(no subject)

[novapsyche]

As seen in ljdemocrats: Foundation Wants Stricter Rules for Splits (one of the most ridiculous titles for an article, IMO)

After its victory in last year's fight over a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in Virginia, the Family Foundation of Virginia announced Thursday that it will push to change the state's divorce laws to make it more difficult for parents to end their marriage.

The Family Foundation, which opposes abortion and promotes socially conservative values, said it will lobby the General Assembly this year to amend the state's long-standing no-fault divorce law, which essentially allows a husband or wife to terminate a marriage without cause.

The foundation is advocating "mutual consent divorce" for couples with children, which would require a husband and wife to agree to divorce before a marriage can be legally terminated, except in certain instances, such as abuse or cruelty. The proposed legislation would not affect childless couples.

"Right now, one spouse can unilaterally end [the marriage], and not only is their spouse unable to stop the divorce, their abandonment does not preclude them from having custody of their child," said Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation. "When we send a message that one can up and leave their family and have no consequence, the Old Dominion is encouraging divorce."

[...] Cobb and her allies in the General Assembly said Thursday that the debate over the amendment banning same-sex marriage spurred this year's push for changes to the state's divorce laws.

"People were saying, 'It is not the homosexuals wrecking marriage, it's the heterosexuals,' so we are saying, 'Is there any truth to that?' " said Del. Robert G. Marshall (R-Prince William), who has filed legislation to study the effects of no-consent divorce on state marriage rates.

"You can just walk away from someone right now. There is less security in the covenant of marriage than if you and I agree to open up a hamburger joint," Marshall said.

Comments

[chimalis.livejournal.com]

Arrrggggghhhh! About half the cases I work on at my job are divorce cases. Every single one would be different if the Michigan no-fault law went away ... and I imagine every single one would be different Virginia, too. Let's see how much MORE power we can take away from women, shall we?

[pstscrpt.livejournal.com]

How does that affect women more than men?

[chimalis.livejournal.com]

Not only are courts traditionally more likely to side with a husband when cause must be shown, women are far more likely to be using domestic violence and/or other abuse as cause. Domestic violence, even when the police are involved, is very much a matter of he-said she-said, unless the parties are foolish enough to let fists fly in front of witnesses. And that's the easy kind of violence to prove - verbal and emotional abuse don't leave bruises or scars and can't possibly generate a police report. No-fault divorce laws allow a woman to begin proceedings for divorce from an abusive spouse without a long court battle on what was and what wasn't abuse and whether or not he did, in fact, abuse her.

That should be reason enough, but there are plenty more ways that having to show cause could affect a custody battle and other issues involving the children. I won't go into them.

Mind you, I'm not saying that it's impossible that a wife could abuse a husband. I'm just saying that it's far less likely, and that women, by and large, are MUCH more heavily affected by this kind of legislation change.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

After banning same-sex marriage, this is the next logical step in their plan to institute Mandatory Heterosexual Marriage For Everyone.

[blackwinterbyrd.livejournal.com]

er.
no you can't just walk away, not if you want to be legally divorced.