Should a Divorce be Free??

[LadyTrinity]

Okay please do not put this in family and parenting lol. Thank you :smoochypo

Okay.. divorce costs ALOT of money and when someone I know gets one they always say that a divorce should be granted under certain circumstances beyond your control like if ur spouce cheats..
but no matter what it still costs alot, force the one spouce to be legally bound to the other.
Do you think the gov should legalize Divorce to be FREE?

[Living Dawn]

I think it should only be free if your beening abused or something like that.

[Sylvan]

If it was free, if they shortened the waiting period (in most states), I think the divorce rate would skyrocket. The turnover would be astronomical.

If anything, it could be on a sliding scale based on income.

I remember mine was a couple hundred dollars, but then I did it by myself, no lawyers, and we'd already split up most of our stuff and there were no kids involved...... And no, he didn't bother to pay me back. I think he gave me like $75 when all was said & done (besides my half of the bank account, which we'd agreed on).

[Arinya]

I voted no because although divorce is necessary sometimes I'd prefer to think of it as a last resort and being able to just divorce with the snap of the fingers entirely free would be too easy and too encouragable to couples who don't try. Also, when people see how much a divorce costs maybe couples will actually wait longer to get married. I see people getting married all the time who haven't even been dating a year, some haven't even been dating six months!!

The attuide towards divorce is becomming more and more one of, "Oh, it's okay if our marriage works out we'll just get a divorce!" If the cost of a divorce becomes free it's only going to encourage that attitude.

[Aine of the Fae]

Divorce is already too easy. People have a bit of trouble and they run to the divorce lawyer instead of trying to work it out. Marriage, which is theoretically intended to be a spiritual bond that lasts a lifetime, has become a joke in this day and age. "Till death do us part" has become "as long as he doesn't annoy me."

Divorce, when done amicably, without lawyers, is not expensive. Making it easier is not the way to go.

[Living Dawn]

Ya, right on! :broomride

[LadyTrinity]

Divorce should be granted free of charge if a person cheats or is abused. :lilangel:

[Sylvan]

Divorce should be granted free of charge if a person cheats or is abused. :lilangel:
This is where the sliding scale comes in. Say "He" cheated on "Her". And She wants a divorce, but has been a stay at home mom and can't afford to have the paperwork done up. *Then* it could be free. However, if She was an exec of a company and wanted a divorce because He cheated, she could afford it. Why bother letting her get rid of him for free?

And I'd guess that abused people, if they are at divorce stage, have cut their losses and run from the abusive partner. In that case, they probably don't have finances to turn to, and *then* it could be free as well.

[charmedkisses1]

Only in abuse cases

[Bec_W]

I voted no, for the practical reason that people still have to do the work. If you don't pay for a service you require who is?

[Koehnae]

I agree with what seems to be the general consensus here... it should not be free unless there is a documented instance of abuse. I think if they made it harder to get a divorce, then more people would make an effort to keep their marriages together. If abuse is involved then they should separate ASAP.

[Pol]

I voted yes, because I believe that if money is all that is holding two people together, they shouldn't be together anyway. :o

[Tullip Troll]

If you do the divorce yourself it's not expensive.

Also if you just want to leave you don't need a divorce.

Although I agree with Aine about people needing to work harder I do not think a divorce shouldn't be hard to get. Sometimes you can't work it out and in order to move on you should be able to end the contract.

MheraPai

Forever is a long time...it is a result of hard work and love.

[pawnman]

Nope. But in cases of rampant infidelity, abuse, or other cases where it is blatantly obvious that one party is at fault, then that person should bear all the costs for both parties (just like someone who loses a lawsuit can be forced to pay the winner's lawyer fees, etc).

Divorce is too common already. Start making it free, and there's no difference between having a girlfriend and a wife.

[{Tigress}]

Well... I wrote up a whole editorial (http://www.amdmb.com/news-display.php?NewsID=7088) about this very subject on another website.

So, no. I don't think divorces should be free.

[Yvonne Belisle]

I paid for my anulment all my divorces were free. I did the work myself and because my personal income was next to nothing I applied for a waiver for the filing fees and got it. The only reason I paid for the annulment was that I hired a lawyer for the job it was too complex I was unable to find a similar case to copy basic format from and he was fighting it. I think if the partner who is initiating it is low income and willing to do the work themselves then yes but I think people who expect others to do the work for them should have to pay and if they can afford the filing fees I think they should pay then too. Divorce was not easy for me I had to go through classes before I could divorce on the effects of divorce on children because I have kids. It also took three years for one of my divorces to go through. That is not easy at all on anyone and that was a no contest divorce. He kept breaking the rules so that I had to wait more time for it to be finalized.

[soilsigh aingeal]

I think it should be based on income and expenses, so if you can't afford much, you shouldn't have to pay out the arse for a judge to sign a paper.

I hear too much that it's too easy to get divorce, they should make it harder for people to get married.

I know 2 people (separate marriages) who got married so they could have sex and got divorced a short time later.

[Pol]

Indeed, if divorce was free there'd be little difference between a girlfriend and a wife.
HOWEVER, there's no difference anyway if the only reason the people are together is because of money.

[Aine of the Fae]

I think it should be based on income and expenses, so if you can't afford much, you shouldn't have to pay out the arse for a judge to sign a paper.

I hear too much that it's too easy to get divorce, they should make it harder for people to get married.

I know 2 people (separate marriages) who got married so they could have sex and got divorced a short time later.

I agree. Marriage should be harder. The idea of marriage is that you are making a LIFETIME commitment to a person and so many people who get married just aren't ready for that. Government regulation has made it too easy to make a lifetime commitment and too easy to get out of it.

If government were to butt out of marriage altogether and make it a literal contract where the parties needed lawyers and contracts, they'd actually have to think about what they expect from their partner and what their partner expects from them. And if I'd had to take the time to go into things like division of finances, child care, household responsibilities and frequency of sex? I wouldn't have married the man I did.

[Pol]

Making people pay to get a divorce is not going to make people take marriage any more seriously. If they're wanting a divorce, making them pay for it is pointless.
'Teach them a lesson,'
A lesson about what?
Exactly how mean and nasty two people can talk to each other because they can't afford a divorce?

[Erebus]

Out of curiosity, how many people saying "No" have ever actually had to go through a divorce? I want to know whose opinions I should take seriously.

[Velvet]

How much is a divorce anyways?

[docdoo]

I am personally sick and tired of hearing all of these wonderful stipulations on 'death do you part', (as in, it's ok to get a divorce if you're being abused) in America to get ANY benefits for your SO you HAVE to be married. Doesn't anyone see how this inherently SETS UP a cycle of divorce? It's not that people just 'don't take marriage seriously' its that we're FORCING them to get married in the first place.

Personally, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that ALL divorces should be free. For gods sake there is no other contract in the world that expects you to bind yourself to ONE person for your ENTIRE life other than marriage.

Speaking as a person who is currently going through a divorce I see NO reason why I should have to air my dirty laundry (meaning what happened in my marriage) to get a free divorce. This idea that it's OK to get a free divorce IF you've been abused is ridiculous...I for one am not about to tell someone all the crap that happened in my marriage just to see if I qualify as 'abused' (and another thought is who the hell is setting up the qualifications for abuse???).

Why the hell is it so horrible for me to decide that I don't want to be with a person anymore? When you live in a society that only recognizes my choice of partner if I commit to a LIFELONG contract then (hmm, slavery was another 'lifelong contract') of course we're going to have tons of divorce. Why the heck do I need a 'good excuse' to change my mind when it comes to my choice of partner??? Why do I have to JUSTIFY my decision to some panel who could then decide whether my reasons were 'good enough' to allow me to get a free divorce???

Furthermore it's utterly ridiculous that we GRANT marriages for only the cost of a liscense and the offical who's doing the ceremony (as little as 50.00 total) but yet we make it next to impossible for someone who has no money to get OUT of a marriage without getting screwed. The marriage/divorce system is a joke in this country, we shun people who get a divorce or say they 'Took the easy way out' unless they regale us with stories of abuse...

Sorry, but this mindset sickens me

[Erebus]

Oh, another question... where is the "Marriage is for children" crowd? Shouldn't they be saying that as soon as the children move out, divorce should be not only free, but automatic?

[{Tigress}]

docodoo, did you vow to remain married until death do us part? If so, why did you do that if you didn't intend to keep your vow? Is your word worth so little?

I don't have a problem with divorce, perse. I have a problem with people who think it's alright to go back on your word. No one FORCES you to make certain vows. You can write and say your own, perhaps one's you really mean to keep.

And as for slavery, frankly I'm appalled. Did someone hold a gun to your head and force you to get married? Slaves did NOT have a choice. You did. You may have felt pressure to get married for economic or social reasons, but agreeing to marry for life is NOTHING like being forced or BORN into slavery.

[Aine of the Fae]

I have a similar problem with divorce that Selene has. If you think there is any possibility of NOT staying together forever then don't get married. Honestly, the tax "benefits" of marriage were non-existant for hubby and I. At least when I was single I got the earned income credit. Now that I'm married? We make hardly anymore money then I did when single, and end up having to PAY taxes each year instead of refunds.

My problem is that people take their vows lightly. Yes their are some cases where the divorce is absolutely necessary. One partner misrepresented themself, or the relationship degrades to a point beyond repair.

However in modern society, divorce has become the FIRST answer instead of the LAST RESORT that it should be. The first hint of trouble and people are crying divorce and calling lawyers instead of actually trying to work things out.

Yes, there are some people who try desperately to work things out and find that they simply can't, and divorce should be available for them. But like I said, it should be a LAST resort, not a first.

[banondraig]

I voted no, for the practical reason that people still have to do the work. If you don't pay for a service you require who is?

probably the taxpayers, which is why i voted other. there wasn't an option for "hell no!". there is absolutely no reason i should have to pay for other people's failures/emotional problems.

marriage should be made more difficult. it's far too easy in the u.s. right now. i don't know exactly how difficult it is to divorce, i think it depends on the parties involved.

also, whirlwind courtship is said to be one of the signs that a relationship may be abusive. making marriage more difficult would help to weed out some of the marriages that should never have happened. after all, one comes before the other.

[banondraig]

Out of curiosity, how many people saying "No" have ever actually had to go through a divorce? I want to know whose opinions I should take seriously.

have you ever actually had to go through a divorce or is this just more gratuitous disrespectful sarcasm?

[Aine of the Fae]

Out of curiosity, how many people saying "No" have ever actually had to go through a divorce? I want to know whose opinions I should take seriously.

I have. And an annulment afterwards because he was Catholic. It was a bad decision to marry him in the first place. He was sweet at first, and then it quickly degraded into abuse. And he had money. A LOT of it. His family was so freaking rich.... And I was broke, and young. I got screwed, royally.

And I still think divorce is too easy. But I think getting married is too easy as well.

[Erebus]

[rant]

docodoo, did you vow to remain married until death do us part? If so, why did you do that if you didn't intend to keep your vow? Is your word worth so little?

Here's a question. What makes you think that (A) you're entitled to know why she's breaking her "vow" and (B) why you get to pass judgement on that if it doesn't meet your standards of "a good reason"?

Maybe she DID mean to keep her vow, but her husband was mentally abusive (rather than physically, so nobody can prove it one way or the other)? Or maybe he cheated on her? Or maybe they just grew apart and stopped loving each other? What entitles you to even be privvy to it, much less judge whether or not her reasons meet your approval?


I don't have a problem with divorce, perse. I have a problem with people who think it's alright to go back on your word.

How do you know who first went back on their word, and why do you think you have a right to that information? Do you honestly believe that people just go "meh, too much work" and throw up their hands and walk down to the county clerk to shell out THOUSANDS of dollars to make it all go away? That's nearly as silly as believing that a woman who'd been pregnant for 8 months will just wake up one morning and go "meh, I don't want it anymore, let's go get a partial birth abortion".


No one FORCES you to make certain vows. You can write and say your own, perhaps one's you really mean to keep.

So how do you know what her vows WERE? You just assume they included the assanine "Even though you may turn out to be someone who's a drug addict or an enabler (neither of which are abusive or meet any of the 'criteria for an acceptable reason' presented in this thread), I'm going to stay with you forever and ever because someone else thinks I need a really fantastic reason not to." How Christian can you get, really?


Did someone hold a gun to your head and force you to get married? Slaves did NOT have a choice. You did.

Ever been poor and pregnant in a country where the government won't do jack to help you if you're not married to the guy with the job that gives bennies? Didn't think so.


You may have felt pressure to get married for economic or social reasons, but agreeing to marry for life is NOTHING like being forced or BORN into slavery.

Marriage in America among the lower SES classes is nothing more than institutionalized sex slavery. If you get a poor girl with conservative parents pregnant before she gets out of high school, she either marries you or dies in a cardboard box on the street. Yay men.

[Nighthawk]

I would love for it to be free... I got to be abused, belittled and controlled... NOW I get to pay for all that even more.. Hell, she would not get a job forever, and I worked 12 days on, 2 off for a long, long time...only to be treated like ummm, crap... I only hope I can get my daugter, and show her what a parent is supposed to be like...as well as take her for as much child support as I can... she already told me she wants over 3/4 of what I make...but would not pay me a penny if I got my daughter... yup..

[Erebus]

have you ever actually had to go through a divorce or is this just more gratuitous disrespectful sarcasm?

I'm watching my SO go through a nasty, difficult, painful, expensive divorce right now. I know more about Ohio marriage law than I ever wanted to care to know.

[docdoo]

I have a similar problem with divorce that Selene has. If you think there is any possibility of NOT staying together forever then don't get married. Honestly, the tax "benefits" of marriage were non-existant for hubby and I. At least when I was single I got the earned income credit. Now that I'm married? We make hardly anymore money then I did when single, and end up having to PAY taxes each year instead of refunds.
I don't think I mentioned tax credits, what was referring to was LEGAL benefits. You know, things like Life insurance and health insurance. Things like living wills etc. If I want my SO recognized then I have to agree to be with him for LIFE! A contract between he and I stating that we are together is not enough.

How hell am I to divinate my entire LIFE into the future and foresee that I will be with someone untilt he day I die? Furthermore...why the hell should I have to?


My problem is that people take their vows lightly. Yes their are some cases where the divorce is absolutely necessary. One partner misrepresented themself, or the relationship degrades to a point beyond repair.

You do understand that your idea of 'absolutely necessary' and MY idea of 'absolutely necessary' could very well be two different things...right?


However in modern society, divorce has become the FIRST answer instead of the LAST RESORT that it should be. The first hint of trouble and people are crying divorce and calling lawyers instead of actually trying to work things out.

Hmm, I have to wonder what your sample size is when you say that 'divorce has become the FIRST answer' and why the hell should it be the last resort?? I NEVER swore 'til death do we part'...EVER.

Why is it that I need a 'reason' to get out of a marriage that I didn't want in anymore?? Why the hell is it acceptable to leave when you're being 'abused'? (a completely subjective term anyway since MY definition of abuse and YOUR definition of abuse may, in fact, be completely different)
Furthermore...if I'm NOT being abused then why don't I have the right to leave? Why is it that people want to assume that I didn't TRY or that my FIRST resort was divorce? And please, someone tell me why I should have to justify MY reasons for leaving a marriage I no longer want to be in to ANYONE?

I assure you that the people I know who have been divorced never, ever took it as a first option. Divorce is messy as hell, demeaning as all get out and expensive beyond reason I seriously doubt that MOST people opt for THAT route at the first twinge of unhapiness.


Yes, there are some people who try desperately to work things out and find that they simply can't, and divorce should be available for them. But like I said, it should be a LAST resort, not a first.

Again...who is anyone to assume that just because I was abused *I* am more worthy of changing my mind than someone who just didn't want to be with the other person anymore. Why do I need a reason...why the hell is it acceptable to change your mind about giving birth to a Child but NOT to get a divorce.

I gotta say that I seriously doubt that MOST people here would say 'Gee, did you try EVERYTHING before you got an abortion?' or...'Oh...so you took the EASY way out huh?' but yet there is apparantly a liscense to do just that when you're looking at divorced people.

I do NOT need to justify myself to anyone...my decision to divorce was my own and this ridiculous mindset of 'Divorce should be a LAST RESORT' is what keeps battered women in their marriages for far to long and keeps them thinking that if they only do 'one more thing' then they can 'save' the marriage.

[Aine of the Fae]

I don't think I mentioned tax credits, what was referring to was LEGAL benefits. You know, things like Life insurance and health insurance. Things like living wills etc. If I want my SO recognized then I have to agree to be with him for LIFE! A contract between he and I stating that we are together is not enough.

How hell am I to divinate my entire LIFE into the future and foresee that I will be with someone untilt he day I die? Furthermore...why the hell should I have to?



Again...who is anyone to assume that just because I was abused *I* am more worthy of changing my mind than someone who just didn't want to be with the other person anymore. Why do I need a reason...why the hell is it acceptable to change your mind about giving birth to a Child but NOT to get a divorce.

I gotta say that I seriously doubt that MOST people here would say 'Gee, did you try EVERYTHING before you got an abortion?' or...'Oh...so you took the EASY way out huh?' but yet there is apparantly a liscense to do just that when you're looking at divorced people.

I do NOT need to justify myself to anyone...my decision to divorce was my own and this ridiculous mindset of 'Divorce should be a LAST RESORT' is what keeps battered women in their marriages for far to long and keeps them thinking that if they only do 'one more thing' then they can 'save' the marriage.

Actually I'm one of those people who is against abortion, except in the most extreme cases.

[docdoo]

Actually I'm one of those people who is against abortion, except in the most extreme cases.

*nods* ok..what about the rest of my post? What give you or anyone the right to assume that because I may not want to divulge what happened in my marriage that somehow I am less 'worthy' of divorce or that I ran for a divorce the first time?

What about the fact that the very mindset you are promoting is the EXACT same mindset that women who are being abused use? Geesh and we wonder why women stay so damn long in a marriage when she's getting the snot knocked out of her. This very idea which has been drummed into everyones head that if you get a divorce you are somehow a failure.

[docdoo]

Here's a question. What makes you think that (A) you're entitled to know why she's breaking her "vow" and (B) why you get to pass judgement on that if it doesn't meet your standards of "a good reason"?

Maybe she DID mean to keep her vow, but her husband was mentally abusive (rather than physically, so nobody can prove it one way or the other)? Or maybe he cheated on her? Or maybe they just grew apart and stopped loving each other? What entitles you to even be privvy to it, much less judge whether or not her reasons meet your approval?



How do you know who first went back on their word, and why do you think you have a right to that information? Do you honestly believe that people just go "meh, too much work" and throw up their hands and walk down to the county clerk to shell out THOUSANDS of dollars to make it all go away? That's nearly as silly as believing that a woman who'd been pregnant for 8 months will just wake up one morning and go "meh, I don't want it anymore, let's go get a partial birth abortion".



So how do you know what her vows WERE? You just assume they included the assanine "Even though you may turn out to be someone who's a drug addict or an enabler (neither of which are abusive or meet any of the 'criteria for an acceptable reason' presented in this thread), I'm going to stay with you forever and ever because someone else thinks I need a really fantastic reason not to." How Christian can you get, really?



Ever been poor and pregnant in a country where the government won't do jack to help you if you're not married to the guy with the job that gives bennies? Didn't think so.



Marriage in America among the lower SES classes is nothing more than institutionalized sex slavery. If you get a poor girl with conservative parents pregnant before she gets out of high school, she either marries you or dies in a cardboard box on the street. Yay men.


*races into the thread and hugs you* MY HERO!!!

[pawnman]

I am personally sick and tired of hearing all of these wonderful stipulations on 'death do you part', (as in, it's ok to get a divorce if you're being abused) in America to get ANY benefits for your SO you HAVE to be married. Doesn't anyone see how this inherently SETS UP a cycle of divorce? It's not that people just 'don't take marriage seriously' its that we're FORCING them to get married in the first place.

Personally, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that ALL divorces should be free. For gods sake there is no other contract in the world that expects you to bind yourself to ONE person for your ENTIRE life other than marriage.

Speaking as a person who is currently going through a divorce I see NO reason why I should have to air my dirty laundry (meaning what happened in my marriage) to get a free divorce. This idea that it's OK to get a free divorce IF you've been abused is ridiculous...I for one am not about to tell someone all the crap that happened in my marriage just to see if I qualify as 'abused' (and another thought is who the hell is setting up the qualifications for abuse???).

Why the hell is it so horrible for me to decide that I don't want to be with a person anymore? When you live in a society that only recognizes my choice of partner if I commit to a LIFELONG contract then (hmm, slavery was another 'lifelong contract') of course we're going to have tons of divorce. Why the heck do I need a 'good excuse' to change my mind when it comes to my choice of partner??? Why do I have to JUSTIFY my decision to some panel who could then decide whether my reasons were 'good enough' to allow me to get a free divorce???

Furthermore it's utterly ridiculous that we GRANT marriages for only the cost of a liscense and the offical who's doing the ceremony (as little as 50.00 total) but yet we make it next to impossible for someone who has no money to get OUT of a marriage without getting screwed. The marriage/divorce system is a joke in this country, we shun people who get a divorce or say they 'Took the easy way out' unless they regale us with stories of abuse...

Sorry, but this mindset sickens me

You don't have to be married to get benefits. That depends on the company, not on the country. My wife's employer offers insurance for domestic partners, and even the children of domestic partners (kids that belong to someone who lives with you, but aren't yours).

[Aine of the Fae]

Furthermore it's utterly ridiculous that we GRANT marriages for only the cost of a liscense and the offical who's doing the ceremony (as little as 50.00 total) but yet we make it next to impossible for someone who has no money to get OUT of a marriage without getting screwed. The marriage/divorce system is a joke in this country, we shun people who get a divorce or say they 'Took the easy way out' unless they regale us with stories of abuse...


And that is a huge part of the whole divorce problem, at least as I see it. It is entirely too easy to get married.

[Erebus]

You don't have to be married to get benefits. That depends on the company, not on the country.

Nice to know. I'll make sure that next time I fall in love, it's with someone who works for one of the few companies that gives benefits to live-in spouses.

[Erebus]

probably the taxpayers, which is why i voted other. there wasn't an option for "hell no!". there is absolutely no reason i should have to pay for other people's failures/emotional problems.

So why should a divorce cost the taxpayers any more than the 25 cents it takes to copy the paperwork?

[Aine of the Fae]

Nice to know. I'll make sure that next time I fall in love, it's with someone who works for one of the few companies that gives benefits to live-in spouses.

Why rush to get married at all? Are you so sure that you are going to love the same person for as long as you live that you want to tie yourself to them legally as well as emotionally?

And if you are get married for the "benefits" it makes me wonder how much love is really there at all.

[pawnman]

Out of curiosity, how many people saying "No" have ever actually had to go through a divorce? I want to know whose opinions I should take seriously.

So, have you been through one?

[pawnman]

And that is a huge part of the whole divorce problem, at least as I see it. It is entirely too easy to get married.

We have a winner. Maybe marriage should cost as much as divorces do now. Then people will really think about it before they jump in.

[Erebus]

And if you are get married for the "benefits" it makes me wonder how much love is really there at all.

If I fall in love with someone and DON'T marry them, you know who gets to visit me in the ICU of the hospital? Nobody. We have to spend double on health insurance. If I die, she can't inheret my crap, even if I have a will, if my family contests it. Not to mention that on my death, my social security vanishes into the void - she'll never see a penny, even to bury me. I may be supporting children, but I can't claim them on taxes unless I brought 'em with me. We'll never get a loan for a house, because neither of us individually makes enough income to offset the debt and we can't do it jointly. Do you want more? Love is great, but why do Christians who believe in Eternal Meshing of Souls get an easier time than those of us who prefer to keep our souls to ourselves?

[Aine of the Fae]

So why should a divorce cost the taxpayers any more than the 25 cents it takes to copy the paperwork?

Hmmm let's see... cost of copying that paperwork, plus cost of paying the person copying that paperwork, and the building they are working in, the electricity and water, cost of the judge to sign that paperwork... and that's for a quick and easy divorce where all parties agree.

[Erebus]

So, have you been through one?

Post 32. Read it.

Remember the whole thing I said in the "age" thread about how I'm the sole breadwinner for a family of five? I don't talk about stuff I don't have experience with. Which is why it bugs me so much when you talk about poor people. But that's another subject.

[Erebus]

Hmmm let's see... cost of copying that paperwork, plus cost of paying the person copying that paperwork, and the building they are working in, the electricity and water, cost of the judge to sign that paperwork... and that's for a quick and easy divorce where all parties agree.

Why can't I copy my own paperwork on my home printer and fax it to the county courthouse? My point being,t he circus surrounding a divorce is completely artificial, and is a system set up specifically to keep poor women in bad marriages because Christians say it's a good thing to do.

[docdoo]

We have a winner. Maybe marriage should cost as much as divorces do now. Then people will really think about it before they jump in.


OH...wonderful idea. This way we can make the benefits of marriage an EXCLUSIVE club for only the wealthy, yessireee....that'll fix it! *insert sarcasm here*

[Aine of the Fae]

If I fall in love with someone and DON'T marry them, you know who gets to visit me in the ICU of the hospital? Nobody. We have to spend double on health insurance. If I die, she can't inheret my crap, even if I have a will, if my family contests it. Not to mention that on my death, my social security vanishes into the void - she'll never see a penny, even to bury me. I may be supporting children, but I can't claim them on taxes unless I brought 'em with me. We'll never get a loan for a house, because neither of us individually makes enough income to offset the debt and we can't do it jointly. Do you want more? Love is great, but why do Christians who believe in Eternal Meshing of Souls get an easier time than those of us who prefer to keep our souls to ourselves?

I don't believe in the "Eternal Meshing of Souls" in fact Jesus mentions quite specifically that in the after-life there is no marriage.

[pawnman]

Post 32. Read it.

Remember the whole thing I said in the "age" thread about how I'm the sole breadwinner for a family of five? I don't talk about stuff I don't have experience with. Which is why it bugs me so much when you talk about poor people. But that's another subject.

Bugs you when I talk about poor people? Because my $20,000/yr is such a fortune, right?

[pawnman]

OH...wonderful idea. This way we can make the benefits of marriage an EXCLUSIVE club for only the wealthy, yessireee....that'll fix it! *insert sarcasm here*

Keeps people who can't afford a divorce from getting married.

[Kaylara]

Divorce is already too easy. People have a bit of trouble and they run to the divorce lawyer instead of trying to work it out. Marriage, which is theoretically intended to be a spiritual bond that lasts a lifetime, has become a joke in this day and age. "Till death do us part" has become "as long as he doesn't annoy me."

Divorce, when done amicably, without lawyers, is not expensive. Making it easier is not the way to go.
In the Christian world view it should be until death do us part. Why should someone stay in a relationship that isn't making them happy?

Also, a marriage is a legal contract... And as far as I know, breaking a contract always costs money...

[Aine of the Fae]

Why can't I copy my own paperwork on my home printer and fax it to the county courthouse? My point being,t he circus surrounding a divorce is completely artificial, and is a system set up specifically to keep poor women in bad marriages because Christians say it's a good thing to do.

If you are so certain that marriage is set up because the Christians say it's a good thing to do, then why would you get married? By getting married you are endorsing the very institution you are criticizing.

[Erebus]

I don't believe in the "Eternal Meshing of Souls" in fact Jesus mentions quite specifically that in the after-life there is no marriage.

And yet, you say it should be HARDER to get out marriage?

[Aine of the Fae]

In the Christian world view it should be until death do us part. Why should someone stay in a relationship that isn't making them happy?

Also, a marriage is a legal contract... And as far as I know, breaking a contract always costs money...

I'm not saying they should stay in a relationship that doesn't make them happy. I'm saying they should have thought harder about making the commitment.

[Erebus]

If you are so certain that marriage is set up because the Christians say it's a good thing to do, then why would you get married? By getting married you are endorsing the very institution you are criticizing.

<sigh>
Because I have no other choice if I want all the nifty stuff I mentioned above? You haven't caught on to that part yet? We can't just write out a contract between the two of us - the government doesn't have to, and won't, recognize it without a minister's seal and a lifetime duration.

[docdoo]

Keeps people who can't afford a divorce from getting married.

Uh hun...sure...making the benefits of marriage ONLY accessable to those who have the money to buy them.

[Aine of the Fae]

And yet, you say it should be HARDER to get out marriage?

Yes I do. But I also think it should be harder to get INTO marriage. People make a commitment with marriage and it's too easy to break that commitment. What does it say for a society that takes its promises so lightly?

[Erebus]

Also, a marriage is a legal contract... And as far as I know, breaking a contract always costs money...

Unless the contract has an escape clause... something you can't legally put into a marriage contract.

[docdoo]

Bugs you when I talk about poor people? Because my $20,000/yr is such a fortune, right?

For a single man...well 20,000 is actually fine to live on. I've done it.

[Aine of the Fae]

<sigh>
Because I have no other choice if I want all the nifty stuff I mentioned above? You haven't caught on to that part yet? We can't just write out a contract between the two of us - the government doesn't have to, and won't, recognize it without a minister's seal and a lifetime duration.

You know what? I know that. It's the only system we have right now. But I don't have to like it, and I can point out ways that would work MUCH better, including each couple writing out their own contract and the government, which is supposed to be FOR THE PEOPLE, abiding by it, not the other way around.

[Aine of the Fae]

Unless the contract has an escape clause... something you can't legally put into a marriage contract.

Well let's see, if it was treated like other legal contracts you could. But it's not.

[Erebus]

You know what? I know that. It's the only system we have right now. But I don't have to like it, and I can point out ways that would work MUCH better, including each couple writing out their own contract and the government, which is supposed to be FOR THE PEOPLE, abiding by it, not the other way around.

Um, who's side are you ON? This is the point I thought I was arguing AGAINST you. :confused:

[Erebus]

Well let's see, if it was treated like other legal contracts you could. But it's not.

So why are you advocating making it HARDER on me?

[docdoo]

Yes I do. But I also think it should be harder to get INTO marriage. People make a commitment with marriage and it's too easy to break that commitment. What does it say for a society that takes its promises so lightly?

Why does a society have to be built on a LIFELONG promise!!

I take my religion VERY seriously as do most folks on this board...why is it ok for me to change THAT path but not the decision to marry someone for LIFE??

[WynterWynd]

Okay please do not put this in family and parenting lol. Thank you :smoochypo

Okay.. divorce costs ALOT of money and when someone I know gets one they always say that a divorce should be granted under certain circumstances beyond your control like if ur spouce cheats..
but no matter what it still costs alot, force the one spouce to be legally bound to the other.
Do you think the gov should legalize Divorce to be FREE?
I voted 'other'
I think it should be free in cases of abuse.
I also think there should be an 'easy out divorce' price too. Not to make marrige a simple thing to get out of persay, but when both parties are set on and agree to the terms that they have set for a peaceable divorce, there is no reason to make some lawyer any richer.
I have a problem with the legal proffesion using divorce to get wealthy on the misery of others. There should be some sort of sliding scale for the process.

[Erebus]

I think it should be free in cases of abuse.

Who defines "abuse"?

[SylverStar]

I think divorce should be free. Because I have to watch my three little cousins suffer because their father left them won't get a divorce and their mom has to take care of them in poverty, because she can't afford a lawyer to get a divorce. Granted their are things she should be doing that she's not...but a divorce would help so much in her case I think.

[Yvonne Belisle]

If she is in the US she can go down to the courthouse and sit in the divorce room for a bit. Find a divorce that is similar to her needs ie kids and no contest if he won't fight it. Then she goes home waits a few days and goes back to the courthouse. She can get a copy of the divorce papers she witnessed for a small amount of money. Then she can ask the clerk if they have forms to waive the filing fees for low income. You might be surprised at what you can do without a lawyer. If she is from Utah and needs an uncomplicated one with kids let me know. For all I know it might work in other states too. I would give her a copy of mine divorce forms and all the papers that go with it are nonclassified documents that are available to anyone.

[Romani Vixen]

I think that it should be.

Yeah... the divorce rate would skyrocket. But I don't feel that it's anyones business to regulate that.

[E. Shadowblade]

I think divorces should be free if both parties are seperating on good terms. When my parents got divorced, they split because my father felt that he could not give my mother the attention she deserved, and my mother felt un loved. They get along wonderfully now and both are happily remarried, but it cost them close to $1000 and the courts tried to nail my father for $250 a week child support when my mom only wanted $75/wk. It was more cost and aggrivation than necessary.

[Romani Vixen]

Why does a society have to be built on a LIFELONG promise!!

I take my religion VERY seriously as do most folks on this board...why is it ok for me to change THAT path but not the decision to marry someone for LIFE??
It's a very personal matter. That's why some Pagans only do handfasting for a limmited duration then renew.

Just because I want to be with my man for life, doesn't mean that you have to be with yours.

[WynterWynd]

Who defines "abuse"?
Who difines abuse????

I don't know, maybe the black eyes, fat lips, cracked cheek bone, broken nose and cracked ribs I used to have from my X husband!

Does that qualify as abuse??

[Kadynas]

Divorce is already too easy. People have a bit of trouble and they run to the divorce lawyer instead of trying to work it out. Marriage, which is theoretically intended to be a spiritual bond that lasts a lifetime, has become a joke in this day and age. "Till death do us part" has become "as long as he doesn't annoy me."

Divorce, when done amicably, without lawyers, is not expensive. Making it easier is not the way to go.
I agree, but I will add that that's why many Pagans have done away with the whole "til death do us part". Maybe it's "unromantic" or even commitment-phobic, but I think it's a bit unrealistic to make a promise that you have no idea you'll be able to keep. Things happen. :whatgives: People aren't always what they seem to be in the first flush of love, and people change... some of those changes may not be acceptable to one's mate.

I think it's already hard enough to get divorced... while I don't think it should be free in all cases, since that only encourages frivoulous marriages, I do think it should be free in cases of abuse and infidelity.

[{Tigress}]

I NEVER swore 'til death do we part'...EVER.

That being the case, my rant was out of place and I apologize.

[RogueSpirit]

I think that an uncontested divorce where everything has already been agreed upon should not be any more complicated or expensive than a marriage (license and officiant fees). When it is contested and is being dragged out in court, then yes, there should be fees... the longer and more complicated, the more fees there are.

In my opinion, suggesting that only people who are abused should be allowed to get a free divorced and that it has to be documented isn't taking some things into consideration. It's difficult to prove some kinds of abuse. So difficult, in fact, that it's not exactly illegal to emotionally and verbally abuse a spouse. And how would anyone prove this type of abuse? Sexual abuse and rape of a spouse is also difficult to prove... and too often considered laughable by the authorities. So who gets to decide what is and isn't abuse... and who gets to decide who's actually experienced it? There are just too many variables here.

I'm also curious about where the idea that people are using divorce as their first reaction to not being happy in their marriage. In every divorce that I know, at least one of the parties involved has tried (too often by themselves, which explains why it didn't work) to save their marriage. I left my husband after three years. Anyone could say that I wasn't abused... I never had bruise or a broken bone or bleeding of any kind. That doesn't mean I wasn't abused, it means I wasn't physically abused. I realized my marriage wasn't going to work before the first year was over. I tried to make it work, he didn't. Does everyone that knows us know what I did to save my marriage? No. Does everyone who knows us know what he did to me? No... most people don't. So how many people do you think assume we just gave up at the first sign of trouble? I'd be willing to say nearly everyone thinks we gave up. And I know his family blames me. No one knows what goes on in a marriage that isn't theirs and no one has the right to judge someone's decision to end their marriage. It's just not anyone's business unless it was their marriage to begin with.

[Cinnamon Girl]

You're right, it's none of our business as to the reasons behind the dissolution of your marriage; however, since the cost needs to be covered somewhere, I don't believe that I as a taxpayer should have to pay for your mistakes, regrets or problems - the government already passes along too much in the form of taxes and individuals should be more accountable for their actions. Your marriage is over and you want a divorce? Fine - but you pay for it, not me.

[Autumn]

Here in NYS we do not have no fault, and in rare cases the cheater or abusers is assigned to pay the court costs of the injured party, but it's Damn RARE!

[WynterWynd]

...... the government already passes along too much in the form of taxes and individuals should be more accountable for their actions. Your marriage is over and you want a divorce? Fine - but you pay for it, not me.I totally agree with that!
I do think there should be some sort of sliding scale for certain individuals, but not at the cost of the tax payer.

[Erebus]

Who difines abuse????

I don't know, maybe the black eyes, fat lips, cracked cheek bone, broken nose and cracked ribs I used to have from my X husband!

Does that qualify as abuse??

How about maybe "You're worthless, you'll never be any good, now go fix my dinner and if you mess it up I'll scream at you and the kids for an hour." Does that count?

How about "I'll kill myself if you ever do anything I dislike." Is that abuse?

How about "Watch me destroy your journals and books and family heirlooms," is that abuse or not?

Or maybe "I'm going to sit here and do heroin all day, so clean the house and take care of the kids"?

Or "I love you so much that I'm going to follow you everywhere and log the mileage on your car and keep you under surveillance 24/7"?

What about a husband who's wife is phobic of small spaces, and he locks her in closests as a "joke"? Regularly?

How about a husband who forces (through intimidation, financial pressure, or otherwise) his wife to have an abortion?

None of that involves black eyes or fat lips... so the divorce in those cases should be hard and expensive, yes?

So, I'll ask again: Who gets to define what counts as "abuse"? You seem to imply only physical injury is "abuse". Some of the above, many people would NOT define as abuse, and other people would. It seems to me like you jumped right into being defensive without actually looking at what I was saying.

[Erebus]

however, since the cost needs to be covered somewhere, I don't believe that I as a taxpayer should have to pay for your mistakes, regrets or problems - the government already passes along too much in the form of taxes and individuals should be more accountable for their actions. Your marriage is over and you want a divorce? Fine - but you pay for it, not me.

Again, why does it have to cost more than a trip to the copy machine and the services of a notary public? That it DOES cost more makes me very suspicious of the point of Christianized marriage as a government institution in the first place. Why does it cost more to get divorced than it costs to get married?

[thok_ragnarok]

Okay please do not put this in family and parenting lol. Thank you :smoochypo

Okay.. divorce costs ALOT of money and when someone I know gets one they always say that a divorce should be granted under certain circumstances beyond your control like if ur spouce cheats..
but no matter what it still costs alot, force the one spouce to be legally bound to the other.
Do you think the gov should legalize Divorce to be FREE?

nothing is free...therefore it would come from taxpayers, meaning I'm paying for another persons divorce

I'll take no for $1000 Alex

[Erebus]

nothing is free...therefore it would come from taxpayers, meaning I'm paying for another persons divorce

I'll take no for $1000 Alex

Yet AGAIN... what is it that is endemic to divorce that necessitates it cost more than a trip to the copy machine and a notary public? That's pretty much all a legal marriage takes.

[WynterWynd]

Thats true, but most of the time when people come into a marrige they don't have much to start off with. Then they get petty about 'whats yours and whats mine'.

[pawnman]

I think divorces should be free if both parties are seperating on good terms. When my parents got divorced, they split because my father felt that he could not give my mother the attention she deserved, and my mother felt un loved. They get along wonderfully now and both are happily remarried, but it cost them close to $1000 and the courts tried to nail my father for $250 a week child support when my mom only wanted $75/wk. It was more cost and aggrivation than necessary.

It is close to free if there's no fighting going on. Just leave the lawyers out of it.

You know what is free, folks? A pre-nup. If you're so sure you're going to divorce someone down the road, then set the rules for the split up front. Keeps the lawyers fees to a minimum, because there's nothing to argue. In fact, all you really need to do is fill out the paperwork yourself in that case.

[pawnman]

Post 32. Read it.

Remember the whole thing I said in the "age" thread about how I'm the sole breadwinner for a family of five? I don't talk about stuff I don't have experience with. Which is why it bugs me so much when you talk about poor people. But that's another subject.

So, that would be a "no".

[pawnman]

For a single man...well 20,000 is actually fine to live on. I've done it.

Sure. But it's not rich, especially when you are paying on $10,000 in credit card debt.

[Yvonne Belisle]

How about maybe "You're worthless, you'll never be any good, now go fix my dinner and if you mess it up I'll scream at you and the kids for an hour." Does that count?

How about "I'll kill myself if you ever do anything I dislike." Is that abuse?

How about "Watch me destroy your journals and books and family heirlooms," is that abuse or not?

Or maybe "I'm going to sit here and do heroin all day, so clean the house and take care of the kids"?

Or "I love you so much that I'm going to follow you everywhere and log the mileage on your car and keep you under surveillance 24/7"?

What about a husband who's wife is phobic of small spaces, and he locks her in closests as a "joke"? Regularly?

How about a husband who forces (through intimidation, financial pressure, or otherwise) his wife to have an abortion?

None of that involves black eyes or fat lips... so the divorce in those cases should be hard and expensive, yes?

So, I'll ask again: Who gets to define what counts as "abuse"? You seem to imply only physical injury is "abuse". Some of the above, many people would NOT define as abuse, and other people would. It seems to me like you jumped right into being defensive without actually looking at what I was saying.


I went through several of those things and I must say I was rather glad they didnt come out in court. To me yes they were abuse but in 1988 and 1992 the attitude would not have been that those things were abuse and I would have been looked at as failing in the marriage. It is really good to see that others see those things as abuse. Thank you.

[Erebus]

You know what is free, folks? A pre-nup.

Hope you don't live in a communal property state like Ohio. Pre-nups aren't worth the paper they're written on here. Courts are not required to even look at them, much less enforce them. They're entirely non-binding here.

[Athena-Nadine]

It is close to free if there's no fighting going on. Just leave the lawyers out of it.

You know what is free, folks? A pre-nup. If you're so sure you're going to divorce someone down the road, then set the rules for the split up front. Keeps the lawyers fees to a minimum, because there's nothing to argue. In fact, all you really need to do is fill out the paperwork yourself in that case.
*...nods...* Except that in some states, which are considered Community Property states, like TX, the courts are not required to uphold a pre-nuptial agreement.

It doesn't cost very much to actually disolve the marriage itself--the cost of copying, notarizing, and filing the paperwork with the court. What costs all the money is the division of assets and debt, and the resolution of custody and support for the children (if there are any). Someone has to pay for the time and work put in by the judges and lawyers. So, no, it shouldn't be free.

There is a reason a marriage is not treated like any other contract. In most cases there is no contract--only a license and a certificate stating two people are married. And the fact that the expectations of marriage are different for many people makes treating it like any other contract difficult. There are only verbal agreements for the courts to work with. For marriage to be treated like any other contract, drafting and executing written contracts would have to become part of the marriage process for every single person (which is all that a pre-nup is). Indemnification would be written into each and every contract, so whomever breaks it has to pay the court fees. Of course, doing so would raise the cost of getting married.

[Felidae]

I agree with BecW.

I don't do bookkeeping for free, so why should a lawyer be expected to draw up papers for free?

[Erebus]

Because I missed this earlier...

That being the case, my rant was out of place and I apologize.

Why is it any of your business in the first place what her vows were? Your rant was out of place under any circumstances, not just the ones that meet your approval.

[{Tigress}]

Because I missed this earlier...


Why is it any of your business in the first place what her vows were? Your rant was out of place under any circumstances, not just the ones that meet your approval.

Because my rant was about her keeping her word. Since she didn't make a promise she couldn't keep, I had no argument with her and said so.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to get? Why can't we expect people to hold to their vows that are freely given?

[Erebus]

Because my rant was about her keeping her word. Since she didn't make a promise she couldn't keep, I had no argument with her and said so.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to get? Why can't we expect people to hold to their vows that are freely given?

Why do we expect people to freely give life-long vows, and why is it any of your business who broke what vow first?

[docdoo]

That being the case, my rant was out of place and I apologize.

Look, the simple fact of the matter is that no matter WHAT circumstances I married under and no matter what circumstances I divorced under it's really nobodys business but MINE.

Basically what I hear you saying is that unless someone is being *abused* (and they tell you all about it!) then they don't get a 'Get out of Jail free card'. Are you saying that a couple who has simply grown apart and are no longer in love should just stay in their marriage because if not, *gasp* then their word means nothing?

I really don't think that you truly understand the message you are sending to people in unhappy marriages! I hear this SAME message everywhere I go. I get sick and tired of people saying "Oh...you're divorcing....how sad. What happened?"

Please tell me and, while you're at it, explain to every other woman out there who lives with the stigma of divorce why the hell it's any of your business WHAT their vows were or WHAT happened in their marriage? Maybe I was abused in my marriage, but you know what? Even if I WAS it's nobody's business but MINE and my X husbands. I'll be damned if I'm gonna put my kids into a position where they feel like they have to choose between Mom and Dad JUST to satisfy YOUR curiosity so that I can feel justified in making a decision to end a marriage that wasn't working.

Oh and ftr...here's the BIG catch, to all of you who say that a 'good reason' to divorce is abuse. When the abused woman DOES admit to being abused most people respond (either immediatly or, if they're cowardly, after the woman leaves) with "Oh, that's too bad...Why didn't you leave sooner"

No wonder women stay when they know they're going to be frowned upon by other women because they 'Took the easy way out' or "Didn't leave sooner" Kind of a catch 22 dont you think?

[docdoo]

Because my rant was about her keeping her word. Since she didn't make a promise she couldn't keep, I had no argument with her and said so.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to get? Why can't we expect people to hold to their vows that are freely given?


And what if I HAD said 'Til death do us part' You're telling me that unless I divulge what happened in MY marriage just to satisfy YOUR idea of 'Acceptable excuses to get divorced' that somehow I'm a dishonest person who goes back on her word?

Tell me Selene, what EXACTLY do you want to know about my marriage to make it a justifiable thing that I got divorced??

[soilsigh aingeal]

It shouldn't be free for anyone. Abused or not. I've been abused and I feel this way, and it shouldn't be hard for an abusee to have to scrape money together to file for divorce. No one should have to pay until it's over with and if it's the result of an abusive marriage or someone committed adultry, etc, those people who commited the crimes should have to pay for their own mistakes when it's finished. It should be based off of what it actually costs to have a judge sign a piece of paper and have a clerk file it somewhere.

[{Tigress}]

And what if I HAD said 'Til death do us part' You're telling me that unless I divulge what happened in MY marriage just to satisfy YOUR idea of 'Acceptable excuses to get divorced' that somehow I'm a dishonest person who goes back on her word?

Tell me Selene, what EXACTLY do you want to know about my marriage to make it a justifiable thing that I got divorced??
I'm not telling you anything. I'm simply saying that I don't approve of liars or oath breakers of any kind and I have that right, just as you or anyone else has the right to break or not break any oaths you wish. And, just as you have the right to voice your opinions about keeping or breaking your oath, or anyone elses, so do I.

And I have no idea if you are dishonest or not. I don't know you. I wasn't at your wedding. I didn't know what you said. Which is exactly why I apologized for jumping to an inaccurate conclusion.

[Athena-Nadine]

Why do we expect people to freely give life-long vows, and why is it any of your business who broke what vow first?
I can't speak for Selene, only for myself. I, too, have issues with people who break their vows. I take an oath way too seriously to make one unless I know I will not break it. My word is the only thing I have. If I don't don't keep it, I lose all right to expect to be trusted or taken seriously. I lose all decency and integrity.

Let's face it. The majority of people still do swear to be married for life. The second they get divorced, for whatever reason, they've broken their vow. It makes no difference who broke what first.

As far as "why is it any of your business...?" goes, this is the very problem with society today. Everyone has become so wrapped up in doing whatever they want to, personal freedom, and "mind your business," that there is no longer any accountability when someone breaks a promise. I may not have the right to live someone else's life for them, or to try to force my moral values upon them, but I have every right to protest and say that I think it's wrong that so many people freely give their word (no one held a gun to their heads and forced them to say, "'Til death do us part.") and then break it.

This does not mean that people should stay in a miserable situation or never get divorced because they made a promise. It means that people need to learn to be more discriminating with what promises they give in order to take into account the fact that there very well may come a time when they cannot stand by their oath.

Scoff all you want, but extenuating circumstances mean nothing to a promise I make. If there is a chance that those circumstances may make it impossible to keep my promise, I will not make it. If I choose to do so anyway, I am agreeing to uphold it no matter the consequences, for to break it would be worse.

[docdoo]

I'm not telling you anything. I'm simply saying that I don't approve of liars or oath breakers of any kind and I have that right, just as you or anyone else has the right to break or not break any oaths you wish. And, just as you have the right to voice your opinions about keeping or breaking your oath, or anyone elses, so do I.

And I have no idea if you are dishonest or not. I don't know you. I wasn't at your wedding. I didn't know what you said. Which is exactly why I apologized for jumping to an inaccurate conclusion.


Fair enough, so, what you're saying is that if a woman says 'Til death do us part' then gets the snot knocked out of her for 5 or 6 years and finally divorces the guy that she's a 'liar or an oathbreaker'....right? That *is* what you're saying, correct?

[soilsigh aingeal]

Actually, maybe they should just do away with this whole marriage thing, that would make things a lot easier. You shouldn't have to have a license and a certificate to be allowed to plege your love in front of your friends and family anyways, so I say do just that, change your name if you want to, but when it's all said and done, and two people have grown apart or someone turned into another person, there's none of this stuff to have to go through. So then 'til death do us part" should not be included in any vows, period.

As far as things you want going to your partner, a will is a will and it should be just that, people shouldn't be allowed to contest it unless there was wrong doing.

[Desdemona]

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to get? Why can't we expect people to hold to their vows that are freely given?Vows of the magnitude to which you refer should not be freely given. They should be given only under the most solemn consideration. Free is not a word I would ascribe to vows and oaths. Perhaps that is what you meant?

Personally, I would like to see more legal free clinics, for more things than just divorce. The one group that needs them the most -- the poor and the working poor. I would like my taxes to go to that.

[{Tigress}]

Fair enough, so, what you're saying is that if a woman says 'Til death do us part' then gets the snot knocked out of her for 5 or 6 years and finally divorces the guy that she's a 'liar or an oathbreaker'....right? That *is* what you're saying, correct?

Yes, she is. But in my opinion she would have cause -- the price for keeping her word is too high, in that example, as it is in many others.

You see, all I want is for people to place a higher value on their word. Which is why I said "no, divorces should not be free" in the first place. Everything has a cost. Everything. I just wish being dishonest wasn't so cheaply purchased in society today -- not just about marriage vows, but about everything.

[{Tigress}]

Vows of the magnitude to which you refer should not be freely given. They should be given only under the most solemn of consideration, and after much time. Free is not a word I would ascribe to vows and oaths. Perhaps that is what you meant?

I'm sorry, by freely given I meant that no one holds a gun to your head during a wedding ceremony and forces you to make promises you might not be able to keep.

[Calyx]

Selene,
have you ever been married before?

[Aowyn]

Fair enough, so, what you're saying is that if a woman says 'Til death do us part' then gets the snot knocked out of her for 5 or 6 years and finally divorces the guy that she's a 'liar or an oathbreaker'....right? That *is* what you're saying, correct?
OK I think a divorce should cost as much as the marriage license costs, lawyers make enough money on other things they can deal with the income loss. Besides doesnt anyone else find it kind of sick to be profitting off of the end of another person's relationship?
While a promise is a promise...and I am not one for breaking an oath easily I am a bit disturbed at where this train of thought is leading people. I wonder what some of the people answering so vehemently against the death of a marriage which is merely a choice after all feel about a person's right to make other choices regarding thier own life.....it is after all just that their life.
It is rather telling how much we all (myself included here) tend to hold other people up to what our own standards are. example...one person doesn't beleive in abortion and therefore is dead set against letting others choose...or one person thinks that divorces are a result of people not taking their word seriously soooo.... I will leave that hanging for you all.
:kooky:

[{Tigress}]

Selene,
have you ever been married before?

Yes ma'am. I am married and have been for four years. And yes, I have considered getting a divorce, but my word given on my wedding day held me to a course of trying to solve our problems instead of giving up -- which is a good thing because things are working out between us where once no future seemed possible.

I'm fortunate, I realize that. Not everyone marries someone who loves them and is willing to work on things as much as my husband does and is. I also know how tempting it can be to throw it all away when things are bad. And frankly I'm amazed not at myself, but at my husband for sticking around through some of the crap I've tossed his way. But, like me, he made a vow that he intended to keep, if there was any hope of a resolution, and so we've worked hard and have overcome many obstacles that others would have given up on.

[RogueSpirit]

You're right, it's none of our business as to the reasons behind the dissolution of your marriage; however, since the cost needs to be covered somewhere, I don't believe that I as a taxpayer should have to pay for your mistakes, regrets or problems - the government already passes along too much in the form of taxes and individuals should be more accountable for their actions. Your marriage is over and you want a divorce? Fine - but you pay for it, not me.

I never said that a divorce should be free. A marriage license and officiant aren't free. And the paperwork and such for a marriage isn't any different than for an uncontested divorce. So why should it cost any more to do one than it does to do the other. Notice where I did say that the contested divorce where one or both parties drag it out should cost more. This is because I realize that in that situation you are going to need lawyers, a judge, and mediators and it will take a lot of time. I don't think that kind of thing should cost the tax payers anything. But I don't see how an uncontested divorce that has already been figured out and only needs basic paperwork that could be mass produced and stamped by an officiant should cost more than a marriage license (which is mass produced) and only requires an officiant and witnesses to make it legal. My license and officiant cost me about $50. An uncontested divorce costs about four times that much. It doesn't make sense... why is it so much more expensive? It's not that I expect people to work for free... it's that I don't see how doing the same amount of paperwork (approximately), taking the same amount of time, and using a similar officiant should cost more.

[pawnman]

Because I missed this earlier...


Why is it any of your business in the first place what her vows were? Your rant was out of place under any circumstances, not just the ones that meet your approval.


Wow. People can't even apoligize without attracting the wrath of Erebus.

What a jerk.

[pawnman]

As far as "why is it any of your business...?" goes, this is the very problem with society today. Everyone has become so wrapped up in doing whatever they want to, personal freedom, and "mind your business," that there is no longer any accountability when someone breaks a promise. I may not have the right to live someone else's life for them, or to try to force my moral values upon them, but I have every right to protest and say that I think it's wrong that so many people freely give their word (no one held a gun to their heads and forced them to say, "'Til death do us part.") and then break it.



I'd like to second this opinion.

[Kaylara]

I'm not saying they should stay in a relationship that doesn't make them happy. I'm saying they should have thought harder about making the commitment.
I don't think that anyone goes into a marriage thinking it's going to end in divorce. I think it's hard enough to make that commitment and when it doesn't work out, it's devastating. So making it more expensive is not going to be all that much of a factor. I mean honestly... Who goes into a marriage going "Well, I'll marry you now, and divorce you in a few years... Just seems like the thing to do."

[dragenfly]

Yup under some circumstances it should be free. But I am thankful that in California at least it cannot be contested so thats a good thing... :chattin:

[thok_ragnarok]

Yet AGAIN... what is it that is endemic to divorce that necessitates it cost more than a trip to the copy machine and a notary public? That's pretty much all a legal marriage takes.

who will pay the judge and the lawyers and the court clerks

[pawnman]

who will pay the judge and the lawyers and the court clerks

You know, I don't have a problem with divorce, per se, being free (or relatively cheap). I have a problem with paying for other people's lawyers when they want to fight their spouse tooth and nail. If the two of you want to run down to the courthouse and get divorced, then that should really cost no more than $50 or so for filing fees. And I believe this is the case. The problem comes in when people start wanting to fight for child support, visitation rights, who gets the house, the car, the dog, etc... Lawyers are not cheap, and I shouldn't be paying for someone else's lawyer because they married someone they don't like anymore.

[Gracecat]

Also, a marriage is a legal contract... And as far as I know, breaking a contract always costs money...

That's it. Docdoo and Erebus are (rightfully) upset that neither can easily add an SO to your personal business matters. I'm seeing from my side, that a few people are looking at marriage as a religious matter. It's not. I signed a form, a sheet of paper. It didn't come attached with my rights, and responsibilities and priviledges. But I certainly could have visited the courthouse and looked them up. I'm sure I could have requested the full article, amendments in verbatim, ad nausem and so forth.

And that's just not true about a minister's seal. And as far as I know, (yes I had the white wedding.... bleh!) there's no where in the agreement stating that you must stay with this person for a lifetime. If that were the case, then wouldn't divorce be illegal?

Escape clauses.... You can't legally put into a marriage? Well, Louisiana states that if there is no property shared and no children resulted from the marriage, in extreme cases you could walk free in 14 days and the abusive partner could be held responsible for all fees incurred. Sure, you may be out of the $1700, but ya know. There are a hell of alot of women living in shelters right now that *should* have died over a couple of those beatings. They left without anything except what they were wearing. And they did it. They got out.

And as far as I know, and I'm relatively new to this but a $200 filing fee petitioning that the judge grant divorce at the end of 180 legally separated days is all that needs to be done. If it's amicable, a lawyer isn't necessary, nor needed. You're paying that lawyer to represent you at least twice in court, the hours that he prepares to present your case, and the paralegals that he has under his employ. If there's nothing to represent in court, and you're both more than willing to play nice and walk away with exactly what you brought into the marriage, what judge would request otherwise?

And Erebus... who defines abuse? I know this is rhetorical and I'm learning fast here... but there are certain "guidelines" in place under the State of Louisiana, and I'm sure it's the same everywhere that if A, B and C happens, or even just A... it's legally considered abusive. I never considered myself battered. I never even attempted to fathom putting myself in the same spot as women with broken arms, concussions, black eyes and the like. But in a court of law, the petition for divorce will read the same, state the same, outline the same codes of violations that were incurred during the time of marital cohabitation. I was frankly startled to realize that by definition of the court system, certain actions of "abuse" started as early as two weeks after I was married. Of course, if you travel that route, then I don't even want to consider what my own reactions could be considered as.

Yesterday I officially became legally separated. I became a statistic.

[Athena-Nadine]

That's it. Docdoo and Erebus are (rightfully) upset that neither can easily add an SO to your personal business matters. I'm seeing from my side, that a few people are looking at marriage as a religious matter. It's not. I signed a form, a sheet of paper. It didn't come attached with my rights, and responsibilities and priviledges. But I certainly could have visited the courthouse and looked them up. I'm sure I could have requested the full article, amendments in verbatim, ad nausem and so forth....*...nods...* Like I said earlier:

It doesn't cost very much to actually disolve the marriage itself--the cost of copying, notarizing, and filing the paperwork with the court. What costs all the money is the division of assets and debt, and the resolution of custody and support for the children (if there are any). Someone has to pay for the time and work put in by the judges and lawyers. So, no, it shouldn't be free.

There is a reason a marriage is not treated like any other contract. In most cases there is no contract--only a license and a certificate stating two people are married. And the fact that the expectations of marriage are different for many people makes treating it like any other contract difficult. There are only verbal agreements for the courts to work with. For marriage to be treated like any other contract, drafting and executing written contracts would have to become part of the marriage process for every single person (which is all that a pre-nup is). Indemnification would be written into each and every contract, so whomever breaks it has to pay the court fees. Of course, doing so would raise the cost of getting married.


And as far as I know, (yes I had the white wedding.... bleh!) there's no where in the agreement stating that you must stay with this person for a lifetime. If that were the case, then wouldn't divorce be illegal?The only place in the agreement this exists is in the verbal promise made by the people getting married themselves. Legal or not, it doesn’t change the fact that by vowing to remain with each other "’Til death do us part," and then divorcing, for any reason, those people have broken their promise and the agreement. Does that mean no one should divorce? Of course not. Does it mean that people are wrong to divorce? No. But it doesn’t change the fact that a promise was broken. Legality has nothing to do with it

[Erebus]

who will pay the judge and the lawyers and the court clerks

Why should there have to be judges and lawyers and court clerks? There's A court clerk for a marriage. Why is there more than that for a divorce?-

[Erebus]

Nallia:
Me breaking a promise neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg, Nallia. For someone sticking up so vehemetly for a Christian tradition, you sure are making a happy hobby out of passing judgements.

Why should I have to tell you everything that happened to me in a marriage before I can get YOUR approval for breaking my promise? Who do you think you are, really? And do you honestly look at someone and say "Well, I would like to trust him, but, you know, he's divorced, so that means he breaks his promises... so I can't trust him"?

Why do you think people get divorced, anyway? We just wake up one morning and go "I think I'll just add 'get divorced' on my to-do list today. No reason, I just feel like leaving."

[Kaylara]

:) Lets try to be nice peeps :)

[Gracecat]

Yeah Kay... I've self modded a couple replies here.

*shrugs*
It's been probably... weeks shy of nine years for me. It's been over half that I've fought personal demons coming to this place in my life. It's additionally difficult that I'm going to cause two very special people to endure all sorts of my miserable hell. My circumstances haven't come easily, it's not been a light decision.

So yeah, it offends me a bit... And it hurts that I'm effectively called an oathbreaker, a liar, I've lost my dignity. I don't deserve respect. And frankly, if someone tells that to the right woman at the right time, she just may buy into that belief and she'll return to something that she doesn't need to be in, because it's "the right thing to do".

[banondraig]

So why should a divorce cost the taxpayers any more than the 25 cents it takes to copy the paperwork?

i never said it should, just that it shouldn't be free.

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

Why should there have to be judges and lawyers and court clerks? There's A court clerk for a marriage. Why is there more than that for a divorce?-

They aren't necessary in amicable, no-contest divorces. Hence why those types of divorces don't require anything more than filing the paper-work with the appropriate people. Which is a perfectly legal and acceptable method of divorce in all of the US.

But in divorces where there is fighting over kids, pets, personal property, and money, or one of them is fighting the divorce they become necessary. This is for one of two reasons from what I can tell. It is either because the two people who are getting the divorce don't have the appropriate knowledge of the legalities of the divorce or they are too busy going at each others throats to deal with it in a mature, adult fashion. The judges and lawyers become necessary to make legal arbitrations. And they have to be paid for their work, just like anyone else in the world. I don't know about you, but I expect to get paid for the time and energy I put into my job.

I make no judgements about people getting divorces, why they get divorced is their own business. But if their dirty laundry gets aired in court, that's because either one or both of them was unable to just get the divorce without dragging their spouse through the mud. Not because it's a requirement to get divorced.

As for the breaking of an oath made to commit to the person for life, personally I agree that it makes you an oathbreaker. The oath was made willingly. If you don't like that part of the vows, whether you think their is a chance you might later get divorced or not, then simply ask the officiant if it can be removed before the wedding takes place. It's a simple thing to do really, and it is not required to be placed in your vows. It wasn't part of mine, and I was married in a church and had absolutely no trouble with it not being in our vows. I have no intention of ever divorcing my husband, but that wasn't something I was willing to guarantee by making a oath before my friends, family, and gods. For that same reason, I won't swear to anything, no matter how trivial it might appear to be.

[Athena-Nadine]

Nallia:
Me breaking a promise neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg, Nallia. For someone sticking up so vehemetly for a Christian tradition, you sure are making a happy hobby out of passing judgements.
Oh, whatever. :rolleyes: If you have a problem with the fact that I believe that every promise is and should be sacred, and that people in general should be much more discriminating when deciding which promises to make, that's your own issue.

*...shrugs...* How I feel about promises is how I feel. I don't expect everyone to feel the way I do, but I have every right to state my feelings on the subject.


Why should I have to tell you everything that happened to me in a marriage before I can get YOUR approval for breaking my promise? Who do you think you are, really? And do you honestly look at someone and say "Well, I would like to trust him, but, you know, he's divorced, so that means he breaks his promises... so I can't trust him"?
And now you are very much putting words into my mouth (and hands). Never once have I asked for reasons anyone has divorced. You continue to miss the point, again and again, and twist it into something it isn't.

Never once have I said that people should never divorce. I have stated, more than once, that my issue is with the statement, "'Til death do us part," in all its many forms. The point is, no one can definitively say that s/he will be with the person s/he marries for the rest of his/her life. As that is the case, people shouldn't be promising to stay with someone for the rest of their lives, because the second people have to get divorced, they've broken that promise. That the promise (if made during their wedding ceremony) is broken is a fact. The reasons don't change that fact.


Why do you think people get divorced, anyway? We just wake up one morning and go "I think I'll just add 'get divorced' on my to-do list today. No reason, I just feel like leaving."
I could care less why someone gets divorced. Again, I have never asked a single person here for a reason, nor have I said anyone is a bad person for doing so. The reasons are moot and have absolutely nothing to do with what I've said.

Once again since you are so obviously so touchy about the subject of divorce in general that you have missed it every time I said it:

My issue is not with divorce. My issue is with the vow people choose to take. My issue with those vows, is that there is not a single person who has promised to remain married to their spouse for the rest of his/her life who can honestly say that they know that this will be so. Relationships, like anything else in life, are not guaranteed. What I can't help but wonder, why, if everyone these days knows already that no marriage is guaranteed to work, they still insist upon making an oath to be with their spouses for the rest of their lives? Since I'm left with no answer from anyone I can only assume that promises are nothing but words to every one of those people, because if those promises were taken seriously, they never would have risked vowing to be remain married for the rest of their lives.

If I state in my vows that I will remain with my husband for the rest of my life, and then got divorced, for any reason, I will have broken my promise. Whether I had legitimate reasons for divorcing or not makes no difference as far as this is concerned. The fact would be that I will still have broken my promise. Because any vow I make is inviolate, there will be no vow to remain married for the rest of my life. It would be difficult enough to have to deal with my marriage ending; I'm not going to add oath-breaking to it.

So, let's recap: I have no issue with divorce. I don't care why anyone gets a divorce. I agree that sometimes divorce is necessary. Because of that, I feel that "Til death" should be left out of wedding vows altogether.

[flar7]

Nalia, I agree, a promise is sacred, or as close to as a person can get. If you break the promise, its your word thats broken, but..... what if your spouse files for divorce? What then? You swore till death, but they divorce you? What do you do then? Where does your word lie? Does protesting the divorce honor your vow, or do you allow it/no contest and do you think this breaks your word? If so, why?

A contested divorce costs a ton, and if there are assets it gets worse, for after the contest is decided, there is still the divorce proceedings to follow up on and division of custody/goods/etc...

[Aowyn]

My issue is not with divorce. My issue is with the vow people choose to take. My issue with those vows, is that there is not a single person who has promised to remain married to their spouse for the rest of his/her life who can honestly say that they know that this will be so. Relationships, like anything else in life, are not guaranteed. What I can't help but wonder, why, if everyone these days knows already that no marriage is guaranteed to work, they still insist upon making an oath to be with their spouses for the rest of their lives? Since I'm left with no answer from anyone I can only assume that promises are nothing but words to every one of those people, because if those promises were taken seriously, they never would have risked vowing to be remain married for the rest of their lives.

If I state in my vows that I will remain with my husband for the rest of my life, and then got divorced, for any reason, I will have broken my promise. Whether I had legitimate reasons for divorcing or not makes no difference as far as this is concerned. The fact would be that I will still have broken my promise. Because any vow I make is inviolate, there will be no vow to remain married for the rest of my life. It would be difficult enough to have to deal with my marriage ending; I'm not going to add oath-breaking to it.

So, let's recap: I have no issue with divorce. I don't care why anyone gets a divorce. I agree that sometimes divorce is necessary. Because of that, I feel that "Til death" should be left out of wedding vows altogether.
What about promises made under false pretenses? What if honestly mean to stay together forever and then find out that there is something horribly wrong with the person? Like they are a child abuser...or that they murdered someone.
I can see your point about leaving out that particular sentence out, many people do nowdays so there are alot of divorces that I assume you have no issues with. Your opinion is well thought out and of course you are entitled to it but it is after all just that an opinion just as everyone elses posts are. It's a shame that divorces are so common this is a fact, and it is a shame that many people don't take their words as seriously as we may like. However it is rather cold to tell someone that because they may have made a horrible mistake (and we all make mistakes) that they now have to live with it forever.
As to the statement that we all know divorce is common so no one should make that promise, well we all know that having sex makes babies so by your logic no one should do that either unless they want a child.

[thok_ragnarok]

Why should there have to be judges and lawyers and court clerks? There's A court clerk for a marriage. Why is there more than that for a divorce?-

ask the idiots who get lawyers to fight over every single thing they own

[Shanti]

Should divorce be free no. I dont wan to pay a divorce tax.
If you dont want to pay for a divorce..dont take the risk......dont get married. There, the end. Simple!

[flar7]

...However it is rather cold to tell someone that because they may have made a horrible mistake (and we all make mistakes) that they now have to live with it forever...
huh? where did she say that or even imply it? am lost...:huh:


...As to the statement that we all know divorce is common so no one should make that promise, well we all know that having sex makes babies so by your logic no one should do that either unless they want a child.
huh? sex makes babies, marriage makes divorce..... huh? thats not logic per se.

[docdoo]

huh? where did she say that or even imply it? am lost...:huh:

Actually the idea that somehow those of us who have gotten a divorce are, in essence, 'oathbreakers' and 'liars' as well as untrustworthy has been the jist of this thread all along.

The idea has been that 'unless you ended your marriage based upon what *I* think are acceptable excuses then you took the easy way out'

In fact, Nallia has gone so far as to say


'I can't speak for Selene, only for myself. I, too, have issues with people who break their vows. I take an oath way too seriously to make one unless I know I will not break it. My word is the only thing I have. If I don't don't keep it, I lose all right to expect to be trusted or taken seriously. I lose all decency and integrity.

I have to say that I take GREAT offence at the implication that because I have divorced then I have lost all 'decency and integrity' and that I've lost 'the right to expect to be trusted or taken seriously'....It is precisely THIS mindset that drives women to stay with men who ultimately kill them and I find it disgusting to hear that there are those amoung us who spew forth this redundant and biased filth.

She has also said


As far as "why is it any of your business...?" goes, this is the very problem with society today. Everyone has become so wrapped up in doing whatever they want to, personal freedom, and "mind your business," that there is no longer any accountability when someone breaks a promise.

Accountability for WHAT? For leaving a marriage I wasn't happy in? Would she have those of us who DID say 'til death do us part' put in stocks for a day? The implication here again is that if I said 'til death do us part' and then I opted out of a marriage that wasn't working I should be held 'accountable'. Personally, taking care of 3 children alone, being degraded and looked down upon, being seen as 'damaged goods' or even better...unworthy of trust and seen as having no INTEGRITY...well, I see that as punishment enough.

Nallia has gone on to say

This does not mean that people should stay in a miserable situation or never get divorced because they made a promise.

Oh...sure thats what she meant...uhn huh..'Go ahead and get a divorce if you promised to be with someone forever...just remember that when you do you will lose all your decency and the right you have to be taken seriously'....

Finally we have this...


Scoff all you want, but extenuating circumstances mean nothing to a promise I make. If there is a chance that those circumstances may make it impossible to keep my promise, I will not make it. If I choose to do so anyway, I am agreeing to uphold it no matter the consequences, for to break it would be worse.

There ya go Flar...doesn't make a difference to Nallia if your daughter is getting the crap kicked out of her on a daily basis for, apparantly in her eyes, breaking a promise is WORSE than being abused....

and now I ask you Flar my friend...do you SEE why so many in this thread have their panties in an uproar? We've been called names from the start, for what? For divorcing!

Frankly I'm disgusted

[docdoo]

Never once have I said that people should never divorce. I have stated, more than once, that my issue is with the statement, "'Til death do us part," in all its many forms. The point is, no one can definitively say that s/he will be with the person s/he marries for the rest of his/her life. As that is the case, people shouldn't be promising to stay with someone for the rest of their lives, because the second people have to get divorced, they've broken that promise. That the promise (if made during their wedding ceremony) is broken is a fact. The reasons don't change that fact.

No, you havent come out and said they shouldn't divorce but, if they 'did' say 'Til death do us part' (in any form apparantly) they will lose the ability to be respected by you and shouldn't expect respect from anyone else either :geez:



I could care less why someone gets divorced. Again, I have never asked a single person here for a reason, nor have I said anyone is a bad person for doing so. The reasons are moot and have absolutely nothing to do with what I've said.

Nope, apparantly they're ALL still untrustworthy oathbreakers and liars and should never again expect to be respected



My issue is not with divorce. My issue is with the vow people choose to take. My issue with those vows, is that there is not a single person who has promised to remain married to their spouse for the rest of his/her life who can honestly say that they know that this will be so. Relationships, like anything else in life, are not guaranteed. What I can't help but wonder, why, if everyone these days knows already that no marriage is guaranteed to work, they still insist upon making an oath to be with their spouses for the rest of their lives? Since I'm left with no answer from anyone I can only assume that promises are nothing but words to every one of those people, because if those promises were taken seriously, they never would have risked vowing to be remain married for the rest of their lives.

You want an answer? The answer is simple Nallia...they say it because they BELIEVE IT! There is no hidden agenda, nobody who takes the vow to their spouse then later breaks it ever intended on breaking it. They say it because they very much believe that they CAN be with that person for life.

For you to tell me that my promises are not to be taken seriously, or that *I* didn't take them seriously is terribly offensive. I just have to say that I REALLY hope you don't have a daughter because, with an attituide like yours she'll never want to leave an abusive relationship.

[{Tigress}]

Actually the idea that somehow those of us who have gotten a divorce are, in essence, 'oathbreakers' and 'liars' as well as untrustworthy has been the jist of this thread all along.

Please tell me what you call it when a person swears an oath and then breaks it. If there is another word in the English language that works better for you than oathbreaker, share it with the rest of us, please.

I don't care why they broke their word. And if I knew, odds are I'd agree with their decision. But that doesn't change the fact that if they swore "until death do us part" and then got a divorce, they broke their oath.

And the whole point is that if y'all (not you specifically because you've already explained that you didn't take that particular oath) get so upset over being called oathbreakers, then stop making promises you're not sure you can keep. Why is this such a difficult concept for y'all to get?

[docdoo]

While a promise is a promise...and I am not one for breaking an oath easily I am a bit disturbed at where this train of thought is leading people. I wonder what some of the people answering so vehemently against the death of a marriage which is merely a choice after all feel about a person's right to make other choices regarding thier own life.....it is after all just that their life.


I agree hon, but I'm not surprised...I've had varying degrees of this same mindset thrown at me from members on this board since I mentioned that I am divorcing.

[Shanti]

I cant believe where this thread went!!
Oaths should not be if your not sure you can keep it? There are no quarentees in the real world!!! And being victumised definately isnt something we know will happen...duh.

This whole oath thing is reminding me of the old days before women had any rights and were property of husbands. He could do whatever he wanted and she was pernamently trapped.
We cant predict what someone else is going to do and sometimes we just change. We dont plan these things...its life.

To live with quarentees is to live in a bubble...it may pop ya know.

I thought the question was should divorce be free?

A little to much self rightous poo is floating around for my taiste. Talk about living up to impossible expectations......prediction, quarentess, oaths no matter what happens....pooey.

My 2 cents!!

[docdoo]

Please tell me what you call it when a person swears an oath and then breaks it. If there is another word in the English language that works better for you than oathbreaker, share it with the rest of us, please.

I don't care why they broke their word. And if I knew, odds are I'd agree with their decision. But that doesn't change the fact that if they swore "until death do us part" and then got a divorce, they broke their oath.

And the whole point is that if y'all (not you specifically because you've already explained that you didn't take that particular oath) get so upset over being called oathbreakers, then stop making promises you're not sure you can keep. Why is this such a difficult concept for y'all to get?

I will tell you why such offense is being taken at this. As divorced people we ALREADY carry the stigma of divorce. Everywhere we go we are asked 'What happened' and 'did you go to counseling'...phrases like 'Oh, your kids must be going through hell' and 'Im so sorry, did you do everything you could to save it?' round through our heads.

Do you have any clue what hearing this crap makes you think? It makes you think you're a damn failure. As if most folks who leave (espicially abusive) marriages don't already have a terrible self-esteem issue society wants to put the spotlight even FURTHER onto these women by telling them that they are 'liars' and 'untrusworthy'.

These are people who are trying desperately to pick themselves back up off the ground in every way possible. The entire idea of divorce is that most people don't get it soon enough. For every marriage that ends there are hundreds of untold stories.

My husband RAPED me throughout my marriage...I was kept as a child...I've been locked into bedrooms for hours at a time and had any number of heavy objects thrown at me through the years, including axes, screwdrivers and frigging hammers.

As if I don't ALREADY feel like I have the worst judgement out there I have to listen to this disgusting rhetoric telling me that, on top of feeling like a freak, I'm also a 'liar' and have given up any right to be treated with RESPECT.

This my friend is why you're getting a backlash. Divorce is NEVER the easy way out and for those of you who say 'Oh...but MY friend got divorced and they never even *tried* to work it out' chances are damn good that you're not getting the whole story. Nobody had ANY idea what was happening in my marriage.

[Shanti]

I got married in 1976. Divorced in 77......why..because we wanted to!!! So burn me in hell. Kiss my booty!!! I dont give a rats butt what any self rightous person thinks. We didnt find it to be good for either of us!! Bite me!

And we paid for it all out of our own pockets..why because we wanted too!!!!:razz:

[Shanti]

And when it comes to people who want to stay married even if its a bad situation...thats fine..its your choice. Just not everyone elses. My standards of reason do not have to match anyone elses and visa versa! We are individuals with the freedom of choice and should be allowed non judgement when it comes to matters as this.
To place a judgement for ones life choices that they live with is disrespectful in my opinion.

The choices are ours to make and its for us to judge ourselves in our own hearts.

[Terestai]

I've been debating jumping in on this thread, and thought I'd offer my two cents today.

I don't think divorce should be free, but it should be more fair. My friend is currently going through a divorce because his wife slept with another guy and got pregnant with his child. He also found out that the daughter he's been raising for the last four years (a daughter he thought was his) is, in fact, not his. His wife cheated on him three times. He lives in the apartment they had because she doesn't have a job (she quit after she got pregnant by one of her coworkers), and she can't afford the mortgage. She's back living with her parents. She was recently arrested for failing to turn up for jury duty. My friend has never been arrested, pays all the bills, has held the same job for the last eight years, and never cheated on his wife.

But guess who got custody of the kids and guess who gets to pay child support?

Also, the reason I don't think divorce should be free is because it makes divorce far too easy. Maybe it'd be alright if there weren't kids involved, but if there are kids involved, then the parents need to think a little more. And yes, I'm bitter. My first memory of life is of my parents' last fight, just after I turned three. They broke my fav toy - a little fire engine that I would ride around on. My entire childhood was destroyed because of their divorce, and I'm not exaggerating (I have stories that would shock the hell out of just about everyone). I grew up wanting to play music, but I didn't get my first instrument until I was 18 - because getting me an instrument would have meant coordinating schedules, and my parents were too unwilling to be in the same 10-mile radius at the same time. I wanted to be in Cub Scouts. Again, a no-go.

So what did I get? A stepmother who was so bad with kids that she put rules in place that are borderline child abuse. Is it any wonder I came down with SAD when I'd have to spend nights alone in a dark room, because I wasn't given permission to come out of my room (we had to ask) and wasn't given permission to turn on my lights? Is it any wonder I'm a pacifist, when I was whipped across the face with a belt because I didn't obey the order my two-year old sister gave me? Yes, we three kids from past marriages were forced to obey their kids or we got beat. And if the younger two cried because of us, we could forget coming out of our rooms for two weeks.

I also got to live alone. My dad had my stepmother. My stepmother's girls from her first marriage had each other. My dad and stepmother's two girls had each other. My mom had my stepdad. My mom and stepdad's two kids had each other. I never had anyone... I was my parents' only child.

So yes... I say to make them pay. Make them pay with everything they have.

[Aowyn]

huh? sex makes babies, marriage makes divorce..... huh? thats not logic per se.
she said that we all know that marriages can result in divorce so we shouldnt promise to marry for life. I am simply applying that train of thought to the fact that we all know that sex can result in a child, therefore by that same type of reasoning no sex should be had unless you are meaning to have one since it is common as well.
the other part i think has already been explained for me.

[Calyx]

I am an oathbreaker!
I got married at 22. Guess what? That nice boy I married? Well, turns out he wasn't so nice at all. He had serious money issues (like out of control spending), fidelity issues (couldn't keep his pants zipped up), and serious power/control issues. I wouldn't see him for weeks at a time, because he was either working or partying with his friends. I am not exaggerating. We had a big church wedding, and though I don't remember the vows, I am sure they contained those words of "til death do us part". I was divorced directly after my 25th birthday. Talk about stigma! And that nice ex? 6 months to the day after we divorced he ran off with his best friend's wife--they'd been having an affair (one of his many) for over a year. Our divorce was free because one of our friends was a lawyer and did it as a favor for me.

That divorce? The best thing I ever did for myself. Why stay in something that made me miserable for the sake of an oath? I now have an adoring and faithful hubby and a lovely family. We did NOT have those words in our ceremony. He's divorced too, and I never thought I couldn't trust him because he'd been divorced.

I take oaths and promises very seriously. I do not make them unless I intend to keep them. That one I could care less about, because it was for the best that we divorced.

I can't believe some of your attitudes in this thread. Quite frankly, I'm disgusted by some of the things I've read here. If you are more concerned about an oath than being miserable or abused, then I can't believe the naiveity of you. Quite frankly, you need to experience something before you open your mouths and spew out the crap I've read in this thread. :dis: If you still haven't changed your minds, then something is wrong with you mentally. Period.

[WynterWynd]

I am an oathbreaker!
I got married at 22. Guess what? That nice boy I married? Well, turns out he wasn't so nice at all. He had serious money issues (like out of control spending), fidelity issues (couldn't keep his pants zipped up), and serious power/control issues. I wouldn't see him for weeks at a time, because he was either working or partying with his friends. I am not exaggerating. We had a big church wedding, and though I don't remember the vows, I am sure they contained those words of "til death do us part". I was divorced directly after my 25th birthday. Talk about stigma! And that nice ex? 6 months to the day after we divorced he ran off with his best friend's wife--they'd been having an affair (one of his many) for over a year. Our divorce was free because one of our friends was a lawyer and did it as a favor for me.

That divorce? The best thing I ever did for myself. Why stay in something that made me miserable for the sake of an oath? I now have an adoring and faithful hubby and a lovely family. We did NOT have those words in our ceremony. He's divorced too, and I never thought I couldn't trust him because he'd been divorced.

I take oaths and promises very seriously. I do not make them unless I intend to keep them. That one I could care less about, because it was for the best that we divorced.

I can't believe some of your attitudes in this thread. Quite frankly, I'm disgusted by some of the things I've read here. If you are more concerned about an oath than being miserable or abused, then I can't believe the naiveity of you. Quite frankly, you need to experience something before you open your mouths and spew out the crap I've read in this thread. :dis: If you still haven't changed your minds, then something is wrong with you mentally. Period.
Thank you Calyx.....for managing to get into words, what I just could not!
I whole heartedly agree with you!!

[Calyx]

Thank you Calyx.....for managing to get into words, what I just could not!
I whole heartedly agree with you!!
Heh, why thank you!
Oh, and one more little addendum....
My hard-core baptist parents? They were DELIGHTED with my divorce. So much so that the three of us went to Mexico for a week to celebrate when the papers were signed. One of the best times I've had with my parents. And they are big on keeping oaths and promises as well.
Sometimes you just HAVE to use common sense.

[docdoo]

Heh, why thank you!
Oh, and one more little addendum....
My hard-core baptist parents? They were DELIGHTED with my divorce. So much so that the three of us went to Mexico for a week to celebrate when the papers were signed. One of the best times I've had with my parents. And they are big on keeping oaths and promises as well.
Sometimes you just HAVE to use common sense.

Amen my friends!! :tongueout

[{Tigress}]

I am an oathbreaker!

I'm an oathbreaker, too. I took an oath to love only my husband, forsaking all others, and I broke it by falling in love with someone else.

Does that make me horrible in peoples eyes? Usually.

Is there more to the story than just me going out and falling in love with another man for no "good" reason? Absolutely.

Does that change the fact that I broke my oath? No.

Do I get upset if someone calls me an oathbreaker after hearing my story? Not in the least - how can I be upset with them for stating the truth?

That's the reality I've been trying to get across. And the whole reason for me harping on the oathbreaking is because I do not think that breaking a scared marriage vow should be cheaper than breaking contracts with your creditors if you file bankrupty, and I certainly don't think it should be free.

If, in my case, my husband had asked for a divorce, I should have been the one to foot the bill, since I was the oathbreaker. And in the cases of others who divorce for abuse or some other broken vow, the spouse breaking the vow should pay.

And that's my belief. Call me any name you'd like, but that won't change what I believe or why.

[flar7]

...doesn't make a difference to Nallia if your daughter is getting the crap kicked out of her on a daily basis for, apparantly in her eyes, breaking a promise is WORSE than being abused....

and now I ask you Flar my friend...do you SEE why so many in this thread have their panties in an uproar? We've been called names from the start, for what? For divorcing!

Frankly I'm disgusted

actually, you are reading into it. Nallia stated her conditions and feelings towards a promise and the conditions required for her to make such a vow. If you dont have the same commitment as her, thats fine. I have been divorced, I made that vow, its now broken...so? How can you get married and promise until death do you part, if you dont know the future stability of the person? Dont you mean, until death do us part, or if he goes nuts and tries to kill me?

Nallia said she had "issues" with people, and that it was the vows that she meant specifically. I agree, unless you are having a religous type service, perhaps "until death do us part" should be left out of such a vow.

You can get mad if you want, its your right. But a broken promise is always a broken promise. Will I break a promise if I have to, of course! When the time to choose comes and you must decide between your word and your life, then you choose as you see fit. A person's life is sacred and cannot be given back, neither can the integrity of a promise. Not necessarily your honesty, but the original intent behind it.

[RogueSpirit]

Personally, I don't consider an oath or promise valid if the person you make it to is telling you what s/he thinks you want to hear in order to obtain the oath. I made my oath (assuming I actually made the oath, I honestly don't remember what was promised at my wedding) to someone I found out about two months later was not who or what he led me to believe he was. And that he basically told me all of that to manipulate me into marriage. Very few of our friends saw through him. I tried to make it work. Through emotional and eventually sexual abuse, lying, trying to turn my family and friends against me, refusing to work, cheating on me, among other things, I went to counseling alone to try to fix things. I don't consider myself a liar. I don't consider myself an oathbreaker. The person I made an oath to doesn't exist... he was a fabrication made up by the person who treated me like property and shared me with his friends. And if the person I made the oath to never existed, neither did the oath.

[flar7]

Life has broken me well to the rule of "never." Never say never. I can promise in marriage to forever love someone, but not to be with them until death do us part. Its that simple for me now.

People need to calm down and step back.


If people will not calm down, the thread will be moderated.

Divorce is very cheap here, (else my wife could not have afforded one) but as I said, if you need a lawyer or court services, then it increases drastically.

[WynterWynd]

Heh, why thank you!
Oh, and one more little addendum....
My hard-core baptist parents? They were DELIGHTED with my divorce. So much so that the three of us went to Mexico for a week to celebrate when the papers were signed. One of the best times I've had with my parents. And they are big on keeping oaths and promises as well.
Sometimes you just HAVE to use common sense. :lol: My Catholic mother helped me get my divorce:rotfl:

When I married, I gave my 'oath' (since that what we seem to be stuck one) to one man........if I had known that shortly there after Mr Hyde would emerge, I never would have uttered those words to him.

[Erebus]

I do not think that breaking a scared marriage vow should be cheaper than breaking contracts with your creditors if you file bankrupty,

So you think someone who breaks their "sacred" marriage vow should lose all their property and destroy their credit for 7 years?

Since when is a government involved in "sacred" vows, anyway?

[WynterWynd]

I would guess since you have to file your marrige license at the court house:whatgives

[Erebus]

And thus, the problem. It's not "sacred" if the government is granting it. It's secular. No matter what house or temple or synagouge you do it in.

[WynterWynd]

Thats very true, I dont believe the gonvernment has any business in the institute of marrige.

[docdoo]

actually, you are reading into it.

Ok, then please give me your interpretation on this...


My word is the only thing I have. If I don't don't keep it, I lose all right to expect to be trusted or taken seriously.

And this...


I lose all decency and integrity

or this...(as if I should be punished for getting a divorce)


there is no longer any accountability when someone breaks a promise.

Again...


If I choose to do so anyway, I am agreeing to uphold it no matter the consequences, for to break it would be worse.

And this...


Marriage, which is theoretically intended to be a spiritual bond that lasts a lifetime, has become a joke in this day and age. "Till death do us part" has become "as long as he doesn't annoy me."

here's another...(I wonder if she KNOWS how hard it is to prove, much less prosecute marital rape?...Hmm, guess that doesn't count eh?)


it should not be free unless there is a documented instance of abuse.

How about this one?

Divorce is too common already. Start making it free, and there's no difference between having a girlfriend and a wife.

Here's one for the books...gotta love the idea that my word is pretty much worthless now that I've been divorced.


docodoo, did you vow to remain married until death do us part? If so, why did you do that if you didn't intend to keep your vow? Is your word worth so little?

I have more of them Flar, the thread is riddled with words like 'Failure', 'Liar', 'Oathbreaker' etc...

Too many for one post though, however, if you'd like me to I'd be happy to pull them all and put them in ONE post?

[Terestai]

Honestly, I think too many people take marriage too lightly these days. Now I feel genuinely sorry for people who marry and find that their spouse turns into a monster. Especially if there's abuse involved - that's just sick. Jerks deserve to be lonely forever.

But what I can't stand is the people who just marry on a whim, tool about for a few years, maybe have kids, and then call it quits just because they find something better to do or realize that they rushed into things. Marriage should be something special. Love should be something special. They aren't things to toss around lightly. Never forget that you have another human being's love in your hands, and that's one of the most special gifts that someone can give.

Don't even get me started on pop culture marriages...

[WynterWynd]

Originally Posted by Selene
docodoo, did you vow to remain married until death do us part? If so, why did you do that if you didn't intend to keep your vow? Is your word worth so little?

:eek:

I know I vowed 'till death do us part'....how the hell did I know he was going to try to fullfill that vow:G
I guess, according to that statment, I should have stayed in that marrige till he killed me, rather than break a vow...................give me a break!!!

OK, then I guess I'm a liar.

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

Docdoo, nowhere did Nallia say you are an oathbreaker, or that you would loose all respect and integrity. She said that if she made the vow of "to death do us part" and she later divorced than in her eyes she is an oathbreaker and would loose all of her respect and integrity. She is not forcing her values on you. She did not anywhere in her posts apply her comments to you, but only to herself. You are reading more into what she wrote than was placed there or any of the rest of us who share that opinion.

For some of us our word is our honor, to break our word is to loose our honor. If I were to make that vow and later break it, then yes I would see myself as an oathbreaker...no matter the reason for the divorce.

If you don't hold those same values, then fine, but don't worry about ours. They don't affect you. They only affect those of us who hold those values. You think it's screwed up, so what. You want to think I'm mental for thinking that way, that's your perogattive. They aren't your values, and I'm not applying them to you or anyone else, just myself. And from what I read Nallia was doing the same thing. Which fact is evidenced by all the excerpts you posted from Nallia's posts which clearly say I and not you.

[Shanti]

I still say divorce should NOT be free cause I still dont want a divorce tax.

Heck I paid for mine!!!

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

I still say divorce should be free cause I still dont want a divorce tax.

Shanti that doesn't make any sense. Someone has to pay the lawyers and judges and clerks who do the job. Do you do your job with the expectation that you won't get paid? Probably not, and neither should those people.

[docdoo]

So what do you make of this...


there is no longer any accountability when someone breaks a promise.

[Shanti]

Shanti that doesn't make any sense. Someone has to pay the lawyers and judges and clerks who do the job. Do you do your job with the expectation that you won't get paid? Probably not, and neither should those people.
:hehehehe: I meant should'nt!!!
I am soooo tired..I think thats my go to bed now...booboo!!!

[flar7]

So what do you make of this...
I take it as a statement in context to her other statements regarding herself. You seem to take it as an attack on you for some reason. I am sorry you feel that way. Nallia has in no way said you were wrong for getting divorced or that it lessened you as a human being. The only thing that she said that may be in reference to you is the "issues with people" and even that I think is out of context to what she was talking about.

as I said, relax. You are percieving attacks were none are meant, in regards to Nallia's post. As to Selene's post, its a tad off and looks like it lacks a bit of reality.

[docdoo]

Docdoo, nowhere did Nallia say you are an oathbreaker, or that you would loose all respect and integrity. She said that if she made the vow of "to death do us part" and she later divorced than in her eyes she is an oathbreaker and would loose all of her respect and integrity. She is not forcing her values on you. She did not anywhere in her posts apply her comments to you, but only to herself. You are reading more into what she wrote than was placed there or any of the rest of us who share that opinion.

No she didn't, what she *did* say (even subtly) is that those of us who HAVE been divorced should EXPECT to lose all respect and integrity, because, in her eyes (and yours apparantly?) people who 'break their oaths' are less deserving of respect?? Unless of course you are both offering exclusions to how you feel about 'other' people divorcing?


For some of us our word is our honor, to break our word is to loose our honor. If I were to make that vow and later break it, then yes I would see myself as an oathbreaker...no matter the reason for the divorce.

When you say 'some' of us you seem to be implying that those of us who have been divorced do not, in fact, have/deserve honor because we 'broke' our words?


If you don't hold those same values, then fine, but don't worry about ours. They don't affect you. They only affect those of us who hold those values.

Actually they DO affect me in that I have to DEAL with people like you on a regular basis. I have to deal with their perceptions that I am somehow 'dishonest' or a 'failure'. For you to say that your values don't affect me is akin to me telling a gay person that the fact that I don't respect gay people has NO effect on them, or a black person that my racism has no effect on them. Or even telling a Pagan that my belief that all Pagans are an abomination has no effect on THEM


You think it's screwed up, so what. You want to think I'm mental for thinking that way, that's your perogattive.

Ok then....deal

[pawnman]

Why should there have to be judges and lawyers and court clerks? There's A court clerk for a marriage. Why is there more than that for a divorce?-

Because the people involved in the divorce more often than not feel the need to grab everything they can. Which means lawyers, judges, and outside research. All of which costs money.

A divorce does not cost that much if you don't drag it into court.

[Erebus]

I take it as a statement in context to her other statements regarding herself. You seem to take it as an attack on you for some reason. I am sorry you feel that way. Nallia has in no way said you were wrong for getting divorced or that it lessened you as a human being. The only thing that she said that may be in reference to you is the "issues with people" and even that I think is out of context to what she was talking about.

I fail to see how you can read "there is no longer any accountability when someone breaks a promise" or "Is your word worth so little?" as anything other than direct attacks. Maybe you've spent so much time in places where people don't make personal attacks that you do not recognize them when they show up so blatantly.

I don't think it could be SAID any plainer than the above.

[Erebus]

A divorce does not cost that much if you don't drag it into court.

So how much does an amiable divorce cost, oh wise one? Please, give us a number.

[flar7]

I fail to see how you can read "there is no longer any accountability when someone breaks a promise" or "Is your word worth so little?" as anything other than direct attacks. Maybe you've spent too much time in places where people don't make personal attacks to recognize them when they show up so blatantly.
heh, I admin here, so I definitely recognize them. Lots have your name attached to them. :)

I was referencing Nallia and not Selene, and the first one you mention is out of context. Use the whole quoted paragraph to get the meaning. Thank you.

[flar7]

So how much does an amiable divorce cost, oh wise one? Please, give us a number.
50-67 dollars here in oklahoma. Also, my wife paid for it, so my divorce cost me nothing.

edited due to pawnman's post not showing on my screen. thought Erebus was quoting my earlier post about cost.

[docdoo]

Because the people involved in the divorce more often than not feel the need to grab everything they can. Which means lawyers, judges, and outside research. All of which costs money.

A divorce does not cost that much if you don't drag it into court.


How do you suggest defending against a spouse who drags you into court just because he CAN and because he has the money to do so? I have NO desire to drag any part of my divorce into court but I do need money to hire an attorney to defend against a man who makes 80,000 per year and has the resources to drag ME into court.

[pawnman]

50-67 dollars here in oklahoma. Thanks for the compliment. Also, my wife paid for it, so my divorce cost me nothing.

Sounds about right. And you can get those fees waived if you are below the poverty line.

[pawnman]

How do you suggest defending against a spouse who drags you into court just because he CAN and because he has the money to do so? I have NO desire to drag any part of my divorce into court but I do need money to hire an attorney to defend against a man who makes 80,000 per year and has the resources to drag ME into court.

I don't know. And frankly, I don't care. Because it's not my problem. I didn't get into the situation, why should I be required to dig someone else out of it?

[docdoo]

Sounds about right. And you can get those fees waived if you are below the poverty line.


Again, IF you're not being dragged into court and don't have to defend yourself!

[Erebus]

and the first one you mention is out of context.

So there IS a context in which you can be talking to a person who apparently broke a promise and say "when a promise is broken, there is no accountability" and not be saying that this person has no accountability?

[flar7]

How do you suggest defending against a spouse who drags you into court just because he CAN and because he has the money to do so? I have NO desire to drag any part of my divorce into court but I do need money to hire an attorney to defend against a man who makes 80,000 per year and has the resources to drag ME into court.
If you are abused, see about getting free legal services, but I know the waiting list can be long. Depends on your state. Also check into other state agencies and see what they offer abused women in financial trouble during divorce. State vary greatly.

[docdoo]

I don't know. And frankly, I don't care. Because it's not my problem. I didn't get into the situation, why should I be required to dig someone else out of it?


Nobody wants to require you to dig anyone out of anything. I'm simply showing you that your well thought out (NOT) answer is not the catch all you seem to think it is.

[flar7]

So there IS a context in which you can be talking to a person who apparently broke a promise and say "when a promise is broken, there is no accountability" and not be saying that this person has no accountability?
The context is in whom she was percieved to be judging. so, to answer your silly question, yes. Nallia was speaking of the vows and her feelings and opinions of them. That was what I read. Others read it differently.

Not saying a broken vow is not a broken vow, but the fact of chosing between two evils and the consequences that does bring. But that is an individual assessment with individual ethics and opinions which everyone may have.

[Erebus]

I don't know. And frankly, I don't care. Because it's not my problem. I didn't get into the situation, why should I be required to dig someone else out of it?

Wow. And you called ME a jerk.

[Erebus]

The context is in whom she was percieved to be judging.

So that it applies to faceless strangers? Seems kind of odd to me, but... :whatgives

[Erebus]

In conclusion, I'd like to say that it's really sort of heartwarming to see the Pagan community and the Christian community finding something to agree on: Divorce is a Horrible Sin.

[flar7]

So that it applies to faceless strangers? Seems kind of odd to me, but... :whatgives
dude. if you cannot understand the written word..... It was a post about herself and her feelings and opinions.

[flar7]

In conclusion, I'd like to say that it's really sort of heartwarming to see the Pagan community and the Christian community finding something to agree on: Divorce is a Horrible Sin.
again. learn to read.

[Terestai]

dude. if you cannot understand the written word..... It was a post about herself and her feelings and opinions.

She'll probably be mortified to come back on to find that her opinion created such a stir. Especially since it was just her opinion and not any sort of attack! :eek:

Honestly... she's really nice.

[flar7]

also.....

lets get back to the topic a bit.

[Erebus]

So was "learn to read" not a personal attack either?

[flar7]

So was "learn to read" not a personal attack either?
so much for, "In Conclusion..."


no, it was more about people not understanding what is written right there in front of them. Seems to happen a lot.

[thok_ragnarok]

Should divorce be free no. I dont wan to pay a divorce tax.
If you dont want to pay for a divorce..dont take the risk......dont get married. There, the end. Simple!

hell has froze over, we agree

[thok_ragnarok]

In conclusion, I'd like to say that it's really sort of heartwarming to see the Pagan community and the Christian community finding something to agree on: Divorce is a Horrible Sin.

I don't see it as a sin, just something I shouldn't pay for

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

No she didn't, what she *did* say (even subtly) is that those of us who HAVE been divorced should EXPECT to lose all respect and integrity, because, in her eyes (and yours apparantly?) people who 'break their oaths' are less deserving of respect?? Unless of course you are both offering exclusions to how you feel about 'other' people divorcing?

I never said that you or anyone else are less deserving of respect if you break your vows. I said because of my values if I were to break an oath I freely made than I would be less deserving of respect. I don't apply my values to you or anyone else, only to myself, as I am the one to which they have meaning. They don't have meaning to you, so don't worry about the value system I apply to my life, and my life only.


When you say 'some' of us you seem to be implying that those of us who have been divorced do not, in fact, have/deserve honor because we 'broke' our words?

You are misunderstanding me here. What I said was "for some of us our word is our honor." Some of us refers only to those people who share the same value system as I do. It was not a comment on the honor or dishonor you or others who divorce may or may not have. I apply my values only to myself, and of course my son who will be raised with those self-same values. If you don't feel you broke your word, or that you had a valid reason to break your word, that's fine by me. I was merely pointing out that I would consider myself to have lost my honor by breaking a sacred vow/oath. Again, you obviously don't share my values and so I would never even think about abscribing my values to you.


Actually they DO affect me in that I have to DEAL with people like you on a regular basis. I have to deal with their perceptions that I am somehow 'dishonest' or a 'failure'. For you to say that your values don't affect me is akin to me telling a gay person that the fact that I don't respect gay people has NO effect on them, or a black person that my racism has no effect on them. Or even telling a Pagan that my belief that all Pagans are an abomination has no effect on THEM

When did I tell you that you are dishonest or a failure? I never once passed judgement on you or anyone else who gets a divorce or their reasons for doing so. I don't perceive you has dishonest or a failure, you are just assuming I feel that way. I personally could care less if you are divorced or your reasons for doing so. Doesn't matter to me. Hell, it wouldn't matter to me if you had been married and divorced 10 times, with each ceremony including the vow "til death do us part" as my value system is applicable only to myself and no one else. My saying that I would view myself as having lost all honor because I broke my vow, does not reflect onto you. I'm not really sure how much clearer you need me to make that. It doesn't affect you because I don't apply my values to your life.

Of course you have to deal with people who have different values than you everyday, but not everyone of those people who has different values says you must share my values, your dishonest because I think you are. Sure some people are like that, but there are just as many who aren't.


Ok then....deal

I am dealing quite fine thank you. You are the one who seems to be getting all worked up and worried over what other people think of you, not me. Like I said I could personally care less why and if people divorce, it's frankly none of my business. But I also don't expect other people to pay for the problems in my life, which seems to me to be the point of thread to begin with - whether or not divorce should be free.

[Aowyn]

the more i read this thread the more i think that i wont file the paperwork when i get handfasted but then even if you dont legally get married many states have commonlaw whats your take on those when they break up you still have court if its messy.

[Jenne]

Damn, y'all are feisty today! I thought *I* was feelin' scrappy!

Have to say that, knowing more divorced people as I do, I don't hold it against them like I used to. I was a huge bigot towards divorce/es...due to my upbringing and thinking that certain principles I was raised on were right and true. And then, like almost every other moral value that I have in my adult life, I met someone on the opposite side of the fence and decided to not make judgments as a whole like that.

I don't think divorce should be a flimsily used tool for relationships to break up, especially when children are involved. However, I *do* recognize that there are those who need OUT of the relationship, and divorce is the only answer for them. For whatever reason.

I don't think the state should pay (meaning us taxpayers), but maybe subsidies could be given for those with lower income or short-term loans for those who need them. *shrug* What can I say, I try to find that happy medium SOMEwhere...:whatmewor

[Flar's Freyja]

Jenne has stated it very well. While I think that there should be some cost for divorce because many people give up on relationships too easily, there are the other cases where abuse or other issues are involved where low or no-cost divorce should be available. Possibly the system should be set up to decide this on an individual basis.

Divorce is the reason that I have a job, and my services are not cheap. When I began supervising visitation, I expected that most cases would be initiated for pure spite and that supervision was only being ordered because one party could get away with it to make the other one miserable. This is far less true than I anticipated, and when I do recommend that someone move on to unsupervised visitation I am typically treated like an unqualified idiot by the opposing party's attorney. One attorney was so intent upon winning his case that he implied that I was sleeping with the client.

Now think here, people - when I say that someone no longer needs my services, I am giving up $500 to $1,000 per month. Why on earth would I do that? By this time, people have usually exhausted all of their financial resources and wouldn't have any money left over to bribe me.

I've seen the system abused over and over, and as long as judges fail to educate themselves to social and psychological issues and lawyers care more about winning their case than they do the welfare of the parties, it will continue.

I've frequently had to confront parents with the reality that the children could be receiving the money that the parent is spending to visit them. Sadly, their goal is frequently to keep the other party in court until they run out of resources and give up.

But there are more cases that I thought where supervision is needed. An unbelievable number of parents do not understand the stress that pulling children into adult issues causes them and how negatively it impacts the healing process for all parties.

[MoonWeed]

Welp I dunno about free maybe in some cases,but if your doing it yourself to save money there should be better instructions for the price you pay.

[Flar's Freyja]

Welp I dunno about free maybe in some cases,but if your doing it yourself to save money there should be better instructions for the price you pay.

Agreed. When I was investigating possibilities for my own divorce, I was told by my attorney that some do it yourself divorces had turned out not to be legal further down the road, so if you choose to go this route, be careful.

[MoonWeed]

I just recently jumped thru these hoops and i think if they made it easier to understand EXACTLY what to do in real people words,not court mumbo jumbo more people would be inclined to do it themselves.Therefore making it easier for people to get divorced. I had to practically play stoopid for someone to tell me what paper I needed for what,not to mention I paid for this huge stack of papers that I had to fill out all if them to make sure I had which ones that I needed for the appropriate time I had to stand in line.And I think I used maybe 10 of them LOL But with the help of some very kind courthouse people and their patience with my dumb arse I finally got divorced after 10 years of marriage when we were only together for 7mths after the wedding.And yes it was the cost and tasks that kept me from doing this.As a single mom I jsut could never shell out the cash to do all at one time so I jsut left it alone,plus we remained friends. I did go and buy the packet a few times.
They give these numbers to call for help,but not real help..Just to make you feel stoopid for not filing the right paper. I think the whole process may have been set up to keep people from not being able to have a divorce so easily.But in fact it should be easier to do yourself nowadays,there are some serious cases out there of needing a divorce for much serious reasons then we can imagine and if people could have access to such things or jsut even help doing it..I bet it could even save a few lives.
Sorry to ramble but I just skipped out of the General Masters office on the 19th...And it felt goooooood!!!

[Desdemona]

I still say, I want to see a portion of my tax money go toward supporting legal aid, and legal free clinics. The people who seem to need the most protection are the ones who can least afford it. If someone needs out of a marriage and they can't afford it, then there is some place they can go.

[{Tigress}]

:eek:

I know I vowed 'till death do us part'....how the hell did I know he was going to try to fullfill that vow:G
I guess, according to that statment, I should have stayed in that marrige till he killed me, rather than break a vow...................give me a break!!!

OK, then I guess I'm a liar.

No, you're not a liar. He broke his vow first, by not loving and cherishing you. That nullifies any oaths you may have made based on his vows.

And I never EVER said you should value your oaths more than your life, or that I think people who get divorced should have stayed married, instead. Please don't put words in my mouth. I don't feel that way at ALL. The whole point I'm trying to make about the vows is that I think people should think about what they are promising before they promise it.

And going back to my divorces shouldn't be free... he should have paid for yours because he broke oath by turning his love against you and breaking his oath first.

[{Tigress}]

as I said, relax. You are percieving attacks were none are meant, in regards to Nallia's post. As to Selene's post, its a tad off and looks like it lacks a bit of reality.

I'd like it noted again that I later apologized, publically, in this thread, for that post docdoo quoted from.

[flar7]

I'd like it noted again that I later apologized, publically, in this thread, for that post docdoo quoted from.
ok. noted. :)


as I said, divorce here if you dont contest it, is cheap and simple. My wife with no education to speak of, got and filed for our divorce, did all the work and just brought the documents by for signing. Kinda like Twister? The movie not the game...:)

[Shanti]

I dont think I want my tax money to go to legal aide either!!!
Marriage is a choice and so is divorce through the courts. You can sue your ex if they forced the devorce desision upon you and you can try to get the courts to make that person foot the bill. I dont want to pay for anyones divorce. I pay for enough of stuff. As for cost, hey, I paid for mine and it was 1,500 back in 1977 and that was a do it your self. Its expensive to divorce here. I went into debt to do it and it took a long time to crawl out. There has to be a limit as to what comes out of taxes. Asking for others to pay for divorce is going to far. Heck it only makes jumping into marriage easier if you know theres a get out free card waiting. Nope. I dont want to pay for some elses divorce. Its not my prob. I dont expect some one to pay for my repairs on my old trailer because I bought a old trailer thats falling apart. I dont expect someone else to pay for a marriage that fell apart either. Its just asking to much of tax payers.
Hell Taxes pay for schools that childless people will never need. I homeschool but still pay for a school I dont use.
I am not married, dont plan to, I sure dont want to pay for divorce that I am not going to use!!

[Shanti]

ok. noted. :)


as I said, divorce here if you dont contest it, is cheap and simple. My wife with no education to speak of, got and filed for our divorce, did all the work and just brought the documents by for signing. Kinda like Twister? The movie not the game...:)
If you marry in the state of Wisconsin, you have to divorce here as long as one of you have your residance here!

[pawnman]

I don't see it as a sin, just something I shouldn't pay for

My thoughts exactly.

So, Docdoo, since I'm supposed to pay for other people's lawyers in the case of a divorce, should I then also pay for their lawyers when they sue people? Should I pay for their mechanic when the car breaks down? Perhaps I should pay the rent, food, and clothing as well. Heaven forbid people pay for their own expenses.

[pawnman]

Nobody wants to require you to dig anyone out of anything. I'm simply showing you that your well thought out (NOT) answer is not the catch all you seem to think it is.

It seems to be working for me. Divorce, in and of itself, is pretty much free. Now if you're going to argue that every married person be assigned their own personal lawyer just in case they get a divorce, and that the whole system will be funded with tax dollars, then I'm going to have to disagree. You wanted divorce to be free, and it is. Lawyers are not free.

[Erebus]

no, it was more about people not understanding what is written right there in front of them. Seems to happen a lot.

I can certainly agree with that. :rolleyes:

[WynterWynd]

No, you're not a liar. He broke his vow first, by not loving and cherishing you. That nullifies any oaths you may have made based on his vows.

And I never EVER said you should value your oaths more than your life, or that I think people who get divorced should have stayed married, instead. Please don't put words in my mouth. I don't feel that way at ALL. The whole point I'm trying to make about the vows is that I think people should think about what they are promising before they promise it.

And going back to my divorces shouldn't be free... he should have paid for yours because he broke oath by turning his love against you and breaking his oath first.
I have to apologize to you, for singling out your post......this whole subject just gets my britches in a bunch:(

I'm sorry Selene:hugz:

.......and back to your 'discussion'........I'm outta here!

[Desdemona]

I dont think I want my tax money to go to legal aide either!!!
Marriage is a choice and so is divorce through the courts. You can sue your ex if they forced the devorce desision upon you and you can try to get the courts to make that person foot the bill. I dont want to pay for anyones divorce. I pay for enough of stuff. As for cost, hey, I paid for mine and it was 1,500 back in 1977 and that was a do it your self. Its expensive to divorce here. I went into debt to do it and it took a long time to crawl out. There has to be a limit as to what comes out of taxes. Asking for others to pay for divorce is going to far. Heck it only makes jumping into marriage easier if you know theres a get out free card waiting. Nope. I dont want to pay for some elses divorce. Its not my prob. I dont expect some one to pay for my repairs on my old trailer because I bought a old trailer thats falling apart. I dont expect someone else to pay for a marriage that fell apart either. Its just asking to much of tax payers.
Hell Taxes pay for schools that childless people will never need. I homeschool but still pay for a school I dont use.
I am not married, dont plan to, I sure dont want to pay for divorce that I am not going to use!!When I was talking about legal aid, it was not just for divorce. What about the poor kid who gets thrown in jail for having a bag of weed, and the rich kid that gets out on bail with probation because his dad has F. Lee Bailey on retainer? How about we take the money that my tax dollars went to fund Sam Donaldson's ranch, and give that to legal aid? I'm not talking about taxing us more. We are taxed enough. I'm talking about better spending of the money that they already take from us.

It has been proven time and time again that the poor and working poor get run over by the legal system. If I'm misquoting, by all means show me a thread where that isn't the case.

Oh, and one last thing... the last time we tried legislating morality was Prohibition. That got us speakeasys and the mob. Let's not go there.

[docdoo]

Des...You speak the absolute truth. The legal system is GREAT for those who have the money to tie it up indefinately...for the rest of us we're pretty much at it's mercy.

But of course, it's far easier to think of the poor as 'lazy' or 'too busy feeling sorry for themselves' than to actually attempt to FEEL something for them.

As to the morality thing, you bring up a salient point...Knowing how many people on this board moved from any given religion because they didn't like the way that other people were shoving THEIR morality down their throats I'm surprised that there are so many here who would then turn around and so vehemently expect others to follow their own brand of morality.

Personally I'm tired of being jerked around by the legal system simply because I don't have money to fight. The few legal aid programs out there have waiting lists a mile long...I'm on one now, unfortunately that doesn't do much to help me when the X is trying like hell to get me into court NOW when I don't HAVE the benefit of a lawyer.

On top of that dealing with people who feel compelled to tell me that they consider divorce a failure and something I should be ashamed of and well...suffice it to say that it gets my panties in a twist. I put up with years of my X telling me I was a failure only to leave him and find that there are many, many people out there that seem hell bent to tell me the same thing.

[Tsuchimaru]

"Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger". I think divorce makes you anything BUT a failure....

[flar7]

yep, havent seen anyone yet post that divorce makes you a failure...

[soilsigh aingeal]

no one is a faliure. It's just not right to say that someone who didn't stand for not being happy (to sum it up) went and worked/is working to get happy, and make their life better, since that is the point, right, you've only got one life, make it the best you can, right?
It's also hard to say that someone who sticks through the absolute horrible is a faliure too because they ultimately (not in all cases, I know) believe that it can/will get better.
It's hard to say that someone who sticks with it out of fear for themselves (because my thought was always "well he's not killing me") or someone they love. Ultimately they believe they're protecting everyone.
etc, etc, etc. No one is a faliure in these cases.

[Erebus]

yep, havent seen anyone yet post that divorce makes you a failure...

I'm tempted to say "Learn to read". :p

[flar7]

then do so. then if I fail to find it, please quote the area where it says that "you are a failure for getting divorced" :halohead:

[pawnman]

When I was talking about legal aid, it was not just for divorce. What about the poor kid who gets thrown in jail for having a bag of weed, and the rich kid that gets out on bail with probation because his dad has F. Lee Bailey on retainer? How about we take the money that my tax dollars went to fund Sam Donaldson's ranch, and give that to legal aid? I'm not talking about taxing us more. We are taxed enough. I'm talking about better spending of the money that they already take from us.

It has been proven time and time again that the poor and working poor get run over by the legal system. If I'm misquoting, by all means show me a thread where that isn't the case.

Oh, and one last thing... the last time we tried legislating morality was Prohibition. That got us speakeasys and the mob. Let's not go there.

The poor have access to lawyers. They're called public defenders. Problem is, defending people in court is just one more thing that the government does poorly.

[pawnman]

Des...You speak the absolute truth. The legal system is GREAT for those who have the money to tie it up indefinately...for the rest of us we're pretty much at it's mercy.

But of course, it's far easier to think of the poor as 'lazy' or 'too busy feeling sorry for themselves' than to actually attempt to FEEL something for them.

As to the morality thing, you bring up a salient point...Knowing how many people on this board moved from any given religion because they didn't like the way that other people were shoving THEIR morality down their throats I'm surprised that there are so many here who would then turn around and so vehemently expect others to follow their own brand of morality.

Personally I'm tired of being jerked around by the legal system simply because I don't have money to fight. The few legal aid programs out there have waiting lists a mile long...I'm on one now, unfortunately that doesn't do much to help me when the X is trying like hell to get me into court NOW when I don't HAVE the benefit of a lawyer.

On top of that dealing with people who feel compelled to tell me that they consider divorce a failure and something I should be ashamed of and well...suffice it to say that it gets my panties in a twist. I put up with years of my X telling me I was a failure only to leave him and find that there are many, many people out there that seem hell bent to tell me the same thing.

Not me. Get as many divorces as you want. I won't see it as failure. I just don't want to pay for someone else's lawyer. I wouldn't expect someone to pay for mine if I got a divorce.

[Shanti]

When I was talking about legal aid, it was not just for divorce. What about the poor kid who gets thrown in jail for having a bag of weed, and the rich kid that gets out on bail with probation because his dad has F. Lee Bailey on retainer? How about we take the money that my tax dollars went to fund Sam Donaldson's ranch, and give that to legal aid? I'm not talking about taxing us more. We are taxed enough. I'm talking about better spending of the money that they already take from us.

It has been proven time and time again that the poor and working poor get run over by the legal system. If I'm misquoting, by all means show me a thread where that isn't the case.

Oh, and one last thing... the last time we tried legislating morality was Prohibition. That got us speakeasys and the mob. Let's not go there. First of all....I was talking generally...never paid attention to your post!!!!!!!!
Second I said legal aid meaning.......aid to people for leagal assistance for divorce!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For criminal court there is a public defender...
I am poor and do get screwed all the time. I still dont want to pay for someone elses divorce!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am talking SOLEY about divorce ......I DONT WANT TO PAY FOR SOME ONE ELSES..........OK?

[greenview]

first of all divorce is the meanest ugliest he said she said act around. And that doesnt get any help from the lawyers that ask for an arm and a leg for so called educated advise and representation. Its not a surprise that no one wants to pay for someone else's anything. Im going to keep it short cause im i the tale in of a long thread and im not im the mood to rant. I belonged to a divorce group for 2 or more years. Every state has different laws and procedures. But by the time something personal like this smacks you in the face you do feel like a looser. Youve lost your stuff your kids your future you thought you had. And if we werent suppose to feel like failures look at our parents and their parents. how many gay people do we know lived a lie to have the american dream( wife/husband 2.4 kids and dog) how many catholics choose not to burn in hell in the eyes of the church cause they didnt want as divorce? how many people got annulments? I was a very very lucky one. we were both adults enough that neither of us had lawyers. we got a state workbook and read the laws and filled out the expected paperwork. Divorce is an ugly business no matter how you look at it.
Am i a better person? hell yes but i didnt have a choice..

[Desdemona]

The poor have access to lawyers. They're called public defenders. Problem is, defending people in court is just one more thing that the government does poorly.
Too true.

[Desdemona]

First of all....I was talking generally...never paid attention to your post!!!!!!!!
Second I said legal aid meaning.......aid to people for leagal assistance for divorce!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For criminal court there is a public defender...
I am poor and do get screwed all the time. I still dont want to pay for someone elses divorce!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am talking SOLEY about divorce ......I DONT WANT TO PAY FOR SOME ONE ELSES..........OK?Ok! :lol:
You don't want your taxes to be spent that way. I don't mind if they are spent that way. It wouldn't be the first time people disagreed about how government funds should be spent. It's all good. :smile:

[MoonWeed]

Guess what your tax dollars already go to places like this propably..But in my state they can't really help you.It's like this mystical journey when you call.They are legally not allowed to tell you what to do.They cryptically answer very shortly and are of no real help at all.
So the fact that the helpline is there great,but try to get some real help is painful..
They need to make this accessible to people for real help and spend the money we give them thru taxes in the proper fashion.
Most people getting the simple ,cheap divorces done would purely get lost in the paperwork.It's a long and arduous process that has many processes in my state.I can tell you if they didn't point me the right direction a few times I would have thought I was finished,when I wasn't.And if you go to something or file a paper and do it wrong they make you start all over and they don't notify you of your mistakes.So all the mumbo jumbo gets confusing and darn sure don't get inline and not have the right paper with you,but 200 others LOL I can't tell you how many times I jsut handed them a big stack of papers to fish thru,because I have no idea what a P395-HH is LOL
It is possible to do this process it's jsut that the directions should be clearer.If I got thru it ,it definetely can be done LOL I could assist in surgery on you ,but paperwork confuses the crap outta me;)
On the free part,no I don't think it should be free.It's a choice and you made both of them to get married/divorce the tax payers shouldn't pay for your choices.I think that marriage licenses should cost more LOL They run $85 here when it should be something higher and then that could drop the price of divorces to the diy people.It literally took 8 minutes for the end judgement and maybe 2 hours total legwork,but the worry over papers was mindwrecking for 4 mths.
Just one more note to my whole bit of rambling...
The lady that I filed divorce papers with at the courthouse helped me get my daughter with a restraining order 4 yrs ago and saved my life that day,literally.Then the General Master that granted my divorce was the State defense attorney that had my case when I stoopidly got in a fight about 8 yrs. ago..Weird how things come around.
So sorry for the long post but I am glad this came up,I needed to get that off my chest LMAO :fpeace:

[Erebus]

yep, havent seen anyone yet post that divorce makes you a failure...

So when I look at this:


probably the taxpayers, which is why i voted other. there wasn't an option for "hell no!". there is absolutely no reason i should have to pay for other people's failures/emotional problems.

...I need to "learn to read" in such a way as to make it so that I don't see the underlined words?

[flar7]

ah. You had to dig way back but you found it. As I said, if I cant find it, quote it. Nicely done.

as to the point of being called a failure? I guess that then depends on whether you think someone who failed is a failure? :colorful:

also, I should remember that even though I cant put people on "ignore" others can and may miss important posts by doing so........ bad dog, no biscuit.

[pawnman]

So divorce doesn't mean that you've failed at holding your marriage together? At least, that one of you hasn't held it together.(it's possible that your spouse is abusive or apathetic, which would make them the failure, not you.)

[Erebus]

The cost of divorce has just come in.

After months of out-of-court, sans-lawyer, pro-bono wrangling, my SO and her soon-to-be ex husband have divvied up all the property and custody and are going to a lawyer to get an uncontested divorce.

That is, when we can raise the money.

Total cost for an uncontested divorce: $1,100. $750 for the lawyer, $350 for the paperwork.

Compared to the cost of the marriage - $35 at the county courthouse.

[mara]

Of course this was 20 some years ago, but my ex husband and I did a "Do it your self divorce"..if I remember correctly it was only $70.00- but that only works if the two parties can come to a mutual agreement.

[WynterWynd]

The cost of divorce has just come in.

After months of out-of-court, sans-lawyer, pro-bono wrangling, my SO and her soon-to-be ex husband have divvied up all the property and custody and are going to a lawyer to get an uncontested divorce.

That is, when we can raise the money.

Total cost for an uncontested divorce: $1,100. $750 for the lawyer, $350 for the paperwork.

Compared to the cost of the marriage - $35 at the county courthouse.
See...thats a bunch of bureaucratic bullcrap!!
If people can file their own damn taxes for $50, then why they hell should an uncontested divorce cost that much money!

I had an uncontested one 20 some odd years ago, a freind of my mothers who was an attorney handled it, and it still cost almost $1000 back then.

If it only cost you $35 to get into it, then $70 to get out of it (for the uncontestedones) seems fair to me.

[flar7]

yep, kids make divorce expensive. legal documents have to be onfile, a judge has to be involved, a childcare socialworker type is consulted as well. You notice the lawyer gets the lion's share of the coin. Court costs are a subjective term. Usually they breakdown into a ton of small fees that go to everything like "support you policman's ball" to "upgrade the city water fountain"

uncontested really is not an accurate term for any divorce that involves children.

[WynterWynd]

I understand that. But when it comes to the amicable separation of marrige with no children or substantial assets involved.....there should be a cheaper way to sparate he and she .....thats all.

[RogueSpirit]

yep, kids make divorce expensive. legal documents have to be onfile, a judge has to be involved, a childcare socialworker type is consulted as well. You notice the lawyer gets the lion's share of the coin. Court costs are a subjective term. Usually they breakdown into a ton of small fees that go to everything like "support you policman's ball" to "upgrade the city water fountain"

uncontested really is not an accurate term for any divorce that involves children.

I think if someone has been separated for three years, the child custody, visitation, and child support arrangements have already been made by the parents (amicably), and all of the property and such has been divided up already, that even with children the divorce should be considered uncontested. That's where I'm at with my "husband" right now. We haven't lived in the same state, much less the same house for over three years. Our daughter has lived with me all this time and he is paying the amount we agreed to for child support every month. We haven't filed yet because of both the money it will cost for the divorce and because he will lose part of his pay (he's in the military) and I will lose my health insurance if we actually divorce. I don't see why I should have to pay someone to do something I have already done on my own. The only thing that will have to be done for my divorce is filing and signatures.

[WynterWynd]

Thats craziness. If 'all was right' with the legal system...you two should be legally divorced already.
If states can call you legally (common law) married after living with someone a certain amount of time, they should be able to do the same for divorce:mad:

[docdoo]

Speaking as a woman who is in the middle of an uncontested divorce I will reinforce that they are, in fact, incredibly expensive. My soon-to-be-X actually took out a loan against his 401K to pay for it. We have already divided property, Child support is taken care of and everything is in utter and complete agreeance.

The tab? $1200.00

[pawnman]

Speaking as a woman who is in the middle of an uncontested divorce I will reinforce that they are, in fact, incredibly expensive. My soon-to-be-X actually took out a loan against his 401K to pay for it. We have already divided property, Child support is taken care of and everything is in utter and complete agreeance.

The tab? $1200.00

But that's Australia, correct? Because here in the states, it's closer to $50. And I don't see $1200 as "incredibly expensive". Cost me more than that to get my car fixed. $12,000, or $120,000, now that's incredibly expensive.

[flar7]

I understand that. But when it comes to the amicable separation of marrige with no children or substantial assets involved.....there should be a cheaper way to sparate he and she .....thats all.
that kind of divorce is about 50-75 dollars here.



kids will always change the equation and cause the cost to go through the roof. If your husband is in another state, thats gonna cost even more...cross state stuff. Like I said, it may be amicable, but with children it aint uncontested. Its in the paperwork itself, it says you cannot file for an uncontested divorce if you have any children.

commonlaw marriage is only for the protection of the woman in case she has a child. If there is no child there, heh, you leave and your divorced. If there is a child, the woman can pretty much leave...and hope that the man doesnt take legal action. The man though, he is committed at that point. If he leaves, he faces abandonment and other resposibility issues due to the child.

The state will not allow a divorce involving children without at least a "once over" at the arrangements made in regards of the kids.

[docdoo]

But that's Australia, correct? Because here in the states, it's closer to $50. And I don't see $1200 as "incredibly expensive". Cost me more than that to get my car fixed. $12,000, or $120,000, now that's incredibly expensive.

Actually no, it's in Ohio Pawnman, as for incredibly expensive...Try doing it WHILE you're supporting 3 kids, a house and your car. Gods, I tire of your particular brand of fluffy.

Do the damn research on the average cost of a divorce and you'll probably see that *I'm* getting off lucky.

[docdoo]

I am seriously curious where the hell everyone lives that it only costs $50.00 to get a divorce!??? The divorce I got over 11 years ago was a damn dissolutionment and it still ran $800.00 with a half-assed attorney who didn't even give me the right to claim my kids on income taxes.

I want proof that a divorce costs $50.00 because in my experience that number is so far from the truth as to be insane

[Erebus]

Let's sing the Moving the Goalpost Song!

Oh, we're
moving the goalpost, 1-2-3!
Moving the goalpost, yes indeed!
Moving the goalpost, left and right!
You can't ever score, 'cuz we're always right!

....

So, first, it was "No, really, divorce is cheap! It's like $50! Honest!"
Now it's "Oh, if there are kids involved, it's perfectly understandable for the system to make it such that a woman who was a stay-at-home mom should be unable to get a divorce under any circumstances because she can't afford it."

[Starry Di]

I don't think divorce should be free. Weddings aren't free, so why should divorce be free?

[Talula]

And who pays the court costs and the lawyer who's doing this "pro bono" divorce for you? Taxpayers. Which means you.

I agree with those who said people jump to divorce too quickly already. Free divorce is just going to encourage something that's happening too much already. I'm currently in a family law class and one thing my instructor (who handles divorces all the time) said is that one thing a lot of her clients do is they'll have a fight on the weekend. When Monday comes along, they'll call her up and say, "We had a fight. I want a divorce." She'll actually stop and ask them, "A week ago today, were you happily married?" And they'll say, "Well, yeah." So she'll tell them to go cool off and rethink what they're saying. That's how lightly some people take divorce. They try to use it as a threat when they have one fight. If it was free, there'd be divorces all over the place.

Honestly, I think marriage licenses should cost more. Because the only thing you actually need to get married is a license. You don't have to have an expensive dress or flowers or any of that. Anywhere from $15 to $50 and boom, you can get married. If marriage wasn't so cheap, maybe there would be fewer "bad couples" getting married and subsequently paying a bunch of money to get divorced.


Thats craziness. If 'all was right' with the legal system...you two should be legally divorced already.
If states can call you legally (common law) married after living with someone a certain amount of time, they should be able to do the same for divorce.

Very few states recognize common law marriage anymore. I think it's 13, although it might be fewer. That statute is starting to slowly fade away.

[Erebus]

Very few states recognize common law marriage anymore. I think it's 13, although it might be fewer. That statute is starting to slowly fade away.

Prove it.

[RogueSpirit]

The cheapest advertised divorce I've seen (in Louisiana) is about $250. I don't think common law marriage is recognized here, but not having done the research, I could be wrong. Louisiana definitely doesn't recognize legal separation. As far as state to state goes, since he is in the military, he is considered a legal resident of his home state, not the state where he currently is stationed. When we decided to split, we went to a seminar that the on-base legal department sets up for people considering divorce. According to them, we have to get divorced in the state we got married in, which in this case is Louisiana. I still think it sucks that just because I have a child I have to pay more for a divorce where everything has already been divided and agreed to and we have been living as though we are divorced for three years. It just doesn't make sense to have to pay someone to do something I've already done. I get that the judge and the paperwork have to be paid for, but I shouldn't have to pay for someone to ok what we've already put into practice on our own. It just seems like an awful lot of divorce lawyers like to stir the pot up to make more money. So I'll just stay married to him, collect the allotment he gets for being married to me and use the health insurance that goes with it that the tax payers of the US are paying for. I think it might be cheaper on the US citizens if he and I just divorced.

[Starry Di]

And who pays the court costs and the lawyer who's doing this "pro bono" divorce for you? Taxpayers. Which means you.
Now I really am against free divorce. I don't want to be paying for someone else's divorce. I didn't make the descision to get married to someone and then fall out of love with them (the latter is more of a happening than a choice).

I will pay for my own divorce, thankyouverymuch.

Though I second the whole raising the amount it costs to get married.

[docdoo]

Talula and everyone else in this thread who has said that 'divorce happens too much'

I am going through a divorce right now, I'm sick of hearing that people just decide, at the drop of a hat, to get a divorce. As to what your teacher says, how the hell does she know what's happening in a marriage? Do you have ANY concept of the shame of abuse? How you don't want to tell ANYONE about it? We send this message to people that we should avoid divorce...Unless you're abused, but then we send this message to abused women that they have 'Poor Judgment' or they 'Should have left sooner' at the same damn time we're telling them to piece their marriage together at all costs.

My kids broke down on me the other day. It seemed to be over nothing, a stupid little arguement that ended in a full-blown meltdown. They miss my X-husband, they wish they could turn back the hands of time and start over. Do you have any idea how It saddened me the most to hear my middle son tell me that he 'Misses Daddy yelling at me, because it made me feel like he was protecting me from me. ' Gods, I waited too long!!!!

Despite what people say the reality is that most folks are told (however subversely) that divorce should be avoided at all costs. Being the good little wife and mother I tried desperately to hold my marriage together, so I wouldn't be a FAILURE. I was bombarded with the perception that divorces are too painful for kids, that people give up too easily that divorces are too rampant in our society....So I pushed on.

With the idea that divorce is a failure running through my head I tried like hell to make it work. After all, who the hell wants to fail? Who wants to 'put their kids through the pain of divorce?' Who WANTS to be seen as 'giving up too easily' The idea that I should wait and wait until it's clear that there is no hope at all is what kept me in my marriage.

Now it seems that in my zeal to NOT put my kids through the pain of divorce I have done substantially MORE harm than if I had done it years ago. I have at least one son who MISSES being screamed at, who has NO self-esteem and, on some levels, is reminicent of a person suffering from Stockholm's syndrome.

My youngest is angry and violent, acting out in the way that his only male role model did for his entire life. He's afraid to cry and despises being thought of as *young* or a child, presumably because he understands that young children are helpless.

The oldest seems to be coping better, though I'de never *really* know since he tends to mask all emotion with humor. At the mere mention of his father he gets bitter and angry.

*Sigh* all this because I wanted to save a marriage and spare my children the 'pain of divorce'. Because I didn't want anyone to see me as abused (read poor judgement, weak willed here because that is yet ANOTHER sublime message we send to abuse victims!!) or as a failure. I didn't want anyone to think that I 'Gave up too easily' I wanted to PROVE to everyone that I DID try...and so I let it go on.

Seems to me that we should be telling people that they're NOT failures for divorcing, not doing this cloak and dagger bullshit where we, as a society, talk out both sides of our mouth. Consoling a person who is 'abused' while simultaneously telling everyone that you should try to save a marriage at all costs and that divorce is way too rampant and too EASY.

[Starry Di]

My parents marriage ended because of emotional abuse as well. So? Divorce still happens too much. And we're not talking about divorcing cause of abuse. That doesn't count. You *have* to get outta that. I still don't want to pay for it out of my taxes though. Cause...I don't ever *want* to get married. And I don't want someone else paying for my divorce or marriage or anything like that unless it's me or my signifigant other/spouse.

We're talking about the couples who have a fight and won't stick it out...Or in your case, your abuser won't be a man and change for the better. Thus, you have to get a divorce. If he would just change, or even if he could (cause some people can't...like every guy on the lifetime channel), then people wouldn't need to get divorced.

Saddly, humans are raised with the misconception that it's horrible to fail and it's horrible to ask for help. I know, I'm one of those people. I don't try cause I'm so scared to fail. I guess I make myself fail on purpose cause I'm so scared of failing. It's very weird :/

Edit : And I know this will seem kinda harsh, but perhaps the whole divorce being expensive is a higher being's way of saying "STOP REPRODUCING!" cause....the world is over populated as it is, and perhaps the higher being is trying to be gentle...instead to killing off random kids.

[docdoo]

My parents marriage ended because of emotional abuse as well. So? Divorce still happens too much. And we're not talking about divorcing cause of abuse. That doesn't count. You *have* to get outta that. I still don't want to pay for it out of my taxes though. Cause...I don't ever *want* to get married. And I don't want someone else paying for my divorce or marriage or anything like that unless it's me or my signifigant other/spouse.

Sure, and abortion happens too much.


We're talking about the couples who have a fight and won't stick it out...Or in your case, your abuser won't be a man and change for the better. Thus, you have to get a divorce. If he would just change, or even if he could (cause some people can't...like every guy on the lifetime channel), then people wouldn't need to get divorced.

And what if I don't want to share with you that I was abused? Then you automatically put me into the category of 'couples who have a fight and won't stick it out' So basically you're assuming that if someone doesn't TELL YOU all the dirty little secrets in their marriage that they just 'had a fight and didn't want to stick it out'


Saddly, humans are raised with the misconception that it's horrible to fail and it's horrible to ask for help. I know, I'm one of those people. I don't try cause I'm so scared to fail. I guess I make myself fail on purpose cause I'm so scared of failing. It's very weird :/

Well, when we use the word 'failure' in the same sentence as 'Not wanting to stick it out' what the heck do you expect? When we tell people that abortion is a choice but divorce is a failure...forgive me but I'm just not seeing how that can be, in any way, healthy.

[docdoo]

Edit : And I know this will seem kinda harsh, but perhaps the whole divorce being expensive is a higher being's way of saying "STOP REPRODUCING!" cause....the world is over populated as it is, and perhaps the higher being is trying to be gentle...instead to killing off random kids.

Wow, I didn't know that the Creator itself was using divorce as a way to stop reproduction! Damn, and here I was thinking that economics were merely a HUMAN thing...heh, guess I should revise my thinking. On that note I guess I should stop assuming that children are only borne of married parents! DOH and here I thought SEX caused pregnancy...not marriage.

[Talula]

For Erebus:


"Fourteen states--Alabama, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Texas--permit couples to enter into common-law marriages, the marital union of two people that is not based upon ceremony or compliance with legal formalities. Many other states permitted common-law marriages in the past, but do so no longer.

Most states, but not all, recognize the sovereign right of all states to regulate marriages and will recognize a common-law marriage that was contracted in one of the 14 states still permitting them. However, there are 12 states--Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont and Wisconsin--in which the legal status of a common-law marriage remains unclear. Those states may or may not recognize a common-law marriage that was contracted in a state where common-law marriages are permitted." (from Basic Family Law, published by Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 1993. Page 70.)

So I was a little off. If your common law marriage was contracted in a state that recognizes them, it might be recognized in some other states. But as it says above, only 14 states permit common law marriages to originate within their borders.

And since I live in Illinois I have this example:


Chapter 750 IL Compiled Statutes Act 5 Section 214

Invalidity of common law marriages
Invalidity of common law marriages. Common law marriages contracted in this State after June 30, 1905 are invalid.

If you're curious about your own state's statute on common law marriage I would suggest looking up the Family Laws chapter of that states compiled statutes and you'll want to look under the section of the statute that encompasses marriage. One good legal website is FindLaw (http://www.findlaw.com).

For docdoo:

Like Heidi said, I understand abuse instances that need to end and the abused needs to get out, and there should be some kind of cap on the legal fees in proven abuse cases. I still don't think it should be free, but there should be a cap on the fees. I'm just talking about other instances. I don't have the statistics, but I'm pretty sure abuse cases do not make up a majority percentage of divorces in the U.S. As for my instructor and how she knows, family lawyers tend to get to know their clients very well. It's probably the most personal area of law to practice and I've come to the impression that she's a pretty good judge of when someone's just pissed off and when they really are ready for a divorce. I believe she's been practicing family law for at least 25 years, if not more.

[Starry Di]

Divorce isn't completely a failure. Only in the cases where there isn't abuse is it not a failure.

And sorry to be harsh, but if you don't want to admit you're being abused, that's your problem. Not mine. If you don't share your problems with someone...someone can't help you, and you're stuck in a vicious cycle. I have little to no sympathy for anyone who gets abused and puts up with it. Get the **** outta the situation. It's not normal, it's not healthy. Call the police, move, get a gun, kill the dude, do whatever you have to do to get away from the abuser. And I'm only talking about killing them in the case of...you run and he hunts you down even after you're attempting to divorce him and such. Or he stalks you, and you join WPP and he finds you. Then you shoot the guy.

[docdoo]

For docdoo:

Like Heidi said, I understand abuse instances that need to end and the abused needs to get out, and there should be some kind of cap on the legal fees in proven abuse cases. I still don't think it should be free, but there should be a cap on the fees. I'm just talking about other instances. I don't have the statistics, but I'm pretty sure abuse cases do not make up a majority percentage of divorces in the U.S. As for my instructor and how she knows, family lawyers tend to get to know their clients very well. It's probably the most personal area of law to practice and I've come to the impression that she's a pretty good judge of when someone's just pissed off and when they really are ready for a divorce. I believe she's been practicing family law for at least 25 years, if not more.


And how the heck do you determine if it was abuse or not? Seriously, if a person doesn't want to TELL you that they were abused how the hell do you know? You do understand that MOST abused women don't TELL...right? So, basically you're assuming that someone who doesn't STATE abuse as a reason for the divorce is just doing it for the hell of it?

Not only that but here's another point, what if the man never actually HITS the woman? What if the abuse was about manipulation? What if (as someone else said earlier) the spouse has a terror of tight spaces and he locks her into a closet every chance he gets 'As a joke'??

Who are YOU to term what abuse is? Furthermore, since there are no guidelines for what is abuse and what isn't (meaning that 'abuse' is different to everyone...some may think abuse is strictly physical but someone who's claustrophobic would think that being locked in a closet is abuse) who the hell determines if the reason for a divorce is 'good enough'??

[Starry Di]

We don't term what abuse is ;) Police do. And getting locked in a closet "for fun" is abuse according to the law, as far as I know.

And again...if you don't tell, you get abused. And if you're getting abused and you're not telling? Well, you probably deserve it then. If you really didn't like being hit, you'd complain. Either you'd complain to someone about how you hate making him hit you, or you'd complain to someone about how you hate that he hits you cause he's a moron.

And as for manipulation...why aren't you complaining to your friends about it? Seriously. People need to be more smart these days. People are bloody morons. People should be told every day that they matter and that if it feels like someone is taking advantage of you that they probably are. People need to get more self confidence. Jeez.

[docdoo]

And sorry to be harsh, but if you don't want to admit you're being abused, that's your problem. Not mine. If you don't share your problems with someone...someone can't help you, and you're stuck in a vicious cycle. I have little to no sympathy for anyone who gets abused and puts up with it.

So then, I'm moved to ask, at what point do you lose pity for an abuse victim? The first time? The third? 10th? I'm just curious so that us abuse victims know just how long we should try to 'Keep our marriage together' before we lose your support?

On another note, the 'I have little or no sympathy for anyone who gets abused and puts up with it' is PRECISELY why women don't TELL!!!! It's also a HUGE factor in why they don't leave...not only have they FAILED but they'll get no sympathy and be deemed as 'silly' or 'stupid' for 'putting up' with it.


Get the **** outta the situation. It's not normal, it's not healthy. Call the police, move, get a gun, kill the dude, do whatever you have to do to get away from the abuser. And I'm only talking about killing them in the case of...you run and he hunts you down even after you're attempting to divorce him and such. Or he stalks you, and you join WPP and he finds you. Then you shoot the guy.

Yep, we all know that abusers just let their wives walk off. Hell, many of the people on this board are too scared to tell their parents what their freaking religion is...yet, somehow we flippantly tell women to JUST LEAVE...just GET OUT. Somehow a woman who has the snot knocked out of her on a regular basis and KNOWS what will happen when she tries to leave is supposed to have MORE courage than someone who is too frightened to tell their family and friends that they're Pagan. Geesh...I love it *rolls eyes*

Sure, it's THAT easy

[Talula]

So divorces should be free (paid by the government) "just in case" there is abuse? Not to be insensitive, but if the abused can't bring himself/herself to admit he/she is being abused as a reason for divorce then there's nothing the government, a lawyer or a judge can do about it. You say they can't assume there's no abuse, but they also can't assume that there is abuse. Silence is a double-edged sword.

Although I think I'm a little confused about what you're arguing here. Are you still arguing about whether or not divorce should be free (paid by the government) or are you just arguing about whether or not divorces happen too much? I'm not quite sure anymore.

And before you take that as sarcasm, I'm serious. I'm not sure which argument you're on right now.

[Erebus]

Because some people can't be bothered to read the whole thread, I have to repeat myself.

Which of the following is "abuse", to you?

"You're worthless, you'll never be any good, now go fix my dinner and if you mess it up I'll scream at you and the kids for an hour." Does that count?

How about "I'll kill myself if you ever do anything I dislike."

How about "Watch me destroy your journals and books and family heirlooms."

Or maybe "I'm going to sit here and do heroin all day, so clean the house and take care of the kids"?

Or "I love you so much that I'm going to follow you everywhere and log the mileage on your car and keep you under surveillance 24/7"?

What about a husband who's wife is phobic of small spaces, and he locks her in closests as a "joke"? Regularly?

How about a husband who forces (through intimidation, financial pressure, or otherwise) his wife to have an abortion?

Now that you've considered that, (A) why do YOU get to decide what counts as 'abuse', particularly if you don't call it abuse but it makes the marriage unbearable, and (B) why do YOU feel that YOU get to know all the sordid details of a relationship and then get to pass judgement on it?

[docdoo]

We don't term what abuse is ;) Police do. And getting locked in a closet "for fun" is abuse according to the law, as far as I know.

Prove it. Show me where ANY woman has had abuse charges filed for her for being locked in a closet. Jesus Christ man, marital RAPE is hardly considered abuse!!!


And again...if you don't tell, you get abused. And if you're getting abused and you're not telling? Well, you probably deserve it then. If you really didn't like being hit, you'd complain. Either you'd complain to someone about how you hate making him hit you, or you'd complain to someone about how you hate that he hits you cause he's a moron.

Oh yes, I WANT to get knocked around. Every woman who doesnt tell MUST LOVE having the crap kicked out of her...Yessireee...when I woke up this morning the first thought through my head was 'YAY>..Another day where I can get raped, or punched in then nose!!! YIPPEEEEE'

Stop putting your idea of what a person 'Should' do onto me. Have you ever actually been raped by your husband? Knocked around? Strangled into unconsciousness? For that matter have you ever tried to screw up the courage to 'tell someone' when you've been told that you and your children will be KILLED???


And as for manipulation...why aren't you complaining to your friends about it? Seriously. People need to be more smart these days. People are bloody morons. People should be told every day that they matter and that if it feels like someone is taking advantage of you that they probably are. People need to get more self confidence. Jeez.

Yep, it's soooo easy to get self-confidence when you're being knocked around all the time. Sure, I'm going to complain and then be thought of as you apparantly think of abuse victims....that they LIKE it or DESERVE it.

Grow up

[Erebus]

Hell, many of the people on this board are too scared to tell their parents what their freaking religion is...yet, somehow we flippantly tell women to JUST LEAVE...just GET OUT.

^5 doc! Top call!