Ban divorce? Ballot effort gets OK to gather signatures

[Hara_Juku Tgirl]

October 23, 2009

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen today authorized the backer of an initiative that would ban divorce to begin collecting signatures to put the proposed constitutional amendment before voters.

John Marcotte now has until March 22, 2010, to collect 694,354 signatures of registered voters in order to get the measure on the ballot next year. The proposal would change the California Constitution to "eliminate the ability of married couples to get divorced in California."

Couples could still get their marriages annulled under the proposal.

Here is the official text of the initiative:

ELIMINATES THE LAW ALLOWING MARRIED COUPLES TO DIVORCE. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the ability of married couples to get divorced in California. Preserves the ability of married couples to seek an annulment. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Savings to the state of up to hundreds of millions of dollars annually for support of the court system due to the elimination of divorce proceedings.

--Jessica Garrison
__________________________________________________ ____________

Discuss..Are you for it or against it? And why?

~Kisses.

HTG

[Silcc69]

This ought to be interesting.

[JamesHunt]

Are crazed religious zealots behind all this?

What's the point of banning divorce if your partner becomes an asshole :?:

[Christastic]

It would force the anti-gay "pro-marriage" folk to put their money where their mouth is.

[hippifried]

Another dumb idea from somebody who thinks they know what's good for everybody else.

[durpadur]

The REAL defense of marriage act. :lol:

[LAGent4ts]

The Family Law division of the State Bar Association will put an end to this I suspect if this ever gets on the ballot.

The State Constitution should be amended to remove the word "Marriage" and give the state authority to sanction civil unions between ANY two individuals, thus entitling the "unioned couples to all the rights, benefits and liabilities formally granted to married couples.

Marriage then becomes only a religious cermony sanctioned by a religion and they can marry or not marry whomever they, provided they are a "unioned couple" and then impose their tunnel visioned view of the world on those happy couples.

[dgs925]

It wouldn't pass, not in a million years, but I think it's a great idea. The only thing is you'd have to give everyone who got married before the law was passed a chance to "divorce now or forever hold your peace".

From then on, anyone who decided to get married would have to think very hard about it, since it is forever. The way things are now, marriage is meaningless - it can be dissolved whenever you want.

[Cuchulain]

I've seen two schools of thought on this. The first is that Marcotte is deadly serious and the second is that it's a satirical attack on the hypocrisy of the prop 8 crowd. After seeing this interview on 'The Young Turks', I'm in the second camp. "I can sell my daughter (according to the bible ) but I can't find anybody who'll give me a good price for her." When asked about the prohibition against eating shellfish contained in the Bible, Marcotte replies "I used to protest at Red Lobster every weekend but that's a separate issue".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMm8gkLRu-k

[trish]

California's referendum system is clearly in need of revision. Sounds like a proposition!

[russtafa]

the rest ot the world wonders if a americans are mad and i think this is confirming their suspicions

[SarahG]

I think its perfect, if the people of California want to force the so-called christian version of marriage upon everyone else- they should be forced to abide by the entire concept of christian marriage.

This would show how much of a fanatical cult that religion is when followed to the letter of their holy text.

This would mean the following would have to be mandated by law:
-If a husband marries and finds his wife is not a virgin, he must take her to the front door of her father's home and stone her to death in front of him.

-As with all stonings, participation of the entire village is not optional. If you don't help with the stoning, you will be stoned to death yourself. Not believing in the religion is no excuse either.

-If the husband dies without a male heir, the wife is required to have sex with all his male relatives starting with his next-oldest brother until such an heir is produced. There is nothing in the text to account for her fertility, so if she is sterile this must continue indefinitely.

Etc.

[BeardedOne]

I voted "Yes".

People should receive the ultimate punishment for their sins, starting with Britney Spears' 55-hour fling.


From then on, anyone who decided to get married would have to think very hard about it, since it is forever. The way things are now, marriage is meaningless - it can be dissolved whenever you want.

Exactly. The institution of marriage (For people who like to live in institutions) is a universal joke in Western culture. My parents stayed together through thick and thin, throughout a tumultuous twenty-four year relationship because that's how their generation dealt with marriage. To this day I am puzzled that one or the other (Or both, as they each had sufficient reason to do so) never took one of my dad's M-1 parade rifles out of the closet and capped the other. If for no other reason than to experience a quiet, peaceful Sunday morning breakfast.

My 'ex' (A term I use in conversation as it tends to lessen the need for explanation) and I never married, though we had an on-again-off-again relationship for several years that produced a rather remarkable child (Now twenty-two years of age). When someone asked us why we hadn't married we chorused "Our favorite game show is Divorce Court!"

I had seen the never-ending grief of my parents and her dad had experienced more wives than I've had stray cats, so it wasn't a stretch to see that we were both hinky, at best, about marriage. We remain friends and, I'm glad to say, that when our son was old enough to understand these things, he saw that we'd made, for us, the right decision.

A similar feeling is held by the son (About the same age as mine) of the woman I refer to as "TW/The Wife" (A title, not a relationship). One wrecked marriage (With whom she is still friendly, the father of her son) and a couple of close-calls at the altar, and she has seen where this nonsense can lead. When her son commented, over dinner one night, "Mom, stop dating these losers! Why don't you marry him?" <Pointing at me> I was mortified, but intrigued. After a moment of thought, she looked at me, then at him, and said "I like him too much.".

Really, I wonder how many divorces there would be, percentage-wise, if this nation would get its collective head out of its ass and make marriage available to all people who truly want it.

[Hara_Juku Tgirl]

I think its perfect, if the people of California want to force the so-called christian version of marriage upon everyone else- they should be forced to abide by the entire concept of christian marriage.

This would show how much of a fanatical cult that religion is when followed to the letter of their holy text.

This would mean the following would have to be mandated by law:
-If a husband marries and finds his wife is not a virgin, he must take her to the front door of her father's home and stone her to death in front of him.

-As with all stonings, participation of the entire village is not optional. If you don't help with the stoning, you will be stoned to death yourself. Not believing in the religion is no excuse either.

-If the husband dies without a male heir, the wife is required to have sex with all his male relatives starting with his next-oldest brother until such an heir is produced. There is nothing in the text to account for her fertility, so if she is sterile this must continue indefinitely.

Etc.

LOL Very funny and entertaining, SarahG! They're trying to turn people into penguins! :lol:

~Kisses.

HTG

[SarahG]

They're a bunch of hypocrites who play selective-literacy ganes, screaming for literal interpretations only when it serves their agenda.

They should be forced to put their money where their mouth is, after what they did with Prop8.

[Silcc69]

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm

Explains the contradictions.

[SarahG]

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm

Explains the contradictions.

That's ok, there won't be any contradictions- just a steady stream of maddness- after they finish making this twisted revisionist version of the bible (http://conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project).

[Silcc69]

Somebody should go to a Wal-Mart and steal a bible that would be funny.

[ALYSINCLAIRxxx]

Yes, Chris, this is amazing! I love the idea.

If you fail to see the genius behind this idea, think of the sanctity of marriage statements all over the media. If they want to play hardball like that to keep a percentage of the population down, this is a great way to show the stupidity of the religious right movement.

I hope it passes.


It would force the anti-gay "pro-marriage" folk to put their money where their mouth is.

[BellaBellucci]

I think its perfect, if the people of California want to force the so-called christian version of marriage upon everyone else- they should be forced to abide by the entire concept of christian marriage.

This would show how much of a fanatical cult that religion is when followed to the letter of their holy text.

This would mean the following would have to be mandated by law:
-If a husband marries and finds his wife is not a virgin, he must take her to the front door of her father's home and stone her to death in front of him.

-As with all stonings, participation of the entire village is not optional. If you don't help with the stoning, you will be stoned to death yourself. Not believing in the religion is no excuse either.

-If the husband dies without a male heir, the wife is required to have sex with all his male relatives starting with his next-oldest brother until such an heir is produced. There is nothing in the text to account for her fertility, so if she is sterile this must continue indefinitely.

Etc.

I fall so madly in love with you whenever you say shit like this. Normally, I'd jokingly ask you to marry me, but frankly, I don't want to deal with the repercussions if it goes sour. :P

~BB~

[SarahG]

I fall so madly in love with you whenever you say shit like this. Normally, I'd jokingly ask you to marry me, but frankly, I don't want to deal with the repercussions if it goes sour. :P

~BB~

Repercussions if it goes sour... you mean the lack of an opting out protocol?

Since they're going for this "traditional family values" version of marriage husbands still have a way out by simply killing their wife. It's not sin (murder) if what they're killing is property (i.e. livestock) so it would be perfectly kosher. If the wife wants out, that's too bad- if she is a "good" by the book christian she'll silently put up with any bullshit the husband has anyway.

This brings up another good point, we can't let these hypocrites flee to another state to get divorced. These reforms should include preventative-detention of all married christians in the state of California so they cannot leave the state. Only to keep it fair we should make sure it doesn't feel like prison... perhaps just fence in the whole state so they can have it to themselves. This should make them happy, after all they'd finally be getting their Christian nation-state that they've been trying to turn America into for the last ~388 years.

That wouldn't be a perfect solution, because they'd still have vice at their disposal like science & technology. So after fencing in the state, all technology should be considered contraband and be confiscated. We could just send it all to needy 3rd world countries that could use it.

Then with this technology-void, fenced in state of California finished, it would be fitting to rename it. How about Eden?

[BellaBellucci]

Then with this technology-void, fenced in state of California finished, it would be fitting to rename it. How about Eden?

How about 'Utah?!' :P

~BB~

[tsmandy]

I think the adult industry should throw as much money into helping this pass as they possibly can. Hookers and porn will get the much needed stimulus they have been needing.

[BellaBellucci]

I think the adult industry should throw as much money into helping this pass as they possibly can. Hookers and porn will get the much needed stimulus they have been needing.

They? Are you excluding yourself?

~BB~

[tsmandy]

I think the adult industry should throw as much money into helping this pass as they possibly can. Hookers and porn will get the much needed stimulus they have been needing.

They? Are you excluding yourself?

~BB~

No.

[Faldur]

The out of work divorce attorneys would break the fragile california economy. Divorce attorneys must be at least 105% of our population.

[will802]

as someone who is most likely heading for a divorce after 12+ yrs I would not want the state tell me I have to stay married.

[TrannyCatcher]

The scary thing about this is that this lady is an elected official. Why not elect communist now, she is stripping people of the rights anyway.

[SarahG]

The scary thing about this is that this lady is an elected official. Why not elect communist now, she is stripping people of the rights anyway.

There is no need, the people of CA are quite profficient at stripping away the rights of others.

She would merely be giving them what they were demanding; marriage as a christian religious institution.

[will802]

Worst part of divorce is the effect on kids if any. Its where I am devoting all my time and effort. Ensuring the kids best interests are put first. Everything else is secondary to me

[trish]

The worst part of a bad marriage is also its effect on the children. Let's face it: kids are screwed either way.