185 points

Let’s be honest here… they don’t have a problem with no fault divorce in principal… they have a problem with women being able to file for divorce on their own.

permalink
report
reply
31 points

Let’s dig a little deeper.

The only reason to make divorce harder is if they also take away a woman’s rights to be independent from her husband, otherwise she could just leave without getting a divorce.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Do you realise women are even allowed to have a bank account nowadays? Madness!

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Principle*

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

No man is a principality

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

I think this needs further clarification

They have a problem with their wives being able to divorce them on their own.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Divorce is a decision that should be left up to the man. /s

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

“You can’t get divorced until I say so!” Yeesh.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

My dishwasher can’t decide to just leave my property on its own, why should my other dishwasher?

permalink
report
parent
reply
89 points
*

If you force the peasants to stayed paired off and breed, especially in desperate, abusive conditions, they will produce the best kind of exploitation livestock for our glorious capitalist owners: the desperate kind that tolerates any abuse.

permalink
report
reply
30 points
*

Human stock. That’s what we are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

That’s why they find our empathy for livestock to be a joke not worth enforcing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

We have all just accepted the term “Human Resources” as something that I guess we aren’t going to revolt against

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Honestly, prices go up any higher and its revolt and lose my house or dont revolt and lose my house.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Actually, slaves. We are held back by those in power, ignored, taught to hate those different than ourselves, paid just enough to survive and abused. We know this and we’re too scared to do anything about it because any fight we give needs us all, or we risk those in power taking away those few things or placing us in prison.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Sounds like we have nothing to lose anyway, then.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Sounds like good way to end marriage. The only benefit is tax related.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So marriage is ultimately more capitalist tax break bullshit?

permalink
report
parent
reply
80 points

My ex-wife and I filed the requisite paperwork and a month or so later met downtown at the courthouse to finalize our petition for a no-fault divorce. We had filled out some of the paperwork incorrectly, scooted over to the law library around the corner and returned less than an hour later to wrap things up, paying a fee so incidental I couldn’t be bothered to remember the amount.

No-fault is a near necessity for folks that want to take the high road out of a shitty situation. Going on to think of the massive cost savings, we’re left not only with religion to blame for the curtailing of our rights under law, but also perhaps the legal profession that spawned many of these legislators. Fuck them all.

permalink
report
reply
32 points

They don’t give a crap about religion. That’s always been just something to motivate gullible idiots. Look at the stupidest and cringiest billionaire constantly whining about racial superiority and needing to breed people etc. they want you to work and they want 60% of whatever you create or labor for and they want you to have children that you pay for college for. They want you to rent your own slave quarters in buildings that they own. When I read history and compare it to ourselves, I can’t help but think we’re livestock that has been trained to be docile. At any other point in history, somebody would have murdered the worst offenders gleefully. They either managed to program us well or convince us to never do anything because we’re so comfortable at the cost of destroying the environment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Panem et circenses, baby!

As long as people are kept fed and entertained, they will tolerate a lot of bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

They’ve rigged the system, no real surprise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

somebody would have murdered the worst offenders gleefully

We have food, so much food that the majority of people are obese. We have entertainment, cheap. Bread and circuses like never before.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

When I read history and compare it to ourselves, I can’t help but think we’re livestock that has been trained to be docile. At any other point in history, somebody would have murdered the worst offenders gleefully.

People in other points in history spent generation after generation living under much worse conditions without murdering their oppressors. Don’t romanticize the past.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points
*

As big fan of the original constitution, I personally don’t believe in any laws or technology from after March 4, 1789.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Let me own a tank damnit!

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Found the tankie!

That’s what that means right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Own a musket for home defense, since that’s what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. “What the devil?” As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he’s dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it’s smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, “Tally ho lads” the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion. He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up. Just as the founding fathers intended.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Upvoted for choice comment and hysterical username.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Marriage is just made up. People can partner off with no need for state intervention.

permalink
report
reply
73 points

Yes, but if the married couple across the street are getting tax and other advantages simply for being married that you and your unmarried partner are not getting, then that is an injustice. Either no one should get such advantages or any pair of people regardless of gender or race should be able to get them. Either get rid of state marriage or let anyone get married.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Easy: Just form a corporation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

“We got married” becomes “We incorporated a Delaware LLC that manages our assets through a Swiss Trust”

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

They seem to have more rights than real people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I think the people making the rules have other things in mind. Not fairness.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

End state marriage tax breaks and please do religious exceptions next.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

100%

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

This is a straw man.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

There are a shit ton of laws built around the idea of marriage. Your spouse has rights to make medical decisions, inhabit and inherit property, share custody of children and property, sign certain documents, and stuff you probably never think about. Marriage equality is not an exercise in vanity, it really makes a difference when the government recognizes your special relationship and commitment. It also makes divorce so important, because the ability to sever that relationship is the only way to untangle all of those rights and responsibilities to each other.

It would be better to have a different concept of contractual family, one that permits for more granularity and possibilities. But that ain’t what we got. Requiring demonstrations of fault to grant a divorce is just another way for shitty people to abuse other people. Prior to no-fault divorce, it wasn’t uncommon for judges to say things like “that’s not really spousal abuse” or “that’s not really rape” and then deny the divorce.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yup, this was one of the central debates with gay marriage vs. civil unions, so many LGBT+ couples were absolutely screwed pre-Obergefell by one of the partners getting sick or dying, and the surviving partner either having no say in medical decisions or getting screwed out of inheritance because the sick/dead partner’s family was anti-gay and froze the surviving partner out of everything.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Don’t worry, they’ll reduce women back to property, so being unmarried, unowned property will be VERY dangerous for the property.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.4K

    Posts

  • 110K

    Comments