Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The concluding section of the study commented that unlike the divorced parents, who can often find relief following separation, children's suffering continues long after divorce. In fact, its effects continue for decades, as long as three decades.
'Divorce has pervasive weakening effects on children and on all of the five major institutions of society -- the family, the church, the school, the marketplace, and government itself,' Fagan and Churchill concluded.
With the high level of divorce in recent times these debilitating consequences will continue to be played out in the years to come. Not a comforting thought as Western society continues to witness continued attacks on family life and attempts to re-define marriage.".
I was with you up to here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim
It's long past time for a return to social, legal and political support for indissoluable Christian marriage.
Hold it right there. Christianity doesn't have the market cornered on family values. Many of the world's major religions teach similar things in this regard. I think of the non-Christian Asian countries where divorce rates are much lower than ours.
Hold it right there. Christianity doesn't have the market cornered on family values. Many of the world's major religions teach similar things in this regard. I think of the non-Christian Asian countries where divorce rates are much lower than ours.
You're absolutely right. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
But let's suppose that a country like Thailand had a divorce problem, and one of the nation's leaders made this statement:
"It's long past time for a return to social, legal and political support for indissoluable Buddhist marriage."
Would you have a problem with that? Should Thai citizens have a problem with that?
Marriage needs a religious and cultural framework. In the United States that framework is Christianity. Secularism just doesn't cut it.
Completely agree with you, but I also think people should be more careful and consider planning their lives better before getting married or having children...
Don't do either if you can't do it right.
I so agree with you, so often it seems to some, that marriage is only a joke.
That sounds rather discriminatory against atheists and anyone non-Christian.
And I'm pretty sure the framework of the United States wasn't even religion!
I said religious and cultural framework, not political framework. Although religion influences culture, and culture obviously influences political systems.
It doesn't need to be discriminatory. It would be sufficient for the county clerk simply to require proof that "until death do us part", or something similar, was included in their marriage vows, before witnesses, and to have the couple acknowledge that they understood what it means.
Last edited by WesternPilgrim; 02-13-2012 at 05:29 PM..
Everyone from liberals to conservatives to the most ardent libertarians believe that it is a proper function of government to enforce contracts.
If you consider it a contract, you will also have to accept there are exit strategies in almost every contract... Especially if both parties agree.
Here in Portugal couples can get divorced online.
But if both parties agree, any contract can be terminated.
There is a third party in this case: the state.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.