Comments about ‘Two lawmakers seek to preserve marriage through counseling; education’

Keeping the government OUT of our daily lives seems to be hard to do for BOTH political parties. While the intent behind this bill for optional counseling seems pretty tame, putting such stuff on the books makes it easier for future legislative efforts to become more restrictive.

More "feel good nanny state nonsense."

Although many marriages fail, instead of making marriage more difficult to sanctify, if anything the state should be working hard to make marriage more popular and instead of chargin any fees for marriage licenses, perhaps reward those who get married.

Why? Because the decline in the traditional twp parent marriage before having children results in myriad problems which harm society as a whole. This is far worse than the harm to those who engage in a divorce.

Look at our inner cities where marriage is nearly obsolete, and the vast majority of children are born to unwed mothers, families are the result of breeding with many different men, and the entire family lives on various welfare programs. School ddddpout rates and conseuqnetly illiteracy are astronomical, and crime of all types is rampant.

Please, legilators, rcognize the real problems and work to implement real soutions to th greater problems, not waste time with the minor ones.

The majority of divorces are the result of selfishness and immaturity. The children are the real victims while their parents use them as pawns in their wars with their spouses.

Mandated counseling isn't going to help the individual who has decided to look for greener pastures somewhere else.

After eight years of counseling people as a social worker, it has been a frustrating experience as couples come in finally for counseling, some seperated, some near divorce. So often the issues that break couples apart are not even the issues that they argue about, but the many years that unspoken feelings and wants and needs have been allowed to fester and build up. Trust, authentic communication and the ability to share human emotions and address what appear to be just small matters appear to be important keys to marriage. But too many couples wait until the barriers and hate have become too great to mend and heal and only come to counseling when its too late. Hopefully some pre-marriage counseling will be made more attractive so that newly weds will have a much brighter future and avoid the needless years of betrayal and emotional pain.

More social meddling from a legislature that should be seeing that it has better things to do.

@tabonio

So as a counselor you think coercion and or bribery is going to be an ethical and effective means of getting people into counseling? I have been a therapist for more then 20 years, I think while well intended it is a bad law.

Well-intentioned laws that as usual would have unintended consequences. This would be just one more thing that would make living together without marriage seem like a better alternative. We should encourage marriage, not micro-manage it.

On HB132 I think that if we have to go through a series of classes and education before obtaining a driver's licence, the same thing should be done in order to get married. It makes perfect sense to me. I don't understand why anyone would want to object to being better prepared. I also think HB290 makes perfect sense because even though today you must complete an education cource before a divorce decree is granted when you have minor chldren,it makes a lot more sense to take the course BEFORE filing and not AFTER. A lot of irreparable damage is done to children WHILE the divorce is pending.

You've gotta love those big-government Republicans in the Utah legislature micro-managing people's marriages--all the while denying other people the chance to have a marriage

The more difficult you make it to get married and the more difficult you make it to get a divorce, the less likely people will be to engage in those behaviors -

this does not mean if divorce is difficult more married people will stay married, it means if marriage is hard to get out of, less people are going to get into it to begin with.

People who are already living together and raising a family are not going to find it necessary to go to counseling before they get married, and charging them more to get married because they don't want to do the counseling may make them decide that the current situation is fine and they really don't need to get married after all.

Divorce laws and parenting classes for divorcing couples only affect couples that are married and need a divorce. Couples that are living together - even when that couple has children - are not required to take parenting classes for a paternity, custody, and support decision.

If marriage is such a pain to get into and out of, why do it?

These bills are likely to damage marriage more than protect it.

Re: Bubble | 12:52 p.m. Feb. 6, 2012
"If marriage is such a pain to get into and out of, why do it?"

In today's world of declining morality there are actually people that still believe in the politically incorrect concept of chastity and virtue. A large percentage of the young men and women in my neighborhood will abstain from sexual relations until AFTER they get married.

The last thing on these young people's minds is contracting one or more of the incurable STDs that go hand in hand with promiscuous sexual relations.

A large percentage of the young men and women in my neighborhood will abstain from sexual relations until AFTER they get married.' - Rifleman | 8:57 a.m. Feb. 7, 2012

2 points:

**'Bristol Palin has book deal' - By Hillel Italie - AP - Published by DSnews - 03/01/11

'Bristol Palin, 20, has become a celebrity in her own right, through her broken relationship with her child's father, Levi Johnston...' - article.

1) Your neighborhood should not pass laws on people who don't live there.

**'LDS Church's in-kind donations to Prop. 8 total $190K' - By Lynn Arave - By Dsnews - 02/03/09

2) How can people wait until AFTER marriage to engage in sex...

when others factually work to DENY them....

marriage?

@ Rifleman: And how does this legislation change that in anyway?

Yes, there are some people who wait until after they are married to have sex - this legislation has nothing to do with that - it doesn't give them bonuses or discounts or anything - all this legislation does is make it harder/more expensive to get into a marriage and harder/more expensive to get out of a bad one.

There are some people this won't make a difference to - but those people were going to get married anyway.

The people this is going to affect are those who were on the fence about getting married in the first place and make them less likely to bother.

Re: Pagan | 9:30 a.m. Feb. 8, 2012

Which is worse: Bristol Palin have sex without the benefit of marriage or President Kennedy, a married man, having sex with intern Mimi Alford?

Ted Kennedy and the "Chappaquiddick incident"?

Your typical liberal is always willing to choke on a gnat while swallowing a camel.

'Re: Pagan | 9:30 a.m. Feb. 8, 2012

Which is worse: Bristol Palin have sex without the benefit of marriage or President Kennedy, a married man, having sex with intern Mimi Alford?
Ted Kennedy and the "Chappaquiddick incident"?
Your typical liberal...' - Rifleman | 6:16 a.m. Feb. 9, 2012

Counter points:

1) You cannot even prove what you brought up.

You cannot prove EITHER your claims on JFK or, Ted Kennedy.

2) I realize you are partisan, but to attack people who are dead??

That is low, Rifleman.

3) You presented 2 questions to Bristol Palins' child outside of marrige.

How is that a FACT?

I used to enjoy our trade off's Rifleman, but you have offered nothing to support your claims.

You haven't even TOUCHED how to 'wait until marriage' for sexual activity...

when people work to PREVENT marriage. For gay & lesbian persons.

And last:

'Your typical liberal...' - Rifleman

Family, is not PARTISAN issue.

Families, make up MORE than just 'conservative vs. liberal's' Rifleman.

The fact that you cannot SEE that, the fact that you resort to partisan rhetoric and attacks....

well, I expected better from you.

Re: Pagan | 11:40 a.m. Feb. 9, 2012

Nice attempt to dodge the question. No one is disputing what she's written in her book or what she's saying on TV.

Obviously you are unable or unwilling to answer the question: Which is worse, Bristol Palin have sex without the benefit of marriage or President Kennedy having sex with intern Mimi Alford?

'Which is worse, Bristol Palin have sex without the benefit of marriage or President Kennedy having sex with intern Mimi Alford?' - Rifleman | 12:47 p.m. Feb. 9, 2012

Now you are just repeating yourself.

I, simply MUST answer all of your questions...

but you, simply CANNOT answer mine:

2) How can people wait until AFTER marriage to engage in sex, when others factually work to DENY them, marriage?

That is, as you know Rifleman...

a Double. Standard.

You can make ANY accusation you want, about people who are dead and cannot defend themselves...

but I, must answer any question you can make up.

JFK & Bristol Palin have one thing in common. They are both heterosexuals.

Both, can legally marry. Though Bristol Palin did fatually NOT wait until marriage to do so.

As exampled, by her son from Levi Johnson.

And yet, people actively work to DENY marriage...

to lgbt persons.

Keep lying about dead people Rifleman.

It shows you really don't care about 'family', as much as you claim.