Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

North Carolina Republicans pushing bill to put two-year hold on all divorces


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,631 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 11:56 AM

Any article that starts with North Carolina Republicans is probably going to be something stupid.

North Carolina Republican lawmakers may have abandoned their plan to declare Christianity as the state’s religion, but conservative legislators in the state are still pushing forward with a plan to require a two-year waiting period on all divorces, a plan that require the couple to attend classes and workshops designed to prevent them from divorcing.

According to the Charlotte Observer, state Senators Austin Allran ® and Sen. Warren Daniel ® proposed the “Healthy Marriage Act” last week, which mandates a two-year wait before judges will grant married couples a divorce, two years during which they must complete counseling courses and workshops designed to improve “communication skills” and “conflict resolution.”

Couples in the state currently face a mandatory one year wait for divorces, but the Observer reported that the lines are blurry about what constitutes the end or resumption of a relationship.


The new law would “strike from the current law a provision that says ‘isolated incidents of sexual intercourse’ don’t count against” the legal waiting period, meaning that if the court can establish that a divorcing couple has had sex, it could potentially start their waiting period over.


http://www.rawstory....n-all-divorces/

#2 Gazi

Gazi

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,798 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 11:59 AM

It's getting more and more ridiculous

#3 TruthVsComfort

TruthVsComfort

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:20 PM

More on this subject:

But couples don't arrive at the decision to end their marriage lightly, and drawing out a divorce only throws more pain into a very deliberate decision, said Lisa Angel, a family law specialist at North Carolina's Rosen Law Firm.

"In 20 years of being a divorce attorney, I've never had a client ask for the waiting period to be longer," she said. "For most clients they have thought about this and agonized over this for years before they actually separate, so to extend that only causes more emotional and financial hardship for the family and children."

Angel said the bill's proposed reform allowing couples to continue living together during what is currently a mandatory separation poses risks for increased litigation. Current law equates a return to living under the same roof with reconciliation, Angel said, and most of the divorces she handles hinge on that definition.

The bill doesn't specify whether both spouses would have to consent to the arrangement, but Brooks said the decision would have to be mutual, and the language of the bill will be tightened as it progresses.

Those issues and the absence of exemptions for victims of domestic abuse show the bill has a long way to go, Angel said.

"Why should they participate in counseling with someone they feel puts their safety at risk?" Angel said. "I really think (the legislators) should talk to family law attorneys who are used to people going through separation and divorce."


http://abclocal.go.c...tics&id=9054531

#4 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,319 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:25 PM

Nothing has changed from the thread last week. Its still just two legislators. I will be surprised if it makes it out of the Rules and Operations committe.

#5 TruthVsComfort

TruthVsComfort

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:27 PM

I am cautiously optimistic that all these ridiculous proposed bills will come back to bite them in the next elections. No wonder why Republicans were out of power for over a century in our State. Look what they do as soon as they have a little bit of control - they poo their pants and cause our State to be national news for all the wrong reasons (national laughingstock).

#6 LongTriad

LongTriad

    Missunderstood

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,711 posts
  • LocationStokeridge

Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:34 PM

Dam them for passing laws that are most desired by the majority that elected them! Dam the majority!

#7 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,394 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:50 PM

That only makes it more of a national embarrassment.

#8 TruthVsComfort

TruthVsComfort

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:55 PM

Dam them for passing laws that are most desired by the majority that elected them! Dam the majority!



Really? You "most desire" exposure of women's breasts to be a felony? For there to be a state religion (this was "only" proposed, but the point remains--this is what they are wasting everyone's time and money on)? Really? You "most desire" the bible to be in public schools?

How about doing things that help our fuging economy? How about staying out of our personal lives (religion/marriage/divorce/tits)?

I would have thought the fiscally conservative policies would have been the "most desired." Not these backwards social policies. But at least we know there is at least one person that feels the idiotic proposed bills are what they "most desire."

#9 LongTriad

LongTriad

    Missunderstood

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,711 posts
  • LocationStokeridge

Posted 06 April 2013 - 12:58 PM

Really? You "most desire" exposure of women's breasts to be a felony? For there to be a state religion (this was "only" proposed, but the point remains--this is what they are wasting everyone's time and money on)? Really? You "most desire" the bible to be in public schools?

How about doing things that help our fuging economy? How about staying out of our personal lives (religion/marriage/divorce/tits)?

I would have thought the fiscally conservative policies would have been the "most desired." Not these backwards social policies. But at least we know there is at least one person that feels the idiotic proposed bills are what they "most desire."

Voters. Did you vote?

#10 TruthVsComfort

TruthVsComfort

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 01:04 PM

Of course I voted. I am guessing most people that post in the Tinderbox vote. By spending time in this forum you are showing interest in politics/etc.

#11 Gazi

Gazi

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,798 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 01:06 PM

Dam them for passing laws that are most desired by the majority that elected them! Dam the majority!

What majority?

#12 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,306 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 06 April 2013 - 01:14 PM

I just don't see any practical use for this. Is the court systems seriously backlogged and this would help? Uhh ok maybe.

Its frustrating because its classic majoring in the minors.

#13 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,790 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 06 April 2013 - 01:38 PM

"republican here, totally for small government and if the obama gun grabbers come knocking at my door i'll show 'em the end of my gun they DONT want to see because this is the land of the free and states rights and freedom isn't free and the 2nd amendment and khruschev said that the way to defeat the west is-"

The new law would “strike from the current law a provision that says ‘isolated incidents of sexual intercourse’ don’t count against” the legal waiting period, meaning that if the court can establish that a divorcing couple has had sex, it could potentially start their waiting period over.


"-yeahnoproblemanywaygetthegovernmentoutofthelittledetailsofourlives,i'msotiredofthesedamnLIEberalsthatareagainstlibertyandjusticeandjustwanttosuckoffthegovernment's

#14 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,394 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 02:02 PM

Dam them for passing laws that are most desired by the majority that elected them! Dam the majority!

Voters. Did you vote?

I'm going to assume you've never criticized Obama's policies before, since the majority of voters elected him.

#15 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,319 posts

Posted 06 April 2013 - 02:04 PM

I just don't see any practical use for this. Is the court systems seriously backlogged and this would help? Uhh ok maybe.

Its frustrating because its classic majoring in the minors.


I agree its an unneccessary change. I doubt it would have much of an impact on the court system one way or the other. But the odds of this becoming law are 1 in a hundred at best. Its one of many pieces of useless legislation introduced by congresses/legislatures everywhere. Fortunately, the vast majority of them never make it to the governor's desk.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.