Lawmaker wants to ban no-fault divorce. Guess the party...

Jun 14, 2004
645
10
313
#1
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...can-lead-to-promiscuous-kids-88426.html?hp=l5


Iowa pol: Easy divorce can lead to promiscuous kids
By: Kevin Robillard
March 5, 2013 12:48 PM EST

Iowa Republicans are pushing to eliminate no-fault divorce for parents in the state, with one lawmaker citing his fear that his granddaughter could become “promiscuous” after her parents split up.
“This basically is an attempt on my part to keep fathers in the home,” GOP state Rep. Tedd Gassman said at a hearing on the legislation, according to Radio Iowa. “I sincerely believe that the family is the foundation of this nation and this nation will go the direction of our families. If our families break up, so will this nation.”
Gassman is sponsoring the bill along with six other Republicans. A three-person subcommittee voted to approve the bill Monday, and a full committee could hear the bill later this week.
Gassman cited his daughter’s recent divorce as a reason he was pushing the bill.
“There’s a 16-year-old girl in this whole mix now,” Gassman said. “Guess what? What are the possibilities of her being more promiscuous? What are the possibilities of all these other things surrounding her life that a 16-year-old girl, with hormones raging, can get herself into?”
Under the law, one of the partners in a marriage would have show that their spouse was guilty of adultery, had been convicted of a felony or had abandoned the family for a full year to qualify for a divorce. Parents could also get a divorce after living apart for two years.
No-fault divorce, which allows a couple to split without any evidence of wrongdoing, is a relatively recent development in the United States. Ronald Reagan signed the first no-fault divorce law as governor of California in 1969, and the 49 other states have adopted the measure since. (New York was the last do so, in 2010.)
Domestic violence victims’ groups are battling the bill, arguing the law could make life more dangerous for victims. According to the Iowa legislature’s website, the Family Leader — a social conservative group that made waves in the 2012 Republican caucus — supports the legislation.
He just told the entire world his granddaughter already is or is about to become a raging whore.
 
Dec 8, 2004
49,485
21,309
693
Maine
#2
Ya no-fault is fine... as long as you don't have real estate or kids involved... then it's a treat.

Like one of our friends no-fault divorce has been going on for like umm 2... 3 years... dunno how much it cost in legal fees.

Mind you beside the house, horses, boat there was also a dental practice involved. And a whole bunch of other shenanigans.

Mind you the other extreme was my buddies divorce... no real estate... one kid... think he spent all of $700 on a retainer and related court fees. Note his ex wife is on her third husband in 3 years.
 
Jun 14, 2004
645
10
313
#4
He should try banning something dangerous, like guns, right?
Changing the topic again Don? We are talking whether these Iowan republicans are right on trying to remove no-fault divorce. If you don't want to take a side then get out of the thread.
 

VicVinegar

Registered User
Oct 5, 2012
1,578
636
163
#5
Yes because the fact they are forced to stay married, a Dad who was previously going to ditch his kids is now going to stay home and be Ward Cleaver.

All to stop a practice of divorce started by that Godless liberal Ronald Reagan.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,250
12,980
438
Atlanta, GA
#6
The economy is in the shitter, the right to keep and bear arms is under all-out assault, illegal wiretapping is the law of the land, the Supreme Court upheld a forced commerce mandate, the President signed a bill formalizing the power of indefinite detention, the federal government wants to use drones to spy on its own citizens, and police departments are militarizing themselves in the name of the War on Drugs and public safety.

No-fault divorces are a serious issue.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#7
Changing the topic again Don? We are talking whether these Iowan republicans are right on trying to remove no-fault divorce. If you don't want to take a side then get out of the thread.
Not changing the topic. Calling you out for the "guess the party" bullshit. I'd rather representatives waste time on this stuff that'll never come to pass than destroy our important freedoms.
 
Jun 14, 2004
645
10
313
#9
Not changing the topic. Calling you out for the "guess the party" bullshit. I'd rather representatives waste time on this stuff that'll never come to pass than destroy our important freedoms.
So in your conservative universe being able to get out of a bad marriage is not an important freedom. Got it.
 

Buster H

Alt-F4
Wackbag Staff
Dec 6, 2004
12,244
2,725
678
Lower Bucks Co, PA
#10
Both parties have their bad sides. I'll take banning no-fault divorces if I can keep my guns.

It's quite simple for me. I've never been married. I had a few times where I was dating someone who wanted to Marry me. I knew it wasn't gonna last the distance, so I did something crazy. I didn't marry her.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#11
So in your conservative universe being able to get out of a bad marriage is not an important freedom. Got it.
I guess you never heard of a Reno divorce.

This will never pass. Meanwhile your boys are raising our taxes, putting my child's future in jeopardy, grabbing every gun they can, and crying in public when murderous dictators die.

It's not even close. Stupid beats out evil for my vote any day.
 

LineBackerU

There is a good chance I am blocking you.
Donator
Oct 14, 2002
1,807
979
858
#12
Evangelical Conservatism = Get government out of our lives... except for our bodies, bedrooms, and marriages. Small government... except when dealing with things Evangelicals find to be yuckie or immoral, then it is all about Big government, and laws, and Constitutional Amendments.
 

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
Jan 12, 2010
36,575
22,234
398
Northern California
#13
In the absence of children, the government should have no input on divorce beyond mitigating the terms of whatever contract two consenting adults felt like entering into... and in the absence of fraud those contracts should be honored completely, without one side being labeled a victim simply due to their gender.

The government should only step in to protect the rights of the children in the most dire circumstances... if the safety and well-being of the children is threatened by the disagreement of the parents.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#14
In the absence of children, the government should have no input on divorce beyond mitigating the terms of whatever contract two consenting adults felt like entering into... and in the absence of fraud those contracts should be honored completely, without one side being labeled a victim simply due to their gender.

The government should only step in to protect the rights of the children in the most dire circumstances... if the safety and well-being of the children is threatened by the disagreement of the parents.
I wouldn't have a problem with this.
But the fact remains that this won't pass.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#16
Why is that the choice? How about we ban neither?
We AREN'T banning no-fault divorce. That's the point. This isn't going to happen. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. This is the same as declaring next Tuesday National Turkey Sausage Day. Meanwhile, there is a full out assault on the Second Amendment. HURR DURR GUESS THE PARTY!!!!1!
 
Jun 14, 2004
645
10
313
#17
hahaha!

Anyways, how do you know if wont pass? If the vaginal ultrasound probe passed, then anything can. The stupidity of some elected people has no limits.
 
Last edited:
Feb 5, 2003
5,565
927
753
With a stranger
#18
We AREN'T banning no-fault divorce. That's the point. This isn't going to happen. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. This is the same as declaring next Tuesday National Turkey Sausage Day. Meanwhile, there is a full out assault on the Second Amendment. HURR DURR GUESS THE PARTY!!!!1!
Is "next Tuesday" the 12th or the 19th? Some people would say the 12th is "this Tuesday" since it's the next one but others would say it's "next Tuesday" since it's next week. I just want to make sure I get to the grocery store before they run out of turkey sausage. And please don't tell me that National Turkey Sausage Day isn't going to happen because you've already got my hopes up. I just need to know which day to request off from work.
 
Feb 5, 2003
5,565
927
753
With a stranger
#19
I'm sure this guy's daughter is thrilled with him telling everyone that he fears her 16-year old daughter will turn into the school slut because mommy and daddy don't love each other anymore. Clearly, it's much better for a kid to stay in a home where the parents scream and yell all the time. 1 home filled with hate > 2 homes filled with love. Now this girl will have 2 or 3 holes filled with love in a desperate attempt to show her parents how easy it is to get along.
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
18,079
5,491
838
Wilmington, NC
#20
Hopefully droogie was just reminding us that the Republican party does still have kooky religious wackjobs that think we need to craft legislation based on their own interpretation of what God would want us to do and not to do. And he's right in that sense.

With regards to the article, I'd rather make it easier for a couple to terminate a marriage, then force them to stay together because it would be too hard for them to get a divorce. Making them stay together and work through their problems sounds nice on the surface. But the overall health of the relationship may never recover, or could take years. And what would THAT do emotionally to the children caught in the middle? As Buster pointed out...people need to think a little more clearly before deciding to marry someone instead of just, essentially doing it on a whim and hoping for the best. Perhaps making it very tough (as if it were ever easy in the first place) to get a divorce could discourage a couple from getting married...but still, people need to be able to move on easily if there are irreconcilable differences. One thing these religious kooks wouldn't appreciate is the FACT that couples need to live and sleep together prior to marriage. That also helps determine if marriage can work.

The law they're proposing though, sounds like it still could be easy to get a divorce. I mean, one of their terms is requiring proof of adultery. So, if the married couple have irreconcilable differences and want to split...they can just provide proof that they committed adultery and be done with it? Unless of course, they want penalties for the spouse who committed adultery...

Only part I really agree with is the comment regarding family. Keeping families together and healthy is a very good thing, and we should be coming up with ways of encouraging that. We should entertain the idea of making divorces damn near impossible as a way of keeping families together for sure...but ultimately, it just is not realistic.

As for the other comments, yes, this country is on the brink of collapse thanks to the progressives in both parties. And that is a MUCH bigger problem then what the religious right are peddling at the moment. And unfortunately for the center-lefties, the far left progressives have complete control over the Democratic party (and control portions of the GOP) and pose a MUCH bigger threat at the moment.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#21
Hopefully droogie was just reminding us that the Republican party does still have kooky religious wackjobs that think we need to craft legislation based on their own interpretation of what God would want us to do and not to do. And he's right in that sense.

With regards to the article, I'd rather make it easier for a couple to terminate a marriage, then force them to stay together because it would be too hard for them to get a divorce. Making them stay together and work through their problems sounds nice on the surface. But the overall health of the relationship may never recover, or could take years. And what would THAT do emotionally to the children caught in the middle? As Buster pointed out...people need to think a little more clearly before deciding to marry someone instead of just, essentially doing it on a whim and hoping for the best. Perhaps making it very tough (as if it were ever easy in the first place) to get a divorce could discourage a couple from getting married...but still, people need to be able to move on easily if there are irreconcilable differences. One thing these religious kooks wouldn't appreciate is the FACT that couples need to live and sleep together prior to marriage. That also helps determine if marriage can work.

The law they're proposing though, sounds like it still could be easy to get a divorce. I mean, one of their terms is requiring proof of adultery. So, if the married couple have irreconcilable differences and want to split...they can just provide proof that they committed adultery and be done with it? Unless of course, they want penalties for the spouse who committed adultery...

Only part I really agree with is the comment regarding family. Keeping families together and healthy is a very good thing, and we should be coming up with ways of encouraging that. We should entertain the idea of making divorces damn near impossible as a way of keeping families together for sure...but ultimately, it just is not realistic.

As for the other comments, yes, this country is on the brink of collapse thanks to the progressives in both parties. And that is a MUCH bigger problem then what the religious right are peddling at the moment. And unfortunately for the center-lefties, the far left progressives have complete control over the Democratic party (and control portions of the GOP) and pose a MUCH bigger threat at the moment.

:action-sm
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,250
12,980
438
Atlanta, GA
#22
We AREN'T banning no-fault divorce. That's the point. This isn't going to happen. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. This is the same as declaring next Tuesday National Turkey Sausage Day. Meanwhile, there is a full out assault on the Second Amendment. HURR DURR GUESS THE PARTY!!!!1!
As usual, you've given a pass to republicans just because the bill won't succeed. Dealing with doomed bills still costs the taxpayer money and wastes time that could be dedicated to something important. Feel free to tell us all again how corruption in the form of ineffectual pandering isn't important. I'll be right here holding everyone accountable for everything they do like we should.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,250
12,980
438
Atlanta, GA
#24
As usual, you've given a pass to republicans just because the bill won't succeed. Dealing with doomed bills still costs the taxpayer money and wastes time that could be dedicated to something important. Feel free to tell us all again how corruption in the form of ineffectual pandering isn't important. I'll be right here holding everyone accountable for everything they do like we should.
What the fuck happened to the font in that last line? I fucking hate Xen's quoting and typing functions.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#25
As usual, you've given a pass to republicans just because the bill won't succeed. Dealing with doomed bills still costs the taxpayer money and wastes time that could be dedicated to something important. Feel free to tell us all again how corruption in the form of ineffectual pandering isn't important. I'll be right here holding everyone accountable for everything they do like we should.
Politicians are paid on salary. Every minute they spend tilting windmills is a minute they're not stealing our rights. This isn't wasting money, and wasting time is a good thing for these morons.

If this entire thread hadn't been designed as a troll thread, I would have said banning no fault divorce is a bad idea. But "guess the party" opens up for comparisons with truly fucking repugnant and evil people.