That was an answer to a previous posters question about Biblical divorce. Biblically, the law of God applies to both believer and non-believer.

But since an atheist is not concerned with what God has to say, then the issue here that I am discussing is the state and the legal contract of marriage.

In His arms.

Close, but not exactly.

To an athiest, there is no "say" because there is no sayer.

WAT
---------------
What's so intelligent about putting blood vessels in FRONT of the retina where they block the light?

As a continuation of this, let's discuss what possible penalties are for breaking the contract (either by infidelity/abuse/abandonment, or by trying to divorce and unwilling spouse). How about the following (please add to the list as you see fit):

1. Loss of physical custody of the children
2. Loss of all assets (except personal, like closthing) that accrued during the marriage
3. Payment of financial penalty (this amount needs to be hashed out. Could be one time payment or over a lifetime. Also mighr be something like 1/3 of what that spouse brought financially...or in financial terms (for the SAHM) to the marriage.)
4. Barred from remarriage (no license) for a period of 5 years and offender must go to approved pre-marriage counselling
5. Just as with sex offenders, there should be a registry of "marriage offenders." Would list the OP also.

Now, I wanted to add one thing here. What if my wife cheats, but I dont want her to face this stuff? Well, it just so happens that Virginia already has a law o nthe books that covers that. it is the law of condonation, which means after I know about the adultery, if I allow her to stay and if I resume marital relations, I have forgiven the act. Which means that the person is no longer subject to legal or civil actions. So, the spuse that cheats, btu works on the marriage and comes home...would be clear.

Now, some of you might see a way to abuse this. Like, my wife cheats. But rather than face those penalties, she comes home to "work" on the marriage. But then leaves a year or two later?

Well, then she would be leavign illegally, first of all. And thus all the penalties still apply. Second, her previous adultery would be added to the list of actions against her.

So, what else do you all think about penalties??

In His arms.

hey b0b,

Here in the U.S. there was a news story a while back where one of the states wanted to make "Gross Marital Misconduct" -- cheating, in other words -- grounds for divorce and/or punitive damages. (I Googled but could not find the story.)

Anyway, I would love to see a betrayed spouse be able to sue their WS on the grounds of "Gross Marital Misconduct" and get the house, the kids, and 90% of the assets.

And I would also love to see a BS be able to sue the OP on grounds of "Marital Intrusion" and get 90% of the OP's assets.

And yes, EAs should be covered just as much as PAs. As another poster here said, if you can show through photos, receipts, e-mails, etc. that your spouse is DATING someone else, that is absolutely an Intrusion and it's absolutely Gross Misconduct.

I'm incredibly sick of OPs and WSs who are free to inflict the worst kinds of suffering and emotional torment on their spouses and families and then get off scot-free - sometimes even making off with the BS's assets.

The average person has no idea how extremely destructive EAs and PAs are until it happens to them. Until then, well, it's just part of life and marriages are disposable and what can you do?

Well, you can take it damn seriously and start holding these people responsible for the damage they do, just like we do for any other kind of damage.

Jail time? Nah. Just hit them in the wallet and then post their pictures on a special website that everyone can access and talk about in the office every day.

JMHO.
Mulan

Wow MM, that's harsh. LOL

First of all, what do you constitute "an unwilling partner"?? An abuser may want a punching bag, and therefore be "unwilling" to let go.

Your list is interesting... especially the 'barred from future marriage' and 'marriage offenders list' parts. That's something to chew on, for sure.

I guess I was thinking along the lines of jail time and/or financial punishment... but I can't imagine what amount(s) would be used. Would there be a "table" ... like...

Yrs. Married........... Amount to be paid for infidelity

1....................... $5,000
2....................... $10,000
.
.
.
15......................$50,000
20......................$100,000

I find it inexplicably depressing to divorce love from marriage. I really, really do. I guess it would make some people feel a bit safer - more secure. They'd know what they could count on: a partner who was compelled to cohabit with them for the duration of their lives.

Is that what you think people want?


Yes, but his labor is legal work.

Much of what transpires in marriage would get you arrested if you did it as a business (*grin and nudge*)

There are limits on what an employer can require you to do as part of a job.


I see that is your opinion. But, marriage TO ME is about all that emotional stuff. Without it, there IS no marriage.

Why bother?


I know. I see that. I just think it's would make things absolutely terrible. People relations are hard enough.

When was the last time you looked at a family and thought to yourself: What that family needs is just a little less love. Yeah. That would fix that situation right up.

Ugh.

Mys

How do you figure out penalties if both sides are at fault?

For example, if one spouse is abandoned then cheats who gets the kids? Or, if one spouse is abusive so the other person abandons him/her then what do you do?

I think that 3 - 5 would serve no purpose. If you've all ready stripped all assets, then why bother asking for a fine? Don't we want to make it possible for them to have something of a new life - after all they'll have to figure out some way to survive long enough to pay child support?

Mys

As I said, adultery, abuse or abandonment ENDS the contract, if the person who is the aggrieved party WANTS it to end. That would take care of the problem you listed here.


Maybe based on percentage of future earnings. Kinda liek alimony, but alimony is paid by the one who transgressed...whether or not they are the one who makes the most money in the marriage. I make more than my wife. But in this scenario, she would have to pay a percentage of what she makes to me.

In His arms.

In His arms.

MM - I think some of your "penalties" would not pass muster in a civil proceeding. (This doesn't necessarily mean they are not warranted based on individual circumstances - if not worse penalties still.*)

In civil law - the way I understand it - any resulting sanctions are meant to "make whole" the "victim." Not to punish the villian. Punishment is the realm of criminal proceedings. (Again, I'm not an ambulance chaser and I may have this wrong.) In that we're talking about both emotional and tangible harm, thus it seems that a civil proceeding can only address the tangibles - lost or "stolen" assets. Piling on fines or escalated sanctions as punishment may not win the day as they would be criminal sanctions.

I don't think the "breach of contract" approach would be broadly accepted without the "crime" of infidelity. As we all know here, one cannot control others' feelings and relationships are not static and a counter argument may be too easy to concoct - "He/she changed and became a different person, one I do not love."

*Our discussion so far has been limited to spouses. In my case, my "friend" and pallbearer for my son hit on my wife before her tears were dry. Even putting aside for a minute what he did to his own family as well, from my vantage point, he does not deserve anything from anybody forever. I cannot even put into words a description of his crime. True justice seems unobtainable on this Earth. Further, because I had no "contract" with him (despite trust), I would have no recourse in any of the schemes being discussed here.

WAT

***I cannot even put into words a description of his crime. True justice seems unobtainable on this Earth. Further, because I had no "contract" with him (despite trust), I would have no recourse in any of the schemes being discussed here.***

WAT, you would under my suggestions! 90% of his assets for "Marital Intrusion". Not to mention Pain and Suffering. So sorry for what happened to you, WAT.
Mulan

No. But the state isnt interested in love. It cant quantify or qualify that. Love is up to the individuals involved. The state isnt handing out a "love" license.

No one wants a loveless marriage. I sure dont!! But as a legal construct, that isnt what we are talking about here. If one party upholds the contract, and the other doesnt...legally, the aggrieved party should receive just compensation.


True. And thr "work" that you talk of in a marriage is legal. You see, if I am an employee of Brinks, then driving one of their trucks filled with money is legal. If I am not an employee, then driving the same truck will get me shot!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Some actions and duties are legal/moral in one arena and not in others.


Marriage is about the other stuff. but what we are talking about here is the law. A legally binding contract of marriage. If a person doesnt think they can handle that kind of commitment, then I agree...why bother?


Which is why commitment must be foremost. Even the Harley principles point to this. With commitment, love is possible. Without commitment, love is impossible.

Look, we enter contracts all the time. I have gotten out of contracts I couldnt or didnt want to live upto at times in my life. And I faced some rather stiff penalties at times. but I decided the penalties were worth getting out of it.

For a spouse that wants their marriage and wants to live up to their commitment, to have the other tear up that contract thru adultery/abuse/abandonment or tear it up thru trying to divorce...then that perso nthat wants the contract upheld, is due something. They are the aggrieved party. They should be legally compensated for the other party not living up to their word and obligations.

In His arms.

Oh, I agree. That is why I did make distinction for criminal and civil above. They are different. But we civilly add things such as "pain and suffering" all the time, dont we? Also, If a husband leaves, he takes his financial earnign power with him. Tha twife counted o nthat as part of the contract. Shouldnt he still have to live up to what he would have brought to her and the family? Dont we do that when a person hurts another? We quantify the future lost wages?


What does that have to do with the law stating in Virginia that it is illegal to commit adultery, abandon your wife or kids...or abuse them? Fairly simple.


Yes you would. Just as the driver of the car is complicit with the bank robber inside. Alienation of affection and other such laws re-instated with penalties! And I know your sitch...and agree on that OM. And he has a God he still has to face!

In His arms.

Ok, but what is the state's interest in keeping people together? What benefit or burden is there to the state that is sufficient for infringing on someone's basic right to 'life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness?'

In other words, I think this way would have to lead to less harm not greater harm (over all) than the current way and I don't see that being true.


And yet, you'd advocate someone forcing someone to remain in a loveless marriage for the duration of their entire life at the whim of their spouse who now really has no need to work on improving conditions. He or she has what he or she wants - and they can never leave.

I think this would make it almost impossible for marriages to get better. Think of it this way. If you had the ability to simply compell your wife to stay with you when she strayed - and you never had to lift a finger to improve the marriage, how motivated would you have been to Plan A her? That's why Plan A is so counter-intuitive. The last thing a BS wants to do is cater to their WS. The natural (and understandable reaction) of any BS is to punish the WS as much as possible. And yet, that's what works to save a MARRIAGE as an emotional, loving, partnership bond vs. a legal construct that compells cohabitation.


Some 'work' can't be legally forced by anyone.


Honestly, I don't think I would have. Not because I want to be or have been unfaithful. In fact, I used a MB like system of POJA and honesty before I even found MB. My H and I are very happy together and yet, I wouldn't sign up for that type of deal. It strips marriage of all that's important to me and makes it a shackle instead of something I celebrate.

I suppose it's the difference between picking cotton on your own land and working as a slave.


Heh. Committment isn't bought with fear and coercion. It's not manufactured by fear of penalties. Committment is when you decide what you're going to do and you do it. Having someone else tell you what you have to do OR ELSE isn't committment.


Due something. Yes, probably - I'd draw a huge line between infidelity and divorce (w/out infidelity) though. To me, the two things aren't on the same scale of harm.

But, even in the case of infidelity, I don't advocate for the punishments lasting much beyond the divorce. Once it's done and the decision has been made, then let both parties have the opportunity to rebuild.

Mys

"We" do indeed, and I happen to believe that's a mistake. Civil proceedings should be limited to tangible things like assets and property. Anyone who thinks a definable "replacement value" can be assigned pain and suffering is either a fool or a lawyer. "Pain and suffering" is a concoction of legislatures, mostly comprised of lawyers who obviously had something to gain from this non-thing.

WAT
-------------
Men come from Mars, Women from Venus, and Lawyers from Uranus.

Charge to hubbie's mastercard of dirty weekend with OM in nasty motel hotel - $120

Cost to hubby of 'missing' statement reprints from mastercard supplier - $5

Hubby Taking that cheatin' ho and OM slime for every penny they got through the new adultery law - priceless !

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

GREAT QUESTION!!!!!!! First off, they are infringing anyone's right to life, liberty, etc. They are enforcing a contract willingly entered by two adults. So no infringement there.

Next, what is the state's interest. Well, I could write a book on that. One that showed that children are better off emotionally and financially in a two parent household. There are reams of studies documenting the mess we create with divorce, especially with the children. And that is just one issue. As I said, the Bible even speaks to this when it states that God doesnt want divorce because He doesnt want the children affected like that. So the law and God both have the initial issue is the children and the effect upon them.

Now on your ascertain that it would cause more harm, I say "cause more harm to whom?" To the kids? Nope...the studies even show that kids are better off in a house where the parents dont get along (as long as there isnt abuse) than with the parents divorced. does this cause mroe harm to the BS? Nope. They have a choice also. They could just let the marriage go and not "prosecute" the WS. So, who does that leave? HHMmmmmm...that leaves the WS who is being harmed. And who really cares if they are being harmed? They chose to be harmed by doing what they did. I do not, nor should I, feel sorry for them being held into a marriage, or losing everything in a divorce. Why should I?


Unfortunately, that may be true. Again, even the Bible states that God does not promise happiness...just joy. And there is a difference. What about sex, yo usay? So what! What if my wife were paralyzed and we couldnt have sex? Should I divorce her so I can be happy? Ridiculous! I told her that I would be there no matter what. So, thus my happiness is subservent to my commitment. Same goes with having a spouse that isnt doing their part. As a Christian, I knwo God promises to take care of that spouse...as long as I am doing my part. That soem serious consequences will befall a spouse not living up to their part.

But again, the state is not worried about happiness, nor should they be. The couple signed a contract "for better or worse." And worse can get VERY bad! Even if those vows werent exactly in yoru vows, the nature of the contract means that to end the contract would mean that there are penalties...unless BOTH parties agree to end it. That's life! It aint perfect. And sometimes we have to live with decisions we made. I KNOW!! My situation is far fro mperfect. My wife has yet to fully come back and meet my needs. She is home. We get along and life is pretty good on a friends basis and mon&dad basis. But she isnt being the wife I need and she promised. But my solution is not to divorce her. If she decides to leave, thats one thing. I wont stop her this time if she does. But if she leaves, she breaks the contract yet again. Thus, there should be penalties!


Not true at all!! Which is one of Harleys tenets. That it is better for the WS to remain at home than to separate! Look, I cant compel my wife to do anything. But, if she decides to cheat or leave, then there should be penalties. She can still go. But, there should be penalties for breaking a contract that I am unwilling to break.


Plan A fits perfectly to what I am saying.


Just as the Brinks company cant FORCE their employees to drive the truck. Of course, they can fire them for not living up to their contract. So, I cant force my wife to have sex with me. But to withold that would also be grounds of abandonment, of which I could "fire" her. There are things in a marriage that come as part ofthe "duties." One of my main duties as the husband is to provide for my family. Should I decide not to work anymore, my wife may decide that I no longer am trying to fulfill my duties. Thus, I really have broken the contract.

But in a legal way, all of that is hard to enforce. So, that is why the bare minimum can be (as it is written in my state) adultery, abuse and abandonment. The three "As."


But again, no one is a slave to their marriage. They have choices. But with choices, come consequences...both good and bad. If someone wants to leave...then leave. But understand that there are consequences. it is a part of the contract. If you can talk your spouse into ending it together, then great. Then the law shouldnt care (although God will hold both responsible!!). But when a person i na contract wants to keep that contract, and then another breaks it...then there must be legal recourse. Otherwise, that contract is a sham!


You know, in the military...I had to sometimes "remind" my soldiers of their commitment. Sometimes that meant fear of being punished. Really, why have I stuck by my wife all thsi time, even with her continuing to not fully meet my needs? I had my "out" legally and Biblically when she cheated. So why? Because I valued my word! I promised to God, to my wife, to my future children and to the Commonwealth of Virginia that I would commit to this marriage until death. It is easy to keep ones word when it is advantageous to do so. But what about when it isnt? But what about when we actually are worse off for it? we wouldnt have to give our word if it was all good!

This is a matter of honor. Honoring your commitments. Having character enough to keep your word. And THAT is more important than love or happiness! I'd rather be unhappy and a man of honor...than happy and my word mean nothing!


If one spouse forces a divorce on another, and then goes out and sleeps with some else or gets remarried...then there is adultery. Unless both spouses wanted the divorce, then in reality, they are still married. Even if the current law has bastardized this.


I might agree. As I said, the very least, they should lose custody of the kids, of all assets of the marriage (minus personal belongings) and pay damages (court costs, attorneys fees, costs of BS using PIs, etc). After that, we can talk about the rest.

In His arms.

WAT...I agree!!! I HATE the pain and suffering crap!

But as I said, we can quantify future earnings!!

In His arms.

Zactly!!!!!!!!!!!!! Priceless!

In His arms

[color:"red"]EGG ZAK LEE [/color] what I was thinkin'

pocketbook penalty

I can see we're just not going to ever come to agreement because you and I disagree fundamentally on what makes up a marriage and what marriage is all about. I disagree with your opinions on the state's interest and I am an athiest so I don't believe there is any higher power running the show who has an opinion on the matter.

Perhaps there is no one-size fits all relationship/civil union/marriage relationship. Maybe we should have layers of agreements that people can make between themselves that specifically spell out what the committments and penalties are ahead of time. That seems more workable than just assuming that everyone is willing to commit to what you describe AND if your partner isn't willing to commit at the level you desire then that is always good to know BEFORE the papers are signed.

Maybe covenant marriages will become more popular.


That seems to be more or less what you describe. I read the study but there isn't enough data to draw many conclusions. At the bottom of the study, they say that although there seem to be benefits to covenant marraige over conventional marriage, it's also likely that the things that make covenant marriage appeal to a couple would also tend to account for those benefits.

I find it interesting that only 2% of the marraige licenses in the one state, Louisiana, which has such marriages are covenant marriages.

Mys