Login/Sign Up




Should getting divorce be easy?
Society

jbilyeu
Oct 05, 2007
12 votes
11 debaters
2
1


+ Add Argument

5
getting divorced should not be easy


dirtpatch
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
it should be equally as easy as getting married. if you can run into a storefront in vegas and get married in 5 mins, you should also be able to run into a storefront in vegas and get divorced in 5 minutes.

 
jbilyeu
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I feel as though getting divorced has become to easy of thing for married people to do. To me it seems like many people today get married knowing that if thingsdon't work out the way they want they can just go to court and get divorced without ever having to ever work on their marriage. What ever hapened to untill death do you part? I can understand if there are extenuating circumstances in which a person must get out of their marriage because it could mean life or death. Other than that, given celeberties for example there are numerous cases in which they get married to each other and then divorce a couple months later. They have turned the sacrament of mariage into a joke. I don't believe that the court system should make divorce such a laxed and easy process, unless absolutley necesary.

 
dirtpatch
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: jbilyeu Show

no, i understood completely,, i dont feel that one person has a right to tell others what they can or cant do, if said actions dont harm any one.

i dont think divorce should be easy, or hard, i think it should be held in direct proportion to the ease of marriage.

if people are "allowed" the choice to marry at whim, they should also be "allowed" the choice to divorce at whim.

 
thales
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: juggernaut Show

"No good"? Says who?

Really: what could it possibly mean to you how other people choose to live their private lives?

 
thales
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: helpme Show

My objection is the apparent presumption that he knows what those lives should mean, and how to force them to do so.

 
helpme
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Maybe we should abolish marriage. That would make this topic moot.

 
dirtpatch
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: cbart95 Show

no, what i have a problem with, is the double standard applied in this case.

If people were required to go to a judge and petition for marriage then have said judge mandate the couple to counseling, and base his decision on whether or not the couple could get married, based on the counselors opinion,, you would cry "foul!"

but it seems that same procedure is ok by people, if in reverse.

 
mastershin
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: cbart95 Show

Just on the mere surface this is a clear and blunt ad hominem. You are addressing a fellow debater in a coarse manner, instead of replying to his arguments.

From reading the actual words, it is also clear this is an ad antiquitatem.
Just because society works some way does not mean it to be right.

And finally, related to the latter, the fact that our society is actually built upon marriage is a very interesting statement. But, is it true?

 
sandifromlargo
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: cbart95 Show

"Our society is founded on the principle of strong family relations based on the institution of marriage.
These become the basis of all of our other social and legal principles. "

With the current percentage of divorces in the USA, I believe this statement no longer holds true for our society. Although our society was founded on that principle, it has since become antiquated and obsolete.


AND if you will start the debate on the time of day, I am sure we can all humor you and debate an opposing point of view. Perhaps we could also debate on your rudeness and insults. Bet we could get the requisite 10 points to win quickly!


 
jbilyeu
Oct 08, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: helpme Show

I'm not really sure I understand what you mean by "don't we all practice divorce while dating"? I thought that was the difference between dating and marriage. That to me is why people date so hopefully when they do get married they don't make those mistakes and need to get divorced.

 
helpme
Oct 09, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: wicked Show

You mean you would want to take my freedom to be married away?

One defenition of freedom is unconstraint. I do not want to live in an unconstrained country. Which we, in the US, do not.

 
+ Add Argument

7
getting divorced should be easy


thales
Oct 05, 2007
2 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: jbilyeu Show

No-fault divorces save lives.

Seriously. My mother had to get divorced back in New York's pre-no-fault dark ages, and it got incredibly ugly (there was violence and a kidnapping involved). And those were two people from nice families who hold advanced degrees (both in law, ironically)--I am 100% positive that there are any number of cases that were much, much worse.

Lawmakers aren't--or shouldn't be--in the business of punishing victimless personal mistakes. That's what we have fascist states for.

 
juggernaut
Oct 05, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: dirtpatch Show

But that really adds to the decision of marraige. If divorces were easier, people would be marrying recklessly. No good.

 
jbilyeu
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: dirtpatch Show

I'm not really sure that you understand. I think you meant to write your comment on the other side. Besides what we are debating is whether or not divorce should be easy, not marriage. That is a whole seperate issue. I also feel that marriage should be taken alot more serious.

 
mastershin
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I agree with dirtpatch, divorce should be equally hard as getting married.
With this in mind, since it is easy to get married, it should be easy to get divorced (if this changed, my argument would change accordingly).

By allowing a couple to marry with ease, a government assures the couple that it has no responsibility on the couple's actual relationship.
If it claims no such responsibility, the government can not be allowed to later interfere with the couple's relationship, as it did not at the time of marriage.

The government's direct view on the sacrament of marriage is bluntly exposed when they allow a drunk couple, that met an hour prior, to get married.

It would be hypocritical to turn a blind eye on a couple making a mistake, but not turn the blind eye on a couple correcting it.

 
helpme
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: thales Show

the lives of people, private or public, always has influence on others. So one life means something to another life.

 
helpme
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: jbilyeu Show

Don't we all practice divorce while dating? Dating makes us all disposable. If you don't like him, get rid of him. No wonder people want easy divorces.

 
cbart95
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: dirtpatch Show

You appear to have a whole major objection to the very idea of social rules and customs to the point that you just might argue the time of day.

Our society is founded on the principle of strong family relations based on the institution of marriage.
These become the basis of all of our other social and legal principles.

For the moment, you appear to be blind to the basis of a civilized society. That's a serous handicap for productive living in todays society.

As a fellow traveler, many of us pray that wisdom will come to you and that you will have a happy,productive life.

 
gogopoet
Oct 05, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Humans are serial monogamists. This crap about till death do you part was dreamed up by a bunch of guys who didn't want to lose the dowry's that came with the goods they bought.

 
cbart95
Oct 06, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: mastershin Show

Well are your questions meant to illicit responses?

And if they are, which language would you prefer them in?

I can barely converse cogently in English...and I don't speak Dead Scrotum (or whatever it is you included in your kittle pontification to me.)

Are we to infer that you somehow don't fully agree with one or more of us? And if you are the keeper of the flame of what "RIGHT" is, perhaps you may wish to share it with us kiddies?

 
loyaltubist
Oct 06, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
It should be just as easy as getting married.

 
helpme
Oct 09, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: jbilyeu Show

Divorce is already too easy.

I was suggesting that one reason that people are so inclined to divorce is because dating creates throw-away relationships. You need NO reason to get rid of your "practice" spouse. people normally have many, many "practice spouses" while dating. We practice get rid of so many "practice spouses" that it becomes easier all the time. We create a disposable mentality in regards to relationships.

For this reason, I think, dating often can be detrimental to marriage, not a benefit.

Society seems to play my theory out. Short term "dating relationships" and short term marriages.



 
wicked
Oct 09, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
As far as I'm concerned the institute of marriage should be abolished entirely.

But aside from that, there's no point shoving beaurocratical obstacles in front of people who want to get divorced. In a free country, it's their right to choose whether to stay married or not, any attempt to make it "harder" is taking away their freedom.

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

Abortion alcohol america Animal animals army art ban BBC black Britain British Capitalism child children Chinese Communism control convinceme council Court crime criminal culture death death penalty Debate Democracy drugs Economy education England english equality ethics EU evil food Frankie Freedom Gay girls good Government Great Britain health House of Lords human illegal Internet Islam Judge Justice language Law lawyer Legal lesbian Liberty life love marijuana marriage men money morals murder music Muslim Obama opinion parenting parents peace people police politics poor Porn pregnancy prison privacy punishment race racism religion Responsibility Rich Rights School science sex slavery smoking social society Students suicide technology terrorism the UK UN United Kingdom united states USA VanCam Video Games violence war weed white women world