Some conservatives want to make it a lot harder to dissolve a marriage.

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.

    • Carmakazi@lemmy.world
      38·
      13 days ago

      If the only families pumping out kids are Christian crackpots, that’s a win for them. They want to out-breed you.

        • morphballganon@lemmy.world
          131·
          13 days ago

          usually

          Please cite your source for that. The religious nutters who are adults now were once kids of religious families themselves.

          • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
            131·
            13 days ago

            Christianity in the U.S. is quickly shrinking and may no longer be the majority religion within just a few decades, research finds

            https://www.cbsnews.com/news/christianity-us-shrinking-pew-research/

            Losing their religion: why US churches are on the decline

            https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/22/us-churches-closing-religion-covid-christianity

            In U.S., Decline of Christianity Continues at Rapid Pace

            https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/

            Pick a study we are in a decline for a reason. The craziest ones are the most motivated but they are the few.

            • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldEnglish
              81·
              12 days ago

              The xtian activists definitely are aware of this overall trend (even if many of them will outright lie about it and many of the flock probably still think they are some kind of supermajority even if they have been losing adherents at about 1% every year for year after year) and it’s exactly why they are agitating to fundamentally change this country to a xtian one.

              They want to be able to COMPEL people to join/stay in their little book club. The only difference between xtian radicals and Islamists is where the retconning leaves off is different. Both of them worship the same god of “the” bible - Allah/Yahweh/Jehovah and both of them have the same dim view of unbelievers and women and outsiders, etc…

              • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
                2·
                12 days ago

                Both of them worship the same god of “the” bible - Allah/Yahweh/Jehovah and both of them have the same dim view of unbelievers and women and outsiders, etc…

                I agree, all religion is backwards. There’s always a group they don’t like. It just changes depending on your “God’s” region of authority.

              • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
                1·
                12 days ago

                Man - I know most folks feel the best thing to do is get rid of religion all together - but at this stage I’d settle for and support a new, loud, and active Christian sect denouncing xtian radicals and the churches that support them as Satanic corruptions.

                Believe Old Testament and its edicts mean a damn practical thing in today’s world? Satan.

                Insisting on not rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s? Satan.

                Treating your fellow humans as lesser for anything whatsoever? Satan.

                Corrupting Bible verses to justify creating suffering and not rendering aid to anyone who needs it? 100% Satan.

                Forcing means to reduce anyone’s capacity to exercise free will, the one key thing their creator deity granted all humans? Sounds like Satan to me.

                And so on. I realize this is deeply naive. But part of the reason I like The Louvin Brother’s song Satan is Real is whenever I hear the guy’s testimony on Satan, I think about about people in the offending churches:

                I grew selfish, and un-neighbourly
                My friends turned against me
                And finally, my home was broken apart

                The Louvin Brothers themselves would likely vehemently disagree, but - does this sound like anyone you know?

                /end of vaguely spiritualist rant.

              • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
                1·
                8 days ago

                Small group grabbed a huge piece. They didn’t do that quietly. People stopped caring, became more self centered, and we lost sight of communities. We allowed this shit and we need to start voting like it.

        • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
          8·
          12 days ago

          Slight non sequitur, but slightly connected (welcome to my brain). Anyone can safely ignore this long, rambling comment.

          There’s a series of books called The Laundry Files by Charles Stross. It starts off as kind of an HP Lovecraft meets spy novel meets a sys admin workplace humor thing. Somewhere in there, I think it’s the 4th book, there’s one called The Apocalypse Codex that deals with a quiverful group of Christian true believers that are accidentally worshipping an otherworldly horror and using parasites to “save” folks. It even features a forced birth center. I’ve known quiverfull, prosperity gospel, literalist folks my entire life, but every time I hear about quiverfull people I still think about that novel. I can highly recommend the series if anything I wrote above sounds remotely interesting, especially if you can get the audiobooks. Here’s one of my favorite passages from that book:

          “They’re believers, Mr. Howard. Pentecostalist dispensationalists—they are saved, but they are surrounded by the unsaved, and they think their master is returning imminently, and anyone who isn’t saved by the time of his arrival is doomed. So they intend to save everyone whether or not they want to be saved, one brain parasite at a time.”

          Other than the extra-dimensional horror, I think the book pretty accurately describes the mindset of those people. The series metaphor for modern society is so good that he had to delay and rewrite the last book because the original plan, prior to the pandemic, was to have the final resolution be a highly contagious disease.

      • AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world
        111·
        13 days ago

        And with child marriage looking to make a comeback, you can bet your ass that arranged marriage will also return.

        Turns out the full Biblical definition of marriage is again, women and girls have no say in who they marry. Just wait. First they legalize child marriage, then they legalize arranged marriage. Got a debt to pay off? Just offer the guy you owe money to your daughter. Want to move up the social ladder at work? Have your daughter marry into a higher class. Don’t worry about what she wants. Marriage isn’t about “love”, whatever that is. It’s a tool for moving up in the world. /s

        But it’s almost like they want European-style feudalism back. The CEOs and billionaires become the new nobility, and we all become serfs, and we are basically already there. But, I have a plan. I’ll join my liege lord’s army and hopefully I’ll serve honorably enough that he shall award me a fief and small parcel of land. Then y’all can move in and become my serfs!

    • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
      7·
      12 days ago

      I was married, later divorced, and am now in a position where I’ve been in a committed relationship for more than 10 years, but we aren’t married.

      The benefits are clear and pushed onto us: I can’t share health care with my partner if we aren’t married. The system is rigged to make people in relationships eventually get married.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        2·
        12 days ago

        What state do you live in if you don’t mind me asking. Many states have rules that would allow you to add them to their insurance if you live together for a length of time. A year for AZ is what popped up when I went to search because I’m here on a work trip.

      • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
        2·
        12 days ago

        This is why my husband and I got married after 10 years together. Originally neither of us cared because we were essentially already married. But doing it officially then I could be on his insurance, and if anything happens where one of us gets incapacitated the other can make healthcare decisions. Sucks that’s how it works though.

    • Zozano@lemy.lol
      4·
      12 days 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.