Get married, stay married? No fault divorce under fire

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Llew40 Sandy, UT
    April 21, 2014 4:39 p.m.

    Old maids are still being stigmatized.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    April 21, 2014 2:34 p.m.

    some of us have wanted stricter guidelines on divorce for a long while now... kinda sad it took the sideshow of gay marriage to eventually get around to addressing it.

  • Kally Salt Lake City, UT
    April 21, 2014 1:13 p.m.

    No fault divorce was legalized in California in 1969 - at which time it immediately came under attack as destroying marriage and families.

    I really don't think you can blame opposition to no-fault divorce on same-sex marriage proponents.

    @ jamescmeyer: One of the biggest problems marriage faces is the idea that "[i]t's a goal in and of itself." If your marriage goal consists solely of getting married, you have failed before you have even begun because the questions you are focusing on are, "Do I want to marry this person? Does this person want to marry me?" There is no focus on anything beyond that and no plan for success.

    The goal should not be to just get married - the goal should be to have a happy, successful marriage. The questions should be, "Can I be happy spending the rest of my life with this person? Can I make this person happy for the rest of their life? Do we have shared interests? How is this person at handling adversity? What does a successful marriage look like? If we marry and some of our goals prove unattainable, will we be able to work through it?"

  • Ranch Here, UT
    April 21, 2014 11:27 a.m.


    LGBT couples have families too. You're quite selfish to deny these families the same legal protections you enjoy. BTW, did you marry for love or did you only marry to have children? If that's the case, pity your wife.

  • Jamescmeyer Midwest City, USA, OK
    April 21, 2014 6:57 a.m.

    A large part of marriage is touched on by the very end of this article; marriage isn't incidental, it's not meant to satisfy individuals, and it can't just be quit out of if things don't magically work out.

    It's a goal in and of itself. It and raising children are the final step to adulthood. It's not about two people; it's about uniting two families, and continuing them on. It's something you dedicate yourself to and work toward forever.

    People now consider marriage optional, not desirable, and there is nothing to be had in marriage that they don't take without it if they want it. Regardless of whatever arguments silver-tongued conservative-bashers try to argue, it is a plainly observed fact that promiscuity and easy divorce are a large part of why people think it's okay to simply change what marriage is altogether, focusing on their sexual "orientation".

    Finally, they clamor about how we should "shore up marriage", yet it is largely them letting it down.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    April 19, 2014 7:52 p.m.

    Its amazing how much good a marriage counselor can do if brought in early enough in the process. Usually once the parties are trying to get a divorce things have gone too far to redeem, unfortunately. I don't know how you can get people to seek help before things get out of hand, though. I would hope helping marriages succeed will not be thought of in liberal v conservative terms. If there is one social ill that plagues everyone, its divorce.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    April 19, 2014 5:08 p.m.

    "So, first the left argues that conservatives should focus on restrcting divorce in order to preserve traditional marriage rather than fight SSM. "

    Actually, the left usually just focuses on pointing out the hypocrisy of only fighting SSM when the right doesn't care about other things, or suggests that reducing divorce rates should be a priority. They generally don't advocate restricting divorce. Much like how I frequently invoke single people being able to adopt in this state pointing out that if the "children need a mother and father" arguments are nonsense because nobody seems to care that single people can adopt. That doesn't actually mean I want there to be restrictions on that. I'm just pointing out inconsistency.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    April 19, 2014 9:59 a.m.

    @RedWings 4:13 p.m. April 18, 2014

    We are in total agreement. Thank you.

  • intervention slc, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:44 p.m.

    "So, first the left argues that conservatives should focus on restrcting divorce in order to preserve traditional marriage rather than fight SSM. Then when they do, it is an "alarming trend"?"

    Imagine that apparently "the left" actually does not fit into one stereotype and don't all think exactly the same. This is why it may help your arguments to just focus on making your point instead of trying disparage others.

    April 18, 2014 4:13 p.m.


    I agree fully. So, let's put an end to the constant barrage of sexual images thrown in front of us. Outlaw sex as a marketing tool. Why do we need almost-naked women to sell hamburgers?

    If we dispense with this hyper-sexualized culture, men will start to respect women instead of turning them into objects of pleasure. I would love to see us go in that direction.

    That should truly be the feminist agenda...

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:54 a.m.

    @Jon W. 9:08 a.m. April 18, 2014

    Contrary to feminist dogma, most men are not rapists, so the tried and proven method for encouraging marriage needs to be reimplemented: that is, a woman should not grant sexual access to any man to whom she is not married.


    So, in other words, blame the woman. If you wish to use that argument, I would also suggest that another tried and proven method for encouraging marriage needs to be reimplemented: that is, a man should not seek sexual access to any woman to whom he is not married.

  • A Quaker Brooklyn, NY
    April 18, 2014 11:37 a.m.

    Describing same-sex marriage as hedonism is preposterous, and an affront to public discourse.

    There is nothing less hedonistic than two people who love each other making a commitment to share their lives together. You may not be able to empathize with people who only feel romantic attraction to their own sex, and I may not be able to imagine myself in that position, either, but we all understand what romantic attraction is in general.

    I try not to think about other people's sex lives, gay or straight. It's none of my business. But, I understand what marriage is, and that's settling down and forming a household. That's not hedonism. It's an important undertaking that if properly done improves both partners, whichever neighborhood they live in, and society at large.

    The wrong individuals ruin everything, though. This Reuters story, today: " A [straight] Florida man annoyed that his 16-month-old crying son was preventing him from playing video games suffocated the toddler and left him to die in a playpen, police said on Friday."

    That's hedonism.

    Divorce is necessary. Some marriages are beyond redemption.

  • cocosweet Sandy, UT
    April 18, 2014 10:18 a.m.

    I do firmly believe marriage is a cornerstone of our society and I find it sad that so many end in divorce. That said wouldn't it be better to have marriage classes before people get married? Catholic church requires anyone who wish to marry in the church (building) to take classes, make sure their compatible, understand the wants and needs of each other. Instead of forcing people into a miserable corner?

    Old adage : Marry in haste, repent in leisure.

  • ordinaryfolks seattle, WA
    April 18, 2014 9:59 a.m.

    Should not marriage be harder to get into than easier to get out of? If a young couple had a "cooling off" period from their lustful courtship before entering into the legal contract of marriage, wouldn't it make more sense? What about mandated counseling before marriage? I don't think many young couples really know what kinds of comprises and hurdles their new married life will entail. I don't think most couples decide in advance many of the big issues facing all married couples must face, nor discuss how to negotiate differences of opinions about these problems. And our current government policies don't make things any easier on the stressed young couples attempting to make ends meet.

    Any fool in Utah can go to the County Clerk, and get licensed to get married (unless you happen to be marrying someone of your same gender). We ought to consider other options that a check and a signature on a form for the commencement of a marriage.

  • Candied Ginger Brooklyn, OH
    April 18, 2014 9:39 a.m.

    I have two pretty good friends currently going through divorces. Neither involve cheating or abuse, both are long broken situations that counseling has not helped. One divorce is reaching the one-year mark of legal shenanigans and maneuvering and bills. Lots of legal bills. And they have months until a court date.

    The other is at the six month mark and seems to be headed down a similar path, including mounting legal bills.

    In both cases the kids are suffering, my friends are miserable and stuck in limbo and, while I have no contact with either of the soon-to-be-ex-husbands, from what I am hearing they are pretty miserable, too.

    The only ones who benefit from the system are the lawyers.

    And by the way - two people giving their opinion on an issue does not mean the "liberals are confused" or the "conservatives can't win."

    Opinions. Individual opinions. From different individuals. Not dictated from a central authority that requires group-think or you get kicked out into the wilderness.

    Me? Divorce should be discouraged and hard. And my friend's situation is long, hard, and stupid.

  • Jon W. Murray, UT
    April 18, 2014 9:08 a.m.

    Contrary to feminist dogma, most men are not rapists, so the tried and proven method for encouraging marriage needs to be reimplemented: that is, a woman should not grant sexual access to any man to whom she is not married.

  • Snapdragon Midlothian, VA
    April 18, 2014 8:59 a.m.

    After four marriages, my friend commented to me that would have been better off just working out the problems in his first marriage.

    It is sad people think it is a solution to run.

    April 18, 2014 8:48 a.m.

    "Amanda Marcotte at Slate calls this an "alarming trend." "

    So, first the left argues that conservatives should focus on restrcting divorce in order to preserve traditional marriage rather than fight SSM. Then when they do, it is an "alarming trend"?

    No-fault divorce was the first attack on the family. This should never have been allowed. In some situations (abuse, adultery, etc.), divorce is necessary and should be done quickly to protect all involved. However, in our current society, most divorces are caused by simple selfishness.

    If Ms. Marcotte is concerned about the "petty squabbling" that is involved in divorce, making it harder to get one will help. If the couple knows that they need to work out their differences as loving adults and can't run to the nearest court to end the relationship, they will have to be more committed to each other.

    Marriage is about putting another's needs above your own. This is something most of us need to learn....

  • 1covey Salt Lake City, UT
    April 18, 2014 8:00 a.m.

    Because it is natural for women to want children and biological drives being what they are; marriage is valuable institution for society. What could be done better is educating people to be prepared for the stresses and responsibilities that come with marriage. Dealing with interpersonal problems is difficult for the best of us; and, obviously, some do better than others. But education and training help. Family and marriage relation classes are invaluable. As is example in the home, where children learn from the examp0le of their parents- good or bad.