An article in the New York Times on divorce and relationships.
"Likewise, the report said, when domestic partners split up, their property should be divided in the same way a divorce court would divide the property of a husband and wife." [emphasis added]
Yet again the state is trying to encroach on areas where you have chosen to keep them out. Many people continue their relationships as so cal led domestic partners in order to avoid the institution of marriage and all the legal problems it brings as confirmed here, "Many heterosexual couples enter into domestic partnerships because they wish to avoid marriage and the obligations of marriage". Yet here is the state's opportunity to ignore the choice of it's individual citizens and step in where it was never wanted and had no right to go. But this proposal get's better.
The report said decisions about alimony and the distribution of property should be made "without regard to marital misconduct." Thus, it said, a wife should not receive less alimony because she committed adultery, nor should a husband be required to pay more because he committed adultery.[emphasis added]
Now marriage is a contract between two people pledging their love in one another and their promise to be faithful. It says that you are the only one for me and I will stand by that as long as I live. This is supposed to signal that these two people are together and can build a stable life upon this understanding. Adultery is the main way of breaking this contract. Sleeping with another person while married is a horrible attact on morality without need for the Christian code of ethics. If during a marriage you realize that your life would be better served by sleeping with someone else (and this brings in to play the proper role of sex in a relationship) then out of respect for yourself and your spouse you should get your marriage annuled beforee comming the act. Adultery is an attempt to have your cake and eat it too, in other words to alter reality. To divorce the reason for the break in the contract from the remedies for doing so is to sanction the evil by ignoring it.
Next point.
The institute says the proper purpose of alimony is compensation for financial losses resulting from the breakdown of a marriage, and it refers to alimony as "compensatory spousal payments."
This sentence is just horrible. At no time during marriage are you prevented from working if your spouse works. In fact many couples chose to work at seperate jobs. Marriage does not mean you will base your life completely on the other person. It means that you will share your individual lives to mutual benifit. There is nothing to compensate for monetarily here. If in deciding to get married I chose to let my spouse finance our house with their work and I chose to stay home and free-load off of that money it is my choice. I then have no claim to my spouse's money especially at a time when I'm attempting to make them no longer my spouse. Alimony has always been a rediculous law based on the ideas of altruism as demonstrated in this quote, "Under existing state laws, judges usually award alimony on the basis of some estimate of a person's need for help".
I'm not even going to go into the issues involving children because that is an area so wrough with fog and subjective wishes that no rational man would want to step in to.
1:16:48 PM 
|
