Would it be a good idea to change our laws to allow for divorce ONLY in cases of adultery?

Question

But, allowing it only in cases of adultery is in line with Biblical teachings. And they're good - right?

(((link955)))

Answer 1

Unfortunately, there are usually too many other good reasons for divorce (although mine did end due to adultery... hers, not mine). I'm rapidly beginning to believe what sociologists and psychologists have concluded: Humans are not capable of monogamy. Spousal abuse, alcohol and drugs, and just general incompatibility break up a lot of marriages. Those who can stay married have my admiration... and a little envy.

(((((YKI)))))

Answer 2

No. When the Pharisees asked Jesus about that, the Christ knew what they were doing. And He answered 'them', not everyone else.
At that time the Pharisee's were divorcing their wives of old and taking up a younger woman for themselves. Jesus knew this. He knew they were looking for a way out and someone to assuage the guilt as well as condone their actions!!
Go figure.
Well if you study the times and the laws of the Nation of Israel you will find that a woman can divorce her husband if she has just cause, and it doesn't have to be adultery. She can file for divorce with the Sadducee's if she finds that she cannot live with the STINK of her husbands trade. In those days a tanner used pig feces to tan the hides. Do you think he came home smelling like a rose? Uh-uh.
There are other reasons for divorce but what the Pharisees got was a straight answer from the Christ. He told "them" you can't divorce 'your' wives for anything but adultry. Jesus said this because He knew that the women of the Pharisees have done all they could and were still doing the best they could for their husbands (the Pharisees) but yet the men of the Pharisee were dumping the women on the street and leaving them destitute!! For younger flesh, and any excuse would do!
Jesus said no!
To-day? Pastor's, Priest's, and the clergy will not listen to a woman's tale about beatings, hunger, rent gone to the bottle, or cruelty from their husbands with any sort of satisfying solvent to the family's woes. They ask instead..."have you caught him in adultry"? and if she hasn't the naive clergy speak about ways of sustaining the beatings for the sake of a marraige. They don't see that there is no marraige with a cruel spouse wether it be the male or female.
They just look at what Jesus said to the Pharisees without understanding what was truly said and why.
So ...no I would have to say that "to change our laws for divorce ONLY in cases of adultry" would be commiting some poor souls to a term of decades living a hell on earth. I would not change the laws.

Answer 3

Yes, and no.
Allowing divorce for the act of adultery would be helpfull but I don't think that could be the only reason.
You also should consider reasons like abuse, or if they didn't love each other anymore. Or for some other reason, one spouse has become a burden rather than a joy to live with and care for in sickness and health (etc..) and they could no longer live happily.

So it is a good idea, but I don't think its possible to limit laws just do that. I think that we could, however, limit divorces by investigating and seeing what the problem was and making sure it couldn't be worked through.

Answer 4

I remember being told the three A's which are the ONLY grounds for divorce: 1) Adultery 2) Abuse and 3) Addiction.The last one is to either drugs, alcohol, porno, and they will/can not stop.

Answer 5

Our laws used ot be that way - and in some states you still have to provide proof that the other was cheating on you.

This makes for very messy, very nasty divorces, with the entire family getting drug through the mud and extending the length of time a bad marriage is forced to stay together.

That situation caused many spouses to just abandon their families in the past.

The only ones who benefit form a law like that are lawyers and private detectives.

That's almost like saying - "we don't care if your spouse has beat you so hard you've been hospitalized 6 times this year, you have to stay married to them" or "it's fine if your spouse molests the kids, you have to stay married to them"

Unacceptable in my book.

Answer 6

No it would NOT be a good idea. There are several very severe situations that call for a divorce like physical or emotional abuse or spousal rape or child abuse to name a few. I am all for doing all you can to work on your marriage and make it loving and successful, but there are limits as to what a partner should be able to get away with in a marriage.

Answer 7

Only if you want the rate of 'accidental death' to go through the ruff!

Jokes aside, No , i think that would be a horrible idea, rather just let the people really know each other, and possibly go through something similar to the story in -license to wed-

Answer 8

No because there's a million other reasons why divorce would be a good choice.I'm Catholic so i'm suppose to be apposed to divorce all together but I think that if there's good reason like abuse then you might wanna get out of the marriage.Bottom line,maybe adultery,yes,but abuse too.

Answer 9

I don't really agree with that. A lot of times people's marriages end up just being a mistake. If two people don't want to be together they wont. It doesn't matter whether it says they are legally married or not they will be divorced in their own way.

Answer 10

no.

that would basically be forcing people to stay in an unhappy relationship which would be detrimental to the well being of both and of any others involved, like children.

also it would lead to adultery being the only answer to a failing marriage which would then lead to the widespread idea that adultery is ok if you are unhappy. it's like legalizing adultery almost.

and that's one societal norm we don't need right now.