Hasn't the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage “redefined marriage” for 40 years now?

[Bartolome_Casas]

Why all the rage, panic, and talk of secession and insurrection, regarding the attempts to “redefine marriage” by letting same gender people obtain state marriages, when NO REACTION even remotely similar has happened over the last 40 plus years by the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s in the U.S.A.?

In Catholic teaching, and in Natural Law, marriage is a lifelong permanent union between one man and one woman. Have not the liberal U.S. laws in the last 40 years regarding divorce and remarriage “redefined marriage”?

Even if every state legalized gay marriage tomorrow, the effect on the culture would be negligible to nil, since only an infinitesimally small number of same gender people will ever want to get a state marriage. It will mostly be a tiny few lesbians who will marry. Most gay men too much enjoy having a wide variety of sex partners. Marriage is the last thing most of them want. In any case, homosexuals make up 1 or 2 percent of the population. That isn’t going to change. It’s not significant. Homosexuality is not contagious like the flu.

By contrast, nearly everyone in America is a heterosexual, and most of them get married or want to get married. Over the last 40 plus years, after the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s, there has been a pandemic of divorcing and remarrying. This has had a DEVASTATING effect on families, children, and even the economy and crime. So, WHERE’s the push for CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to end the “redefining of marriage” caused by legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage? Where’s are all the “Defend Marriage Acts” to save marriage from what has been destroying marriage for 40 plus years running?

I am not in favor of so-called Gay Marriage. Per Catholic Church teaching, I believe gays should be left their human dignity. But marriage? No. They should not be humiliated, shunned, or put in concentration camps. In general, they should not be fired from their jobs or evicted from apartments for being gay (their are exceptions, however, such as when children could be impacted).

The point is: the political conservative movement in the U.S.A. is losing and accomplishing little to nothing because it is mired in hypocrisy and sin. In general, political conservatives, both the leadership and the rank and file members, relish attacking the sins of a tiny minority of outsiders (gays), but don’t want their own vast sinning stopped, exposed or even acknowledged. Can you think of another historical situation in which a political movement focused intensely on the sins (real and imagined) of a tiny minority, while hiding and covering their own terrible crimes and plans? Like maybe in Western Europe, in the 1930s and 1940s?

In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party leaders condemned the greed and lush lifestyles of the Capitalists in the West, even while they, the Communist Party leaders, enjoyed, in secret, a lush life. They too were gigantic hypocrites.

The “gay marriage” movement would not even be upon us if political conservatives had drawn the line at the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s. This is all our fault. We grew comfortable with and accepting of the CANCER of widespread divorce and remarriage, and now the CANCER has SPREAD! Well, SUPRISE, SUPRISE!

Isn’t this THE TRUTH? But do you ever HEAR this truth being spoken by anyone OUT THERE? What’s up with this?

 

[Sarcelle]

Why all the rage, panic, and talk of secession and insurrection, regarding the attempts to “redefine marriage” by letting same gender people obtain state marriages, when NO REACTION even remotely similar has happened over the last 40 plus years by the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s in the U.S.A.?

In Catholic teaching, and in Natural Law, marriage is a lifelong permanent union between one man and one woman. Have not the liberal U.S. laws in the last 40 years regarding divorce and remarriage “redefined marriage”?

Even if every state legalized gay marriage tomorrow, the effect on the culture would be negligible to nil, since only an infinitesimally small number of same gender people will ever want to get a state marriage. It will mostly be a tiny few lesbians who will marry. Most gay men too much enjoy having a wide variety of sex partners. Marriage is the last thing most of them want. In any case, homosexuals make up 1 or 2 percent of the population. That isn’t going to change. It’s not significant. Homosexuality is not contagious like the flu.

By contrast, nearly everyone in America is a heterosexual, and most of them get married or want to get married. Over the last 40 plus years, after the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s, there has been a pandemic of divorcing and remarrying. This has had a DEVASTATING effect on families, children, and even the economy and crime. So, WHERE’s the push for CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to end the “redefining of marriage” caused by legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage? Where’s are all the “Defend Marriage Acts” to save marriage from what has been destroying marriage for 40 plus years running?

I am not in favor of so-called Gay Marriage. Per Catholic Church teaching, I believe gays should be left their human dignity. But marriage? No. They should not be humiliated, shunned, or put in concentration camps. In general, they should not be fired from their jobs or evicted from apartments for being gay (their are exceptions, however, such as when children could be impacted).

The point is: the political conservative movement in the U.S.A. is losing and accomplishing little to nothing because it is mired in hypocrisy and sin. In general, political conservatives, both the leadership and the rank and file members, relish attacking the sins of a tiny minority of outsiders (gays), but don’t want their own vast sinning stopped, exposed or even acknowledged. Can you think of another historical situation in which a political movement focused intensely on the sins (real and imagined) of a tiny minority, while hiding and covering their own terrible crimes and plans? Like maybe in Western Europe, in the 1930s and 1940s?

In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party leaders condemned the greed and lush lifestyles of the Capitalists in the West, even while they, the Communist Party leaders, enjoyed, in secret, a lush life. They too were gigantic hypocrites.

The “gay marriage” movement would not even be upon us if political conservatives had drawn the line at the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s. This is all our fault. We grew comfortable with and accepting of the CANCER of widespread divorce and remarriage, and now the CANCER has SPREAD! Well, SUPRISE, SUPRISE!

Isn’t this THE TRUTH? But do you ever HEAR this truth being spoken by anyone OUT THERE? What’s up with this?

You are on to something here. I think it is the no fault divorce law that gave rise to the view of marriage as a self-indulgent activity that can be easily entered into and then out of when the thrill is gone.

 

[Bartolome_Casas]

You are on to something here. I think it is the no fault divorce law that gave rise to the view of marriage as a self-indulgent activity that can be easily entered into and then out of when the thrill is gone.

Yes, I like the way you put that.

One a similar note, I know someone who always says that, based on the current laws of states in the U.S., we don’t really have marriage anymore, just “long term dating.”

 

[Bartolome_Casas]

Jesus gave a very pointed teaching about those who dwell on the sins of other people and ignore or rationalize or minimalize their own sins. It was when Jesus told about the Pharisee who prayed a prayer of thanks that he was not like the tax collectors. But Jesus praised the tax collector who prayed for mercy, and condemned the self-righteous Pharisees.

No, that doesn’t mean that the sins of gays should be excused. That’s not the point. Just that sins of heterosexuals should not be ignored while a hail storm of condemnation is poured onto gays.

I think it is undeniable that the sins of heterosexuals are doing FAR MORE to destroy America than are the sins of gays. Thus, there should be some sense of proportion, if leaders really care about America.

Yes, speak and vote against gay marriage.

But, even more than that, we need leaders who will vote and speak against no-fault marriage, and who will propose a Constitution Amendment to ban no fault divorce and establish throughout America what the Natural Law says marriage is, which is a permanent, unbreakable lifelong union between one man and one woman with no artificial birth control devices to block contraception. That’s what marriage is. What we’ve had for the last 40 years in the U.S. is a RADICAL “redefinition of marriage.” It does not deserve the name “marriage.” The vows of a state marriage are not worth the paper they are printed on. How can we argue against gays and liberals trying to redefine marriage when we’ve already accepted a radical redefinition of marriage?

Do we love America and our fellow countrymen, or do we just want to beat up gays with our words to vent or to try to gain self-serving political advantage?

 

[Sarcelle]

Yes, I like the way you put that.

One a similar note, I know someone who always says that, based on the current laws of states in the U.S., we don’t really have marriage anymore, just “long term dating.”

I also have heard it called “serial monogamy”.

 

[Bartolome_Casas]

I also have heard it called “serial monogamy”.

Right. Not marriage. The Catholic Church still has true marriage. The laws of the U.S. states do not, by and large. Marriage was radically redefined back in the late 1960s and 1970s.

Heterosexuals want to have and enjoy their own Sexual Revolution, but don’t want to let gays get in on the “fun.”

But, in truth, the Sexual Revolution is CATASTROPHE for both heterosexual and gays.

 

[BettyBoop416]

I think it is the no fault divorce law that gave rise to the view of marriage as a self-indulgent activity that can be easily entered into and then out of when the thrill is gone.

I really don’t believe that most people view marriage as a “self-indulgent activity.” I think when most people get married they honesty believe that they are marrying for life. Sadly, it doesn’t work out about half the time - for Catholics as well as members of other religious groups. (In fact, I recently read that the rate of divorce among atheists is less than it is among Christians in general.)

Do you really think divorce should be outlawed? Do you think that the state should force an unhappy couple to stay together, making each other miserable for the rest of their lives? Why would the state have an interest in doing such a thing?

 

[Seeker1961]

No, that doesn’t mean that the sins of gays should be excused. That’s not the point. Just that sins of heterosexuals should not be ignored while a hail storm of condemnation is poured onto gays.

I think it is undeniable that the sins of heterosexuals are doing FAR MORE to destroy America than are the sins of gays. Thus, there should be some sense of proportion, if leaders really care about America.

My pastor has a theory on that. He says that since homosexual acts are something over 90% of the population has never and will never have any inclination to commit, it’s easy for that 90% of the population to point those out as EVIL while ignoring their own issues. It’s like little kids who point out the bad thing their brother or sister did to get Mom and Dad’s attention off the bad thing that they did.

Part of the reason the Christians have so little credibility with the general public on the gay issue is that so many other issues are completely ignored, even though they are still sins.

 

[Least]

“Legal divorce” turns Marriage into legalized prostitution with bad sex.

Further, it destroys faith in, and adherence to, the Law, as it provides a circumnavigation to irrefutable natural law, that is extra-jurisdictional to any worldly court’s authority (i.e., it is not within the realm of authority to hamper or govern such things). MOREOVER, if we are going to play “anything goes,” I guaranty that you will not appreciate the outcome becuase we are going to do it my way.

In effect (figuratively and actually) I have to protest ALL court’s actions in order to stand before a court’s divorce proceeding and make the same argument (i.e., that “precedence” is all of the stupidity that falls from the mouth of the court, until they have asked me) in order to prevent such incursion.

History records that such activity among mankind eventually, and inevitably comes to violence.

 

[lerapt78]

Good post, Bartolome Cassas - agreed whole-heartedly, with one minor addition:

Though many “conservatives” oppose gay marriage and yet are accepting of no-fault divorce, the Catholic Church is not part of this hypocrisy, and that distinction lies within the act of annulment. Which is why these no-fault divorces are still recognized by the Church as valid marriages.

I want to add as well that no-fault divorce, while not only cheapening the institution of marriage, often causes a disproportionate harm to men who deserve better.

 

[gabanzo]

Do you really think divorce should be outlawed? Do you think that the state should force an unhappy couple to stay together, making each other miserable for the rest of their lives? Why would the state have an interest in doing such a thing?

The state wouldn’t have an interest in doing such a thing. If divorce was more difficult people would think twice about getting married or at least try harder in the marriage. As Bartolome Casas stated divorce has had a devastating effect on society. Marriage should be taken more seriously!!!

 

[lerapt78]

Do you really think divorce should be outlawed? Do you think that the state should force an unhappy couple to stay together, making each other miserable for the rest of their lives? Why would the state have an interest in doing such a thing?

Not advocating outlawing divorce - simply expunging the travesty of “no-fault” divorce from our lawbooks.

 

[phoooiee]

I really don’t believe that most people view marriage as a “self-indulgent activity.” I think when most people get married they honesty believe that they are marrying for life. Sadly, it doesn’t work out about half the time - for Catholics as well as members of other religious groups. (In fact, I recently read that the rate of divorce among atheists is less than it is among Christians in general.)

Do you really think divorce should be outlawed? Do you think that the state should force an unhappy couple to stay together, making each other miserable for the rest of their lives? Why would the state have an interest in doing such a thing?

Because it is usually not the case that an unhappy couple who stays together will remain miserable for the rest of their lives- see the below link:

americanvalues.org/html/r-unhappy_ii.html

My husband is a child of divorced parents and I can’t believe how deeply it hurt him to have gone through that.

 

[LisaA]

Because it is usually not the case that an unhappy couple who stays together will remain miserable for the rest of their lives- see the below link:

americanvalues.org/html/r-unhappy_ii.html

My husband is a child of divorced parents and I can’t believe how deeply it hurt him to have gone through that.

Excellent point and although one poster asked “do we want to make divorce illegal” the reality as we can see with marriage, contraception and abortion, if you give someone an ‘easy out’ they will take it. No fault divorce has made it so easy to divorce that couples going through a tough time think if they divorce they will be “happy.” What they often find and as your linked study attests, their unhappiness wasn’t created just by the marriage and undoing it won’t solve their problems.

Ditto with contraception which has made premarital sex and adultery much “easier” and thus more prevalent. Even worse is legalized abortion which has become birth control. The easier and less expensive it is, the more there will be of whatever is being considered.

Further no fault divorce was promoted as being better for children…you know the spiel how much better for children not to be living in a home with constant arguments and tension. Unfortunately the premise was total baloney and we are finding out, too late, that even amicable divorces are devastating for children.

I bet if you ask any long married couple if they ever had a tough time, if they ever thought about separating or divorce, you would get a lot of yeses. Human nature hasn’t changed. Marital difficulties date back to Adam and Eve. Only we are arrogant enough to believe WE can do everything perfectly

Lisa

 

[edwest2]

Why all the rage, panic, and talk of secession and insurrection, regarding the attempts to “redefine marriage” by letting same gender people obtain state marriages, when NO REACTION even remotely similar has happened over the last 40 plus years by the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s in the U.S.A.?

In Catholic teaching, and in Natural Law, marriage is a lifelong permanent union between one man and one woman. Have not the liberal U.S. laws in the last 40 years regarding divorce and remarriage “redefined marriage”?

Even if every state legalized gay marriage tomorrow, the effect on the culture would be negligible to nil, since only an infinitesimally small number of same gender people will ever want to get a state marriage. It will mostly be a tiny few lesbians who will marry. Most gay men too much enjoy having a wide variety of sex partners. Marriage is the last thing most of them want. In any case, homosexuals make up 1 or 2 percent of the population. That isn’t going to change. It’s not significant. Homosexuality is not contagious like the flu.

By contrast, nearly everyone in America is a heterosexual, and most of them get married or want to get married. Over the last 40 plus years, after the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s, there has been a pandemic of divorcing and remarrying. This has had a DEVASTATING effect on families, children, and even the economy and crime. So, WHERE’s the push for CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to end the “redefining of marriage” caused by legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage? Where’s are all the “Defend Marriage Acts” to save marriage from what has been destroying marriage for 40 plus years running?

I am not in favor of so-called Gay Marriage. Per Catholic Church teaching, I believe gays should be left their human dignity. But marriage? No. They should not be humiliated, shunned, or put in concentration camps. In general, they should not be fired from their jobs or evicted from apartments for being gay (their are exceptions, however, such as when children could be impacted).

The point is: the political conservative movement in the U.S.A. is losing and accomplishing little to nothing because it is mired in hypocrisy and sin. In general, political conservatives, both the leadership and the rank and file members, relish attacking the sins of a tiny minority of outsiders (gays), but don’t want their own vast sinning stopped, exposed or even acknowledged. Can you think of another historical situation in which a political movement focused intensely on the sins (real and imagined) of a tiny minority, while hiding and covering their own terrible crimes and plans? Like maybe in Western Europe, in the 1930s and 1940s?

In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party leaders condemned the greed and lush lifestyles of the Capitalists in the West, even while they, the Communist Party leaders, enjoyed, in secret, a lush life. They too were gigantic hypocrites.

The “gay marriage” movement would not even be upon us if political conservatives had drawn the line at the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s. This is all our fault. We grew comfortable with and accepting of the CANCER of widespread divorce and remarriage, and now the CANCER has SPREAD! Well, SUPRISE, SUPRISE!

Isn’t this THE TRUTH? But do you ever HEAR this truth being spoken by anyone OUT THERE? What’s up with this?

Your writing lacks all historical context. None of the things you mentioned happened overnight, So please, read a little history starting from 1967 to date. Your words are those of an agent provocateur. I think you are too filled with emotion, and broad, sweeping judgements to argue effectively. So either present a cogent case, or stop now.

Peace,
Ed

I have no affiliation with any political party.

 

[BettyBoop416]

Because it is usually not the case that an unhappy couple who stays together will remain miserable for the rest of their lives- see the below link:

americanvalues.org/html/r-unhappy_ii.html

My husband is a child of divorced parents and I can’t believe how deeply it hurt him to have gone through that.

My husband is a child of parents who decided to stay together “for the sake of the children.” They didn’t do him or his siblings any favors. According to DH, there was constant conflict. Fighting, screaming, arguing…even when they called a truce the tension in the air was so thick you could cut it with a knife. And who was caught in the crossfire? The kids.

My in-laws finally divorced after all the children were out of the house. I don’t know if I’d call them “happier.” They both have their battle scars, but at least they finally found peace.

While I certainly don’t regard divorce as a positive thing, and I agree that many couples give up long before it’s really necessary, I believe that couples who are truly miserable with each other should have the option to end it - not only state sanctioned marriages, but Church sanctioned marriages as well. If two 19 year olds get married while under the influence of a flood of hormones and then, upon achieving a bit more maturity discover that they made a horrible mistake, no one - not the state or the Church - should say “Tough luck - you’re stuck with each other whether you like it or not.” That’s just mindless.

 

[fix]

Why all the rage, panic, and talk of secession and insurrection, regarding the attempts to “redefine marriage” by letting same gender people obtain state marriages, when NO REACTION even remotely similar has happened over the last 40 plus years by the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s in the U.S.A.?

In Catholic teaching, and in Natural Law, marriage is a lifelong permanent union between one man and one woman. Have not the liberal U.S. laws in the last 40 years regarding divorce and remarriage “redefined marriage”?

Even if every state legalized gay marriage tomorrow, the effect on the culture would be negligible to nil, since only an infinitesimally small number of same gender people will ever want to get a state marriage. It will mostly be a tiny few lesbians who will marry. Most gay men too much enjoy having a wide variety of sex partners. Marriage is the last thing most of them want. In any case, homosexuals make up 1 or 2 percent of the population. That isn’t going to change. It’s not significant. Homosexuality is not contagious like the flu.

By contrast, nearly everyone in America is a heterosexual, and most of them get married or want to get married. Over the last 40 plus years, after the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s, there has been a pandemic of divorcing and remarrying. This has had a DEVASTATING effect on families, children, and even the economy and crime. So, WHERE’s the push for CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to end the “redefining of marriage” caused by legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage? Where’s are all the “Defend Marriage Acts” to save marriage from what has been destroying marriage for 40 plus years running?

I am not in favor of so-called Gay Marriage. Per Catholic Church teaching, I believe gays should be left their human dignity. But marriage? No. They should not be humiliated, shunned, or put in concentration camps. In general, they should not be fired from their jobs or evicted from apartments for being gay (their are exceptions, however, such as when children could be impacted).

The point is: the political conservative movement in the U.S.A. is losing and accomplishing little to nothing because it is mired in hypocrisy and sin. In general, political conservatives, both the leadership and the rank and file members, relish attacking the sins of a tiny minority of outsiders (gays), but don’t want their own vast sinning stopped, exposed or even acknowledged. Can you think of another historical situation in which a political movement focused intensely on the sins (real and imagined) of a tiny minority, while hiding and covering their own terrible crimes and plans? Like maybe in Western Europe, in the 1930s and 1940s?

In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party leaders condemned the greed and lush lifestyles of the Capitalists in the West, even while they, the Communist Party leaders, enjoyed, in secret, a lush life. They too were gigantic hypocrites.

The “gay marriage” movement would not even be upon us if political conservatives had drawn the line at the legalization of no-fault divorce and remarriage in the 1970s. This is all our fault. We grew comfortable with and accepting of the CANCER of widespread divorce and remarriage, and now the CANCER has SPREAD! Well, SUPRISE, SUPRISE!

Isn’t this THE TRUTH? But do you ever HEAR this truth being spoken by anyone OUT THERE? What’s up with this?

The last Pope called “gay marriage” a new ideology of evil. I am trying to understand your point but what I see is an argument to deflect the seriousness of what is happening right now.

Because of other social ills we should just let a more serious evil take place?

 

[LilyM]

Not advocating outlawing divorce - simply expunging the travesty of “no-fault” divorce from our lawbooks.

As opposed to the travesty of manufactured infidelity as the only means by which a mutually agreeable couple could ahve geounds for divorce - complete with faked photographic ‘evidence’ and the use of paid professionals who would pretend to be the ‘other woman’, or I suppose occasionally ‘other man’?

 

[fix]

My pastor has a theory on that. He says that since homosexual acts are something over 90% of the population has never and will never have any inclination to commit, it’s easy for that 90% of the population to point those out as EVIL while ignoring their own issues.

What an unfortunate and erroneous position for one to hold.

 

[JimG]

To answer the thread title question, the answer is yes.

No fault divorce wasn’t the beginning of the devolution of marriage, but it was a big step along the way. The widespread acceptance of contraception, beginning with the Lambeth Conference of 1930, and given enormous impetus by the sexual revolution of the 1960’s, separated the idea of marriage from the generating of children. That was a fatal step, and has not been reversed. Once that step was taken, the acceptance of abortion, and even same sex marriage became inevitable. [For statistical evidence of the devastating social effects of contraception and sexual license, see Mary Eberstadt’s “*Adam and Even After the Pill.”]

Of course, separating marriage from children was radical and wrong; separating marriage from gender is even more of a flight from reality. None of this can have a good ending. It can only end in the destruction of family, and the destruction of family ends in civilizational chaos.