Anti-divorce arguments -- what do you think of them?

[Black Panther]

The argument is in the title here.

What do you think about the arguments in bold below? (my replies are biased since I'm pro-divorce)

As I said in another thread, my country and the Philippines (hello entropy13) are the only ones in the entire world without divorce legislation. Actually in Malta divorce is recognized if obtained abroad. This means that it is available only to those rich enough to buy/rent foreign property thus enabling them to start judicial proceedings in another country.

Now one of our MP's moved a bill for the introduction of divorce. Our PM used the excuse that divorce wasn't one of the promises on which he won the election so the decision cannot be taken by parliament but only by a referendum. (As if he were keeping his pre-electoral promises but that's another story).

Thing is in my country we have a lot of 'fervent' catholics who reason things out "I'm OK, f**k you Jack". The arguments of these anti-divorce people are:

1) Marriage is sacred, what was bound by God can't be dissolved by man.

But excuse me, not all the population is Catholic. What right does a particular religion have to impose its beliefs on those who don't follow it?
Even if a Catholic person gets divorced by his spouse, this catholic has still got the option to remain celibate and 'faithful' - no one will be forcing anyone to have sex with other people.

2) Divorce is very hard on the kids.

Excuse me again - it is the actual breakdown of the marriage (and what caused it ie violence or infidelity or vices like drugs/gambling etc...) which is hard on the kids. What follows later, whether they just separate and live celibate, or get an annulment and remarry, or as in the majority of cases here they separate and start cohabiting with another partner and start a new family with kids is trivial I guess.

3) The introduction of divorce will make the whole institution of marriage meaningless. People will start marrying without giving a thought, knowing that they can always get a divorce if things don't work out.

I don't agree - I mean why would someone go through all the hassle (and expense!) of marrying 'temporarily'? It makes no sense. I'm pretty sure that even as things stand now, with more than one-third of our marriages broken down, no one in his or her right mind ever decided to marry with the intention of the marriage not being "happily forever after".....


We pretend to be a country of faithful saints, but we're far from that.

Over 28% of children were born out of wedlock in 2008, heck that's more than 1 out of every 4 kids three years ago, and the numbers are always increasing. Out of wedlock here doesn't only mean naughty girls who have one-night-stands and end up preggers without knowing who daddy is. Only 9% of these 28% claim that the father is unknown considering the tax and social security benefits offered to single mothers this 9% figure is understandable

These 28% are people whose marriage broke down, who then separated from their spouse, found a partner and started a new family which is officially not recognised in the statistics. Those who are not well-off state that the father is unknown... This 28% doesn't include those lucky enough to get their marriage annulled and who can hence officially re-marry again. Neither does it include cohabiting couples who have no offspring.

As the situation now stands, cohabitation is a very dangerous situation to be in but apparently between one-third and a half of the cohabiting maltese population don't know about it or just take things for-granted.

Cohabitation is not recognised or regulated by law. In 'official' marriage, when a couple separates the court decides that all property acquired during marriage is to be divided 50-50 between husband and wife (stuff might be divided unequally when the marriage breakdown was wilfully caused like someone committed adultery), which is only right even if one of the parties never officially brought a paycheck but worked in the kitchen and rearing the kids. But since cohabitation is not acknowledged, the person who has nothing in his or her own name would end up homeless and penniless when a cohabitation verbal agreement ends.


Finally, I don't agree on a referendum because having divorce or not won't be affecting the catholic divorcees. Heck if the government wants to hold a referendum it should do so on income tax or VAT rates, because that would surely affect the entire population. But a catholic divorcee can still choose to live to his or her own religion as if he or she were only separated, so why all the anti-divorce fuss?


So what do you think? Just read the parts in bold which are the anti-divorce arguments (my replies are biased since I'm pro-divorce)

[MRCL]

I think, especially if there are kids around, divorce should be thought through very thoroughly. And I mean VERY.
In Germany there's that thing, I'll translate it to "Living-apart-phase". Its a phase where a married couple needs to live one year apart, only after that time they can legally divorce. Its a good prevention of hastily (is that the right word, I dunno) made decisions.

Especially when kids are involved, its not about the adults anymore. Sure, if violence and such is involved, there's no question. But things like "we lived apart"; come on, don't be selfish. It depends on the kids age, too. I'm 23, if my partents would want a divorce, I'd find it strange, and I'd slap them, but eh, its their decision, and I wouldn't suffer from the separation. If I were still a kiddo, things would look different.

Bottom line, if there are good, rational reasons, okay. If not: think it trough.

PS: I can see why you're pro divorce BP, you're a woman, and the woman gets everything in a divocre

[jmcslob]

1) imo is bullshit...It's a sacred bond between a man and a woman

2) absolutely nothing to argue about

3) It's true divorce gives people an easy out and people shouldn't be forced into staying in a physical or mentally abusive relationship, but other than with physical or mental abuse I don't think divorce should be an option

4) I think people give up to easily.....nobody ever said it was going to be easy!! Marriage is something you have to work at EVERYDAY!....People are going to be people....Of course your partner is going to do something that makes you hate them for awhile..People are going to stray, say hurtful things, cause financial distress and a whole plethora of other shit to their partner, That doesn't justify anything.....You may find out your partner has been doing something extremely hurtful behind your back for the last year and may wanna just give up..but think about this...How did you feel about that person the day before you found out...Did that change?

Again people are people and they are going to do shit and when they do YOU WORK THROUGH IT...even when your hurt, feel betrayed and whatnot...

Seek help if you need it.....working through something may take a long time....

You took a VOW....if you didn't mean it then why did you take it....

[yogurt_21]

1. that presupposes that the couple entered into a sacred bond with God. Many are non religious, others say the words and don't mean them (ie "till death do us part", when they really mean "till something better comes along")
so that isn't really an argument.

2. people hating each other in close proximity is hard on kids. Many divorces ar ugly sure but sometimes had the parents divorced sooner, they wouldn't be so hateful to each other. Just because you have a child together doesn't mean you need to be married.

3. Hypocritical argument for a catholic area. what about annulment? how the hell is that better? "oh yeah the marriage never existed so you kids are either nonexistant or bastards" The best way to preserve the marriage institution isn't by forcing those who do not want to be together anymore to stay together. It's by making sure people think things through before getting married. Like it's not a good idea to marry someone you've known for 3 months.

I do believe people quit way too easily alot of the time but that doesn't mean you should force all people into the same boat. Some people generally made a mistake and will never get along. Keeping the marriage up for any reason in that circumstance is only going to make it worse.

I agree with germany's seperation rule for 1 year, that will weed out those who are filing at the height of anger. But I'm more for requiring pre-marital counseling and a mandetory relationship time before they are allowed to get married. Slamming the door shut after all the bugs got in helps no one.

[Fourstaff]

1. Personally, I don't mind people having divorces and stuff like that, because its their choice, and we have no right to stop them from doing it. Also, if the couple is starting to "not like each other", I think its better to have a "clean break" rather than for the family to descent into madness. I know many people who remain married only because of various stupid reasons (honor and bullshit like that?). Its very painful to see both sides ready to kill each other, and the children caught in crossfire.

2. Depends on the age of kids. If the children are all rather grown up (15+? don't know a good age) I think its better for the parents to break up and go their own ways rather than to live together. No point continue to suffer then.

3. That's true, but at the same time, its rather harsh for 2 people to stay together happily for 50 years. When I get married (if at all ) I don't want to chain my wife up under "faithfulness", in my opinion its too demanding for any woman. As long as my children are brought up properly, I don't really care how my wife treats me, and that is my first condition of being a parent (easy for me to say this now, eh?). That said, I don't know what I am going to do if I am the unfaithful one. Perhaps this question is why I haven't have a girlfriend even after 2 decades of life (or there is the computer....)

[CyberDruid]

Marriage is as sacred as you want it to be. Garbage In Garbage Out...just like the rest of life. If Religious people are married by a priest then as far as they are concerned, yes, it is a holy bond. But even Catholics get divorced...despite all the mumbo jumbo life is life and people will do what they must do.

Any anger, resentment, arguing, etc between parents is hard on the kids. Parents that use their children to vent their frustrations about their partner should be kicked in the groin every time they even think about doing it. Good parents will not do it. They protect the children from the strife as best they can and discuss it when the time is right. Staying together or being divorced is not the issue. Parents talking shit about each other and wanting the kids to agree, commiserate, take sides is the issue. Good parents will continue to provide a loving space for their children whether together or apart.

In some ways having an out does make marriage too easy. But oddly enough divorce law, the requirements to seek counseling, trial separation, and the need to prove irreconcilable differences do not make divorce an easy or quick process. And there is the child support...and the alimony...on top of the division of all assets. Those things alone will make most people think twice about divorce if they share property and/or have children. So I think the reality is that Divorce does not make it easier for well established couples to part...but it does make it easier for out-of-love newly weds or those with irreconcilable differences and few ties to part. I don't think it weakens the institution of marriage. I think it is the flip side to that institution: the harsh financial realities of lawyering up.

[DannibusX]

Divorce is really hard on family, but it's not something I'm against. I'm against marriage in general. There should be no perks for married people. Tax breaks and the like. Also, alimony laws need to be either updated or removed in the modern era. Alimony was good back in the day when the wife was a homemaker, but in modern society, women can make their own way in life.

I'm all for alimony for women who are homemakers though, at least temporarily until they can get into the workforce.

[FordGT90Concept]

1 & 3 only apply if you are religious or believe in the religious definition of marriage (as opposed to government definition).

2 depends on the outcome but the divorce process is always hard on the kids. I have yet to see a divorce proceeding that wasn't messy.

[Steevo]

1) Marriage is a very serious commitment. However, in certain circumstances it is better to be divorced.

Cheating.
Abuse.
Neglect.


Top three I could think of. If your spouce cheats, then is it really a marriage? If they are abusive, how could they truly love you? If they neglect you, how could they love you. Marriage is supposed to be built on love, without it there is no marriage.

2) Kids, are a product of sexual intercourse, not marriage. Yes kids in a well established home, with two loving caring parents, who nurture, provide and love them are much better off than in a broken home. However, by the time the love for the marriage is gone you can bet one of the two in the marriage is no longer really wanting the children. If they were they would find the time spent with the spouse and children would be a unifying and love building time.

3) The institution of marriage is already meaningless. So few take the time to truly understand and appreciate the life long commitment that it requires, the hard work that it requires, the effort. With instant gratification on almost everything else they expect marriage to be the same.

[JC316]

1. Marriage is sacred, but hardly bound by God, I don't exactly hear Him voicing complaint about a divorce. This is simply people trying to control other people using God's name as an excuse to do so.

2. Yes, it's hard on the kids, which means that you should exhaust every option before actually getting a divorce, but you can't be miserable for the sake of your offspring.

3. Hardly, especially for men. We get a divorce and most of our possessions go with the wife. If I was planing on making it temporary, then I damn sure wouldn't marry a chick.

[Bundy]

So...is Entropy13 the Phillipino? lol sry had to

Answers!
1. What God?
2. Of course it's hard on the kids. Divorce should never be taken lightly, especially if kids are involved. It could even be a good reason to try harder to resolve differences. In the end though, if the partnership is failing, everyone is better off separated than being forced to be together.
3. I don't think so, forcing unwilling parties to stay together will make it meaningless.

[Black Panther]

But is there an argument where one can say that separation is better for the kids than divorce?

That's what the local anti-divorcists are trying to argue here, and I fail to see the point...

[CyberDruid]

The only thing separation does is hold out a hope (in the child's mind) that mommy and daddy will get back together.

Having lived through that myth...even after mommy and daddy get back together they resent each other and treat each other in a manner that is toxic...and eventually move on with their lives.

Separation is for people that can't decide if they want to take a dump or not...so they hang their ass out the window and wait. I know of no one that separated and got back together and went on about their lives happily. It never happens.

So I am in agreement that Divorce is preferable to separation.

[jmcslob]

I think the problem is that it's to easy to get married...I don't think people take it seriously because their aren't any repercussions when you break your oath....

Don't get me wrong but someone can cheat on their spouse then file for divorce and walk away with 50% of the shit they accumulated during the marriage imo that's fucked up.

I don't know how it works everywhere else but I had to take a legal oath to get a license to take a vow to have it finalized. Again I had to file for a license to get married...A LEGAL LICENSE....I think if you break the rules of that license there should be a penalty for doing so.....Like when a spouse cheats..why should they get to walk away with anything....before they cheated did they seek help? if not did they fess up and seek help with their partner? if not then they don't get shit end of story.......I'm sorry but it is a LEGAL OATH and if you don't stick to your end of it then you shouldn't get any of the end benefits

[entropy13]

There are marriage licenses here too, and as already been mentioned no divorce. Haven't got enough information there yet, and the ones I do know usually pertain on whether or not divorces done in other countries by our citizens married in other countries are valid (they aren't).

[Fourstaff]

The problem I see is that people makes mistakes. Removal of the ability to correct the mistakes will cause problems, but the ability for people to correct their mistakes allows people to be careless (intentionally or otherwise). Either way, its bad, but which one is the worse evil is open to debate. Having the choice to correct your life sounds very good, I must say.

[Black Panther]

Originally Posted by jmcslob

Don't get me wrong but someone can cheat on their spouse then file for divorce and walk away with 50% of the shit they accumulated during the marriage imo that's fucked up.

There's no need for divorce for that to happen.

In my country there's no divorce - so say a poor woman marries a wealthy businessman, and they separate after 10 years. The woman gets to keep 50% of the wealth accumulated during those 10 years of marriage, which wealth was possible only because of the man's financial standing. So even without divorce this 'fucked up situation' still occurs.

When this happens in my country the couple go separate ways but are still technically married and cannot officially remarry. What happens then is that both find other partners and start cohabiting together, and many even have kids. The union is not recognised as a family by the government though. For tax purposes and any other govt related issue, the status of all above 4 people is that of a "single person"

[idlesiren]

In Canada you still have to be legally separated for a year before you can file for divorce. (I guess like how it is in Germany).

I think divorce is hard on a child at any age. I've had friends at five whose parents divorced and friends at twenty five, neither age is any better than the other.

I think that marriage should be separated from religion. There are too many fights over which religion to convert to if one person is of one faith, and one is of another.

Common law is another option, where you don't officially get married, but you do file for it. And like Black Panther said, after 10 years, if a couple separates after being together, the woman gets to keep half. A couple should always keep their finances separate, and keep their mortgage/house under strict legal conditions, in case things do turn sour.

Also, you could make the same debate over abortion. Should it be allowed, or shouldn't it. I think it should, but I think that both marriage and abortion should have more respect than they do. Certain people make hasty decisions too quickly in life, because they feel if they don't like it (marriage or a pregnancy) they can just get rid of it.

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by idlesiren

In Canada you still have to be legally separated for a year before you can file for divorce. (I guess like how it is in Germany).

I think divorce is hard on a child at any age. I've had friends at five whose parents divorced and friends at twenty five, neither age is any better than the other.

I think that marriage should be separated from religion. There are too many fights over which religion to convert to if one person is of one faith, and one is of another.

Common law is another option, where you don't officially get married, but you do file for it. And like Black Panther said, after 10 years, if a couple separates after being together, the woman gets to keep half. A couple should always keep their finances separate, and keep their mortgage/house under strict legal conditions, in case things do turn sour.

Also, you could make the same debate over abortion. Should it be allowed, or shouldn't it. I think it should, but I think that both marriage and abortion should have more respect than they do. Certain people make hasty decisions too quickly in life, because they feel if they don't like it (marriage or a pregnancy) they can just get rid of it.

See, I told you. Hippies.

[The Witcher]

Hmmmm....this may be a bit off-topic.

I think that people should choose their spouse wisely and stop following that "She/he is my soul mate" BS.

Seriously most people in the US marry because of "love" and almost 50 to 70% of them end up in divorce. Love is a beautiful thing but it shouldn't be the number one reason for marrying.

I'll give you a real life example. Most of the people I know in my community choose their future wives (yes, traditional marriage) by looking for certain traits. For example the man's and the woman's mothers gives each other the phone number to their son/daughter. They typically talk to each other in a semi-professional way to see how they view certain topics. Women who are willing to be faithful to their husbands even in the harshest situations and poverty, willing to raise children the proper way (no day care BS) and have a high morals standards are the most sought. If the man and woman were wise, their marriage usually lasts forever.

To be honest, we used to have very low divorce rate but in the past 30 years with the spread of the "Western" lifestyle globally the divorce rate started to raise rapidly.

The bottom line is:

If you want a successful marriage you should have these things:

1. Wisdom.

2. Responsibility.

3. Insight into the future.

4. The ability to sacrifice.

5. Good surrounding environment.

6. Open minded.

7. You should be faithful and trustworthy.

Believe me that if you find all these traits in your future spouse you would feel the real lasting love not the weak temporally one

[twilyth]

If your objective is children, then there are good reasons for making divorce somewhat difficult - but certainly not impossible.

If you're like a lot of couples and don't want to have children, I don't think it really matters.

Most attitudes toward divorced formed when there no reliable means of birth control and a wife didn't dare deny her husband since she would probably be raped anyway. That is the critical difference. When children weren't a choice, there had to be protections for them favoring unity of the family. Once children are no longer an issue, it just doesn't matter any more.

[JC316]

Originally Posted by The Witcher

Hmmmm....this may be a bit off-topic.

I think that people should choose their spouse wisely and stop following that "She/he is my soul mate" BS.

Seriously most people in the US marry because of "love" and almost 50 to 70% of them end up in divorce. Love is a beautiful thing but it shouldn't be the number one reason for marrying.

I'll give you a real life example. Most of the people I know in my community choose their future wives (yes, traditional marriage) by looking for certain traits. For example the man's and the woman's mothers gives each other the phone number to their son/daughter. They typically talk to each other in a semi-professional way to see how they view certain topics. Women who are willing to be faithful to their husbands even in the harshest situations and poverty, willing to raise children the proper way (no day care BS) and have a high morals standards are the most sought. If the man and woman were wise, their marriage usually lasts forever.

To be honest, we used to have very low divorce rate but in the past 30 years with the spread of the "Western" lifestyle globally the divorce rate started to raise rapidly.

The bottom line is:

If you want a successful marriage you should have these things:

1. Wisdom.

2. Responsibility.

3. Insight into the future.

4. The ability to sacrifice.

5. Good surrounding environment.

6. Open minded.

7. You should be faithful and trustworthy.

Believe me that if you find all these traits in your future spouse you would feel the real lasting love not the weak temporally one

My mom and dad knew each other for 3 months when they got married. Been married 33 years now, the "soul mate bs" worked fine for them. You talk about marriage like two companies merging, cold and business like. That is a piss poor way to start IMO, that is using one another. Those traits you listed shouldn't be for marriage, they are basic things that most humans should live by, I damn sure try.

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by JC316

My mom and dad knew each other for 3 months when they got married. Been married 33 years now, the "soul mate bs" worked fine for them. You talk about marriage like two companies merging, cold and business like. That is a piss poor way to start IMO, that is using one another. Those traits you listed shouldn't be for marriage, they are basic things that most humans should live by, I damn sure try.

I agree, but you have to put it in context. When the life expectancy was 30 and maybe 40 years, you got married pretty much when you hit puberty. For boys that was probably 14 or 15 and maybe a couple years younger for girls. In that case, it made a lot more sense to have your parents make the selection for you. It's only because our average life span is so much longer that we can afford to wait until our late 20's or 30's to get married and start a family.

[JC316]

Originally Posted by twilyth

I agree, but you have to put it in context. When the life expectancy was 30 and maybe 40 years, you got married pretty much when you hit puberty. For boys that was probably 14 or 15 and maybe a couple years younger for girls. In that case, it made a lot more sense to have your parents make the selection for you. It's only because our average life span is so much longer that we can afford to wait until our late 20's or 30's to get married and start a family.

I am pre-wired from the factory to resist being told what to do, so maybe I am biased. Bottom line is that there are 4 or 5 major choices that change someones life, and you have to be the one to make em. Who you are married to, regardless if it's from age 15 or 55 should be entirely up to you. In those days, the parents were selfish, picking families that benefit their own.

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by JC316

I am pre-wired from the factory to resist being told what to do, so maybe I am biased. Bottom line is that there are 4 or 5 major choices that change someones life, and you have to be the one to make em. Who you are married to, regardless if it's from age 15 or 55 should be entirely up to you. In those days, the parents were selfish, picking families that benefit their own.

Yeah, but what do most couples fight over? Money. So there is still some basis for making that a consideration. No parent WANTS to see their child unhappy, so I think that sort of thing happened mainly with nobility and royalty.

But hey, if you think a 15 y.o. has the mental ability to chose a lifelong mate (which is what was expected back then), I won't try to stop you.