Before the 1960s, it was really hard to get divorced in America.

Typically, the only way to do it was to convince a judge that your spouse had committed some form of wrongdoing, like adultery, abandonment, or “cruelty” (that is, abuse). This could be difficult: “Even if you could prove you had been hit, that didn’t necessarily mean it rose to the level of cruelty that justified a divorce,” said Marcia Zug, a family law professor at the University of South Carolina.

Then came a revolution: In 1969, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan of California (who was himself divorced) signed the nation’s first no-fault divorce law, allowing people to end their marriages without proving they’d been wronged. The move was a recognition that “people were going to get out of marriages,” Zug said, and gave them a way to do that without resorting to subterfuge. Similar laws soon swept the country, and rates of domestic violence and spousal murder began to drop as people — especially women — gained more freedom to leave dangerous situations.

Today, however, a counter-revolution is brewing: Conservative commentators and lawmakers are calling for an end to no-fault divorce, arguing that it has harmed men and even destroyed the fabric of society. Oklahoma state Sen. Dusty Deevers, for example, introduced a bill in January to ban his state’s version of no-fault divorce. The Texas Republican Party added a call to end the practice to its 2022 platform (the plank is preserved in the 2024 version). Federal lawmakers like Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) and House Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, have spoken out in favor of tightening divorce laws.

  • Zozano@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 months ago

    Isn’t this the same argument as “if women can’t have abortions, they will stop having sex”?

    Nobody gets married under the assumption they will get divorced. Marriage is supposed to be a gesture of a life long commitment.

    On top of that, there are financial benefits to getting married.

    I highly doubt this would stop anyone from getting married.

    People should stop getting married because it’s a government contract based in religion - it’s gross and I don’t want either of those things being involved in my relationships.

    • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I fully agree marriage should be simple with little to no government or religion involvement. That’s why we see less people getting married or if they do it’s later in life.

      The only real reason to get married now is financial and health benefits. That’s it.

      Making it harder to divorce will lead to the ones waiting to rethink if it’s even worth it.

      https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2020/12/united-states-marriage-and-divorce-rates-declined-last-10-years.html

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Marriage rates have already been dropping and divorce is an available option. Removing that out isn’t going to increase people’s confidence about going into marriage.

      And as the nightmare stories come out about the guys (and probably some girls, too) who change overnight once the marriage license is official (or annulment period ends or whatever becomes the “now you’re locked in as long as I don’t get caught cheating”), it’ll only go down further.

      There will also be a reaction to the women who decide to just stop being loyal once they are done with a marriage but can’t get out.