Will gay marriage advocates join social conservatives in opposing no-fault divorce legislation in Empire State?
With the notable exception of such folk like Jonathan Rauch and David Blankenhorn, most advocates and opponents of gay marriage would rather level accusations against their opponents on this issue than actually engage their arguments (see, e.g., Judge Walker’s opinion in Perry v. Schwarzenegger)
The advocates tell us that the opponents are meanies who just plain hate gay people while the opponents (like some bozos running for Senate in Arizona), in the highest of dudgeon, warn that state recognition of gay marriage will lead to parade of horribles, including interspecies marriage. And while the opponents of same-sex marriage warn that state recognition of same-sex marriage will damage the institution, they do little to undo long-enacted laws that has already harmed marriage far more than gay marriage ever could.
Last month, I wrote about the last state to hold out on passing one of those laws:
New York [is] set to become the “last state” to “adopt no-fault divorce”. Now, I’m sure some social conservatives are opposing such legislation. Those who don’t while continuing to oppose state recognition of same-sex marriage, are just plain not sincere about their support for the institution and the ideals which undergird it.
Well, ya’ gotta give credit where it’s due. One such social conservative, Mike McManus, President of Marriage Savers, penned a column “urging Gov. Paterson to veto” the bill.” Kudos to Mr. McManus.
Now, let’s hope Evan Wolfson, Executive Director of “Freedom to Marry”, and other leading advocates of gay marriage show they’re serious about the institution they wish to open to gay people by joining McManus in pushing Governor Paterson to veto this anti-marriage legislation.
3 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
ended up at Wiki to read up on No-Fault divorce and this popped up
“No-fault” divorce was pioneered in the United States by the state of California when Governor Ronald Reagan signed into law the Family Law Act of 1969 on September 4, 1969 (effective January 1, 1970).
Comment by rusty — August 12, 2010 @ 10:55 am - August 12, 2010
but then in the same article
National Organization of Women New York State chapter leader Marcia Pappas has argued:
Approximately 95 percent of divorce cases in New York are resolved by the parties themselves, not by the judge, without going to court. This is the best possible process. No-fault takes away any bargaining leverage the non-moneyed spouse has. Currently she can say, “If you want a divorce I’ll agree, but you have to work out a fair agreement.” We must look at the socioeconomic standing of women in our society. Women clearly continue to be the non- or lesser moneyed spouse, as women continue to give up careers and financial independence for the role of housewife and mother. For this reason alone we must look closely at how divorce affects the lives of women and children and the role that the state should play to ensure that homemakers and children not be left destitute after divorce.
Comment by rusty — August 12, 2010 @ 10:59 am - August 12, 2010
[...] Divorce is Institutionalized Evil“), but all you really need to know is that both Gay Patriot and the Heritage Foundation are against no-fault divorce. When they think it will advance their [...]
Pingback by Right-Wing Utopia: Gays Can’t Marry and Straights Can’t Divorce « SpeakEasy — August 13, 2010 @ 12:35 pm - August 13, 2010