Holy social conservatism, Batman!
Hold on to your snazzy pleather underpants, people—my head is (once again) about to explode.
Feeling powerful and legally relevant after its victory pushing (and passing) the state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in Virginia (but not really), the Family Foundation has crossed off “withhold rights from unmarried couples” from its list of resolutions and moved on to “withhold rights from married couples who want to become unmarried.” Confused?
[The Family Foundation] will lobby the General Assembly this year to amend the state's long-standing no-fault divorce law, which essentially allows a husband or wife to terminate a marriage without cause.
The foundation is advocating "mutual consent divorce" for couples with children, which would require a husband and wife to agree to divorce before a marriage can be legally terminated, except in certain instances, such as abuse or cruelty. The proposed legislation would not affect childless couples.
"Right now, one spouse can unilaterally end [the marriage], and not only is their spouse unable to stop the divorce, their abandonment does not preclude them from having custody of their child," said Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation. "When we send a message that one can up and leave their family and have no consequence, the Old Dominion is encouraging divorce."
I can’t make it past the second sentence without having to close my eyes and take a few deep, calming breaths. Why, why, WHY would this ever be a good idea? For the sake of my blood pressure, I’m going to limit my exposure to such radioactive stupidity. The Family Foundation is assuming that:
1. Living with miserably married parents is better for children than living with divorced, perhaps still slightly miserable, but nevertheless happier than being miserable with their ex-spouse parents.
2. The spouse that ends the marriage is the bad guy and wants to ‘abandon’ familial responsibility as well as their spouse.
3. Everyone’s main reason for NOT wanting a divorce is related to preserving the wellbeing of the children.
4. Abuse is only abuse if it leaves a visible mark.
Discuss.
Grad schools in other states are looking more and more appealing every day.
posted by curious m at 10:14 AM
1 Comments:
Hmmm...a couple of observations, in no particular order, and certainly not all worthy of further consideration:
1. If they're going to draw the kids into it, they should give the kids a vote on the divorce.
2. This is a really good way to induce abuse or cruelty.
3. If the Old Dominion believes that they're facilitating divorce with their current laws, they should file for divorce.
4. It only takes one in any relationship to end it.
5. This is the best way ever to ensure that people will either not marry and/or not have children if they do! "Withhold rights???" Please.
6. This indirectly makes children a legal party to the contract their parents signed.
7. And what are they going to do about people who seek to divorce in Virginia but were married in other states? Whose state's laws will supersede?
Methinks it would be far better to require that all states disclose the terms of the contract you are signing with them when you file for a marriage license, that they require that you consent to those terms or that you draft your own terms before you sign the contract, and that the contract outlines the terms of terminating the contract. Just like every other contract.
5:36 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home