First They Came After Gay Marriage Rights, Now they Want to Outlaw DIVORCE

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 11:40am

Okay, straight people. Don't say we didn't WARN you that these wacko conservatives were gonna come after YOU next.

===

Foundation Wants Stricter Rules for Splits

By Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 5, 2007; B03

RICHMOND, Jan. 4 -- 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."

Similar legislation has failed in the past. Cobb said the push for tougher standards is one of several initiatives her organization will advocate when the General Assembly convenes next week.

The foundation also wants libraries to be required to install Internet filters to block pornography and obscene material from children's view.

And, in what has become a yearly battle in Richmond, the group plans to push for laws to reduce the number of abortions in the state.

Specifically, Cobb said the group will advocate changes to the informed consent law so that abortion clinics would be required to perform an ultrasound before administering an abortion. Another proposal would require clinics to give women information about how anesthesia could be used on fetuses during late-term abortions.

Cobb said the proposals are designed to give women "the most advanced health-care information available."

But Ann O'Hanlon, executive director of Virginia's chapter of the National Abortion Rights Action League, said her group would oppose the foundation's efforts.

"Getting a woman unbiased information is what we like to see, but when it is coming from people who oppose the legal option of abortion, it is not going to be unbiased information," O'Hanlon said.

Last year, the Family Foundation was the chief proponent of a Virginia constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions.

Despite opposition from Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D), who argued that the amendment also threatened the rights of unmarried heterosexual couples, the Republican-controlled General Assembly put the amendment on last year's ballot. Voters approved it with 57 percent of the vote.

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.

Cobb said she will work with Marshall and other legislators to explore more comprehensive legislation for requiring "mutual consent."
Foundation Wants Stricter Rules for Splits

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 12:56pm

Yea, good luck to them, this is never going to fly.

But, at least if they did do this they'd finally have made a stronger argument against gay marriage for themselves (which I wouldn't doubt as being the entire reason they're trying to pursue this). Their whole "sanctity of marriage" b.s. is flimsy with celebrity hetero couples marrying and divorcing in two month increments.

[Kringas]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 1:15pm

Civil marriage should just be outlawed completely. Let it be strictly a religious institution.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 1:34pm

Eh, it's not going to work.

[hannahshule]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 3:20pm

Ceaucescu tried to do something very similar and looked how that worked out for him.

[actor]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 3:31pm

This is ridiculous.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 5:29pm

Ha.

[Raviolisun]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 5:37pm

Wow. That's funny.

[aspen]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 6:06pm

"Civil marriage should just be outlawed completely. Let it be strictly a religious institution."

I couldn't agree more, Kringas.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 6:14pm

Next they should regulate how many kids a couple can have, and only AFTER they've been through parental training.

[jsrocks]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 11:32pm

Conservatives are funny.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 11:35pm

At least they're TRYING to be consistent with their worldviews.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 11:37pm

Go away, touchme, you conservative lover!

[WalkOn]

Posted: 1/6/07 at 11:45pm

The mean spirited part of my personality has always thought that gay men and women in states were there is constitutional ban on gay marriage force the issue of banning divorce. Make them live up their own standards.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 12:08am

I love, though, that this group of right-wing Christians forget that the divorce rate amongst Christians is significantly higher than their non-Christian counterparts.

[deadparrot]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 12:28am

Just allow any two people to enter into a civil union, in which they receive benefits similar to a traditional married couple. This "union" would allow equal benefits for same-sex or opposite-sex couples, or even non-romantic relationships, such as two adult friends or relatives who trust each other with money, benefits, and critical life decisions.

If a couple feels it necessary to be blessed in their own religion, that can be handled by the various traditions, but any two adults should be able to entrust important decisions to anyone they choose without regard to sex.

[aspen]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 11:56am

Deadparrot, that was my argument in Government class. Unfortunately, I live in Texas, so I was nearly stoned to death as a heretic for expressing such views. I've come to the unfortunate conclusion that conservative Christians are utterly hopeless.

The most coherent argument that was put up against my view was "Well, the founding fathers were Christians so that should be the only marriage we have ANYWAYYYYZZ!"

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 1:19pm

The Founding Fathers were NOT Christians. We've had this discussion before.

[aspen]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:17pm

Making it all the more tragic that aforementioned argument was the most coherent one.

If any of them watched the news, I'm sure they would be outraged that Jefferson owned a copy of the Qur'an.

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:33pm

I want to know how "stricter rules for divorce" became "outlaw divorce."

[aspen]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:37pm

Eh, the same way Wicked became OMFG!CHENZZELWIKKID@<3!!1!

[aspen]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 10:01pm

...I support the immediate stoning of brides who are found not to be virgins. Hey, it's in Leviticus, right?

Oh, and if a woman's getting mugged and she punches her attacker in the genitals, cut off her hand and show her no mercy, right?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 10:15pm

Will you marry me, tobesureof?

[Pinguin]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 4:33am

I'm pretty sure there are other states who have fairly strict rules about divorce...I think Pennsylvania will not allow one spouse to divorce, the other has to agree. I have an aunt who has lived with a man for 10 years or so who is still legally married to someone else because his wife will not divorce him, or something kooky to that effect.

[aspen]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 7:26am

I think Pennsylvania will not allow one spouse to divorce, the other has to agree.

Doesn't that take away the spouse's right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

EDIT: Oh, and Paljoey, marrying a puppet is a sin. I think it's the third commandment or something...

Updated On: 1/8/07 at 07:26 AM