I highly doubt this would stop anyone from getting married.
People should stop getting married because it's a government contract based in religion - it's gross and I don't want either of those things being involved in my relationships.
I fully agree marriage should be simple with little to no government or religion involvement. That's why we see less people getting married or if they do it's later in life.
The only real reason to get married now is financial and health benefits. That's it.
Making it harder to divorce will lead to the ones waiting to rethink if it's even worth it.
Marriage rates have already been dropping and divorce is an available option. Removing that out isn't going to increase people's confidence about going into marriage.
And as the nightmare stories come out about the guys (and probably some girls, too) who change overnight once the marriage license is official (or annulment period ends or whatever becomes the "now you're locked in as long as I don't get caught cheating"), it'll only go down further.
There will also be a reaction to the women who decide to just stop being loyal once they are done with a marriage but can't get out.
Better fix: make life difficult for the assholes pushing for these policies instead of shrugging your shoulders and saying "guess it's their fault when everything goes to Hell."
Republicans today are not the same as Republicans back then. Reagan did more for illegal immigrants than any president since. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat if it was him versus the two bad jokes currently campaigning.
This is what you really NEED to know about abolishing no fault divorce:
And that will cause huge problems, especially for anyone experiencing abuse. “Any barrier to divorce is a really big challenge for survivors,” said Marium Durrani, vice president of policy at the National Domestic Violence Hotline. “What it really ends up doing is prolonging their forced entanglement with an abusive partner.”
If they abolish no fault divorce it WILL cost lives
That is the bottom fucking line. There is no argument against divorce that exists that can prevent that. Wait no there is, oh golly they will make exceptions for abuse. That sure fucking sounds familiar. Hmm like maybe it was the concession 'pro-life' would make for abortion.
And look how that turned out.
Before roe v wade was overturned they were all about protecting the abused, somewhat, with caveats. Kinda like they are talking about divorce here innit?
I don't think this is a safe assumption. The victim may not have free access to hardware. The police/etc may not believe them. They may be afraid of being murdered if they try to record something. Just off the top of my head.
Just like how "there will be exceptions for unviable pregnancies" no amount of direct video evidence of abuse will be enough to justify for the courts to justify a divorce. If they had people's well being and best interests in mind this wouldn't even be proposed.
I know more than one woman who fled one of these convenant marriage states. One still can't get the divorce officialized because her toxic abusive husband keeps insisting on an endless parade of marriage counseling, via answers to the divorce court.
I don't know if forcing her back into the marriage because that same abusive husband started working for a legislative lobbying outfit would be productive.
The ethos of these people is largely about enforcing the dominion of men over women.* This divorce stance is about disempowering women. Abortion is about disempowering women. The move they are about to make against contraception, about removing agency from women. Age of consent, ditto. Given the opportunity, they would absolutely remove women’s right to vote, own property, maintain credit, and on and on. This is the culture that’s dominating the Republican Party and they face very little meaningful opposition right now.
To be fair, they are also guided by a profound desire to enforce the racial dominion of what they perceive as white.
The solution seems simple. Don't marry and don't have kids. Eventually America dies off and the rest of the world closes the book on the experiment that failed.
At this point, I'm happy to end my bloodline. People are insufferable enough already, i don't want my kids growing up with the product of even more ridiculous nutjobs
The solution seems simple: drive these ass backwards politicians out of office and don't allow them to have any power over your lives because they are not interested in your health or well-being.
The solution seems simple. Don’t marry and don’t have kids.
Am I allowed to be amused that a bunch of guys looking at the state of family courts deciding the same thing were mocked as a bunch of evil misogynistic incels, and have been for years? Apparently "don't participate in the system you are worried is going to fuck you over" is not an acceptable choice.
It'll be a common law marriage when it comes to sharing debt and calculating income for denying SNAP, single when it comes to hospital visitation rights and bereavement.
Advising my nephew will have to suffice, I feel bad enough bringing those I already have to this place. I will make sure to just advise young people in general.
If anything, I believe they wanna go back to long before the 60s. Back to the 1700s, in terms of owning slaves (including women), being able to shoot anyone who they disagree with, and getting away with killing anyone who isn't white, claim they killed themselves, and have nobody question it.
I hope them publicly advocating for this backfires spectacularly.
"First they game for gay marriage, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't gay. Then they came for the abortions, and I didn't speak up because I didn't need an abortion. Then they came for divorce, and...fuck, that might be a real a pain in the ass. Maybe I won't vote for these asshats."
"First the came for abortions, and we made a lot of noise but got ignored. Then they came for Divorce and... fuck, maybe we should do more than just make noise."
Boy I wish our government wasn't so good at bringing their nightmare fuel fever dreams to fruition, while constantly failing to do anything to better anyone in the way almost every voter agrees with.
Wolfers and Stevenson traced suicide rates before and after divorce reform and found a statistically significant reduction of nearly 6 percent in the female suicide rate following a state's change to unilateral divorce. There was no discernible change in male suicides. Looking longer term, they found close to a 20 percent decline in female suicides 20 years after the change to no-fault divorce.
The percentage of husbands abused by their wives increased in the 11 states with unchanged laws also, yet remained the same in no-fault divorce states. For women, the change was greatest: Women victims of spousal violence declined by 1.7 percent from 12.8 percent in the reform states in the same period that spousal violence against women increased 2.5 percentage points in the non-reform states.
We're going to have to make sure the boyfriends and girl friends of our kids are all sluts. We will require bdsm, ropes, leather. rubber, nudism, open marriage, 12" penises, DDD boob jobs, LGBTQA of some kind, etc. if they possess at least 3 of these then we're good to go. Any of them bring up God's of any kind they get the F out.
Those from the USA that grab the attention are not sane, but I assume there are sane people there. What are their take and outlook on this? What’s their outlook on the future, and are there developments in their outlook on the USA?
I suppose I could call myself sane and I'm from the US. My outlook is pretty grim honestly. We have far-right "christians" trying to turn the US into a theocracy and install a dictator. It's real Hand Maid's Tail shit and it's scary as fuck.
I don't think we have crossed the point of no return yet but we are damn fucking close. I also don't know that there is going to be a way out of this without violence.
One thing I CAN say for sure, if Trump wins in November we have crossed that line and the US is going to be fucked for a long time.
Also semi-sane US citizen. Same feelings. Would not be surprised if there is a major civil incident within the next 20 years.
Lower class is fucked without anything to lose.
Middle class is getting milked dry to keep infinite growth alive.
Wealthy R class keeps making these rules for thee not for me proposals in order to seize control.
Wealthy D class, other than a handful of progressives, are just as corrupt with better marketing. Complacency over Israel's actions put some light on it at least.
These dinosaurs who are running these crimes against humanity won't retire from office.
R has been stupidly effective at wrapping up hate in "christian love." I can't even understand how people buy into this crap. Wealth and power is all they want. These social issues to keep people infighting is so blatant and obvious.
We have far-right "christians" trying to turn the US into a theocracy and install a dictator.
Have you seen the documentary God Forbid (hulu), shiny happy people (prime), or the much older netfflix doc, the family? I only ask because you're basically making the same conclusions I got from watching them.
As a woman in the United States I feel like I'm constantly fighting against the political future (if not the practical reality of) the handmaid's tale.
Show or book, whatever medium floats your boat it is powerful and real and speaks so much of similar lived experiences... it should be consumed, digested, and change you after. That is my favorite type of media.
But also it is a sort of coping mechanism cuz I 100% can see the show or book happening. And while this seems off topic yeah it all starts with religion dictating law based on their morals which gee... I sure see the church. But never Christ.
I can understand that you feel that way, is there any of your rights that seems safe? And from what I can gather there’s not a majority behind those changes - it’s a religious minority that one side needs in order to get a majority that is allowed to dictate this direction?
I haven’t seen The Handmaids Tale, but I’ve heard it’s good, and I’ve put it on my watchlist.
Oops realized I didn't answer your question and I noticed lemmy doesn't have great track record of showing edits.
So yeah I was curious cuz as an American I still don't get it. Ca Gov Regan passed no fault divorce and we are arguing about it fucking 50 years later because maybe someone haves to give away too much money/property? I fucking hate it.
This will reverse all the good done by those laws. Domestic violence, spousal abuse and murder, and suicide will all raise significantly. This is a terrible call that nobody who truly supports freedom could get behind. It makes me want to procure large amounts of glass bottles and cloth for no particular purpose at all.
signed the nation’s first no-fault divorce law, allowing people to end their marriages without proving they’d been wronged. The move was a recognition that “people were going to get out of marriages,” Zug said, and gave them a way to do that without resorting to subterfuge.
Do you hear it? The sound of communism, my friend.
So they are forcing their own interpretation of Christianity on everyone? I guess that the US doesn’t have separate courts for other religions… So no one's allowed divorce even if allowed in their religion? this can’t be legal.
To think that the caliphate at least allowed Jews and Christians to have their own religious courts.
I've read that in the Jewish culture/religion that Yehoshua "Jesus" benJoseph, the woke socialist convict, grew up in, there was legal-divorce,
& there was a kind of rule, too:
"you aren't allowed to marry someone, if you aren't mature-enough to divorce them honestly/fairly/sanely" in that culture..
I'm not remembering the exact phrasing of it, obviously, but that was the essence of it.
IF you were too immature to divorce responsibly, THEN you were too immature to marry, in the 1st place.
For .. to use a phrase from the Christian bible, just updating it to modern terminology .. "those who call themselves Christian .. but are not" to be warring against wokeness .. in the name of the wokest guy in the entire New Testament, .. & to be warring against socialism .. in the name of the guy who literally is famous for feeding thousands of hungry people who wanted learning/understanding & food, for no money/commercial-exchange, & who also gave free healthcare to any who'd spiritually-earned it .. you can see that their bible's phrase "those who call themselves _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. but are not" is applicable to those who fake ANY religion's membership, of any culture, anywhere!
That's what no-fault divorce is. All assets are split 50/50 with no emphasis or prejudice given to who caused the divorce with infidelity, violence, etc.
Not only is it fair, its way, way easier than establishing blame and then some kind of punitive split of assets that will be fought over and appealed even more than the current system of "equal, equal."
The fair has already been solved. It's what we have now.
So, if you are married for a day (after, lets say a drunken wedding in Vegas), the person you are married to gets 50% of your assets and you get 50% of theirs? I think a fairer way is either keep all assets separate or have some sort of automatic pre-nup for all marriages.
What do you mean? Divorce is at a 50 year low, and the average couple getting married today has more like a 75 percent chance of staying married. Your odds are especially good if it’s your first marriage.
The famous 50% figure doesn’t take into account that getting a divorce is correlated with getting another one, and the emerging generations are much more selective in who they marry.