The Christian right is coming for divorce next

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.

slimarev92,

Getting married in 2024 is kibda dumb anyway?

PanArab,

They can’t prohibit it for other faiths though. Jews, Muslims, and so on can still divorce… right?

CPMSP,

Marriage in the eyes of a state is a legal contract. I don’t think faith is a barrier or consideration in this context.

PanArab, (edited )

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.

Corkyskog,

They are changing the laws so it can be legal, its what the submission is about.

Snowclone,

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.

rab,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

I don’t even understand why people get married when all the data shows that marriages fail

htrayl,

That is really not true.

rab,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

One of my favorite videos ever uploaded to YouTube, should be mandatory viewing in high school youtu.be/o5z8-9Op2nM?si=D-JVKYYmhqUXjtLA

henfredemars,

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.

rab,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

I encourage you to listen to this when you have a free hour youtu.be/o5z8-9Op2nM?si=D-JVKYYmhqUXjtLA

Fades,

No point in living either, everyone dies eventually so what’s the point right?

That’s essentially your take.

rab,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

What does marriage do?

I have a gf of 10 years, we are happy now, why would we get married?

I’m honestly curious the reasoning

Snowclone,

I’ve been married 14 years, and I have no idea. It makes it REALLY hard to break up. No one can grasp that you changed your last name. At all. Every gov offical just BAFFLED. ‘‘I’ve worked in the county clerks office for 30 years and this is the FIRST I’ve heard of people changing their last name for marriage’’. Every. Fucking. Time. If you have kids that aren’t even close to 18, and you break up, You get to be EXACTLY the same as married, but now you don’t have sex or trust eachother. But literally nothing else changes. Also if you get married in your 20s, then by 40 you get to find out in excruciating detail that ‘inner child’, ‘mid-life crisis’, and ‘familiarity breeds contempt’, aren’t just dumb things people say, they are also why you dread being around someone you stupidly legally bound yourself too in the custom of a religion nether of you is still childish enough to buy into.

I mean… it was pretty fun when we were having kids, going on trips, casually abusing Rx drugs, and having a sexual awakening after getting to 25 being painfully sexually repressed through religious abuse, but FUCK if I’m not aware of how little rope is left.

rambling_lunatic,

One of the few times Reagan did something good

RIPandTERROR,
@RIPandTERROR@sh.itjust.works avatar

Mr “gifted hands” should stick his gifted fingers up his ass.

uis,

Ronald Reagan of California

King Ronald Reagan of California.

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.

microphone900,
uis,

Well, I don’t have any stance on what you mention, but banning 3d printers is ridiculous and damages society.

voltaa,

So why bring it up? It has nothing to do with the comment and nothing to do with the topic of the original post.

uis,

Original post is about divorce, and guns stuff was brought up here not by me.

Chessmasterrex,

Good way to keep those marriage rates low. Can’t get divorced if one doesn’t bother getting married in the first place.

WindyRebel,

Ah, but then there’s common-law marriages that they will institute.

PseudoSpock,
@PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

Then don’t ever get rid of your own place, so you can prove you’ve only been dating, not living together.

todd_bonzalez,

Oh yeah man, just have two homes in this economy. Great idea.

MoonMelon,

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.

KroninJ,
@KroninJ@lemmy.world avatar

They already calculate household income for any individual assistance.

ZILtoid1991,

Likely they will counteract by making even more things illegal, e.g. premartial sex.

TheReturnOfPEB,

This should require anyone working on these laws that is divorced to be retroactively married to their ex-spouse automatically.

Croquette,

No, because they had a valid reason to get divorced, unlike everyone else.

Just like their abortion.

TheReturnOfPEB,

I have had enough of conservatives climbing into the tree house and pulling up the ladder behind them.

Some, they say, can’t get married. Now they want to say who can split up. Let’s see them live the walk they talk first.

Croquette,

You know for sure they will find a reason why they can’t live the walk.

And they are probably afraid that their wives will leave them because they are pieces of shit.

UnderpantsWeevil,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

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.

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

Those women did nothing wrong, don’t punish them like that.

This is exactly why they are working on these laws: so they can treat their wives like property and the women have no recourse.

Crashumbc,

Meh, very often the women married to conservative assholes aren’t blameless. And often share their husband views.

VerdantSporeSeasoning,

A lot of them are raised to be that way though. One of the big pushes in a lot of Christian circles, for example, is the push to raise kids believing in complementarianism instead of egalitarianism–simply put, that god created men and women to have different roles, and that men just so happen to be in the role of leadership. Combine that with extreme purity culture (at times involving courtship instead of dating, for example) and a fervor to push for big families, and you get a bunch of grown ups looking up after 5, 10 years in a marriage going, “wait, I was promised happiness, why am I so miserable?” Divorce is a huge tool to help. We need to give people, especially women and children, a safe exit from high control spaces.

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

Not the ones that divorced these conservative assholes. We should be encouraging them to escape, not forcing them back.

Spacehooks,

“In recent news Home accidents increase”

werefreeatlast,

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.

DerArzt,

DDD boob jobs

My brain: Man I can’t wait for Dinners Drive-ins and Dives boob jobs. I wonder how they will get the frosted tips just right.

AngryCommieKender,

They’ll hire Guy Fierie’s Hairdresser

Schadrach,

Wouldn’t those be frosted nips since it’s a boob job?

probableprotogen,

The gayer the better

uis,

Sounds very gay

Aux,

Murica - the land of free or something.

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

The freedom to own women and their bodies.

uis,

Free to be killed, enslaved and then raped

Aux,

With speed things progress over there, Saudi Arabia will soon become a better place for women.

brygphilomena,

The land of the thief Home of the slave

BoringHusband,

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.

MNByChoice,

No. The batshit crazys are having lots and lots of kids. They want sane people to leave, to die off.

frunch,

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

Enkrod,
@Enkrod@feddit.de avatar

You could think about emigrating. We’d love to brain drain the US… more.

thegr8goldfish,

They’ll just pivot to forced/arranged marriage then.

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

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.

Schadrach,

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.

Brutticus,

They are just going to make contraception behind locked doors/ only available to married partners, if at all available.

asteriskeverything,

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.”

asteriskeverything, (edited )

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?

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

If they abolish no fault divorce it WILL cost lives

“Probably, but those are lives of women, not people.”

-Conservatives who support this shit

asteriskeverything,

Stop you’re making me cry. It’s so “funny cuz it’s sad” it went past the point of being funny.

you’re not wrong.

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

I never said it was funny.

AeonFelis,
skvlp,

Republicans only seem to be pro life until the child is born.

AProfessional,

Democrats need to stop using these terms. Republicans are pro human-capital. They want numerous, dumb, poor workers to control and they want to own women.

skvlp,

“Pro human capital” is a good term, thank you for introducing me to it. I’d say numerous, dumb, poor workers who are desperate to serve for scraps because of austerity.

StaySquared,

Interestingly, I’d assume that between home surveillance systems and cell phones, proving domestic violence shouldn’t be too tough nowadays.

jjjalljs,

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.

You can read “why does he do that?” by Lundy Bancroft for fascinating and depressing information about abuse. goodreads.com/…/224552.Why_Does_He_Do_That_Inside…

andros_rex,

The police/etc may not believe them.

There’s something about 44% of cops…

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

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.

StaySquared,

That would be utterly shameful of the justice system.

5too,

…yes?

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

Much like the current situation with abortions in certain states.

AnxiousOtter,

Are you new here?

StaySquared,

I am.

ohlaph,

They conservatives do love any and all kinds of oppression and slavery!

CileTheSane,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

The thought The Handmaid’s Tale was a “How-to” guide.

A7thStone,

At long last we have created the Torment Nexus from the classic sci fi novel “Don’t Create the Torment Nexus”.

randon31415,

Maybe instead of getting rid of divorce, just make divorce fair for both parties?

mosiacmango,

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.

randon31415,

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.

tissek,
@tissek@ttrpg.network avatar

Issue in that case I rather see as why is it allowed to enter into legally binding agreements when you aren’t sober. Why there isn’t a (forced) period to review the papers.

Marriage is a legally binding agreement. Let’s treat it as such.

zerog_bandit,

The law can’t protect dumbasses from themselves, unfortunately.

mosiacmango, (edited )

No, generally that marriage would be annulled. Its far too short for any mingling of assets, so none would be split.

Generally any individual assets prior to a marriage stay individual. If you own a house outright and marry, your spouse doesnt immediatly get half of it. If you buy a house after you marry, then yes the house is split as its an asset that both parties put value into. It’s like an automatic pre-nup for marriages that already exists.

Despite the ridiculous scenario you imagined above, judges and lawyers aren’t actually idiots. You dont have to make up hypotheticals to figure out how asset sharing in marriage or divorce works. The law is pretty clear, and there are millions of examples of both you can easily research instead of deciding there is something to be outraged about.

KevonLooney,

That guy is just repeating what he heard on the radio or from some drunk guy at a bar. He’s not putting any thoughts into it.

Besides what you mentioned, there are pre-nups, post-nups, trusts, and other complicated ways that rich families use to protect their assets from gold-diggers. Marriage is a legal contract and it can be modified with other legal contracts.

In a lot of cases, “trust fund kids” don’t even own their house or car. It’s all held in a trust so no one, not even them, can have it. If they divorce there’s nothing to split but some cash and whatever furniture or toys they own.

In practice, I believe the pre or post-nup gives some consideration (money) to the spouse who isn’t rich so they won’t sue. But it’s not 50/50 because the trust fund kid legally doesn’t own much.

mosiacmango,

Yeah, Im not even sure if he knows what hes arguing about.

All of these “problems” these conservatives are whinging about are already understood and settled with our current system. The default works well for the vast majority, and when it doesnt, you can change it. Easy.

Draedron,

No. When you make a lot of money because you can focus on work because your partner os handling all the work at home, the partner should not be financially destroyed after divorce. Your “idea” would lead to completely dependent partners who can never get divorces of their spouses

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • politics@lemmy.world
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines