King Arts
Well-known member
Yes someone can be a good stepdad or stepmom, but surely you understand that kids are better with a stable home. That means not moving every week from one house to another right? Even if the divorced couple are stile amicable with each other.It's logical considering I've heard plenty of horror stories from before no fault divorce as well as examples of people finding any marrying someone more compatible with themselves who is a good step-parent for their children. I'd put up the Dadvocate's family as an example of this, with neither of them hating their exes.
LOL. Aren't you being kinda unreasonable and delusional here? I have not brought up religion here, and I don't think anyone else on the other side has either. Mrttao is an atheist Jew, and Marduk has bitched about my confessional politics before. They still support this even with secular reasons. So blanket calling your opponents theocrats is both uncivil and a red herring.No, I don't need you as a middle-man. I've already told you I'm basically done with you because of your constant anti-liberty stance on basically everything. Go found some theocracy on some isolated Pacific island somewhere where you and other weirdos like yourself will be happy.
To be fair even if you were king or dictator your power isn't absolute. The king of Saudi Arabia can't decide one day to make the state religion satanism and go completely against Islam. He needs support of other people to not get couped.Those are some very different scenarios
If I was king, my word would be law. I would write up a comprehensive reform without needing to compromise with anyone about anything. all I would have are advisors.
If I was a senator, then by definition I would be one of many, compromise would be a given.
However, I cannot imagine the other side ever giving us an inch in compromise. As such, the only time we could possibly enact a change would be when we have a solid majority such that we don't even need to listen to the other side. Because demonrats never compromise.
Any compromise would be between me and other conservative senators.
I do agree that the situation for childless couples is different compared to if there are children involved.
The barriers to divorce with children should be significantly harder than divorce without children.
In the case of childless separation. well my only issues with it is that it is a vehicle for divorce raping men. and people violating oaths.
Ban common law marriage, ban alimony, respect prenups, and a few other things would have to be part of such a compromise.
although it still irks me that we are encouraging people to be filthy liars who just take then break oaths at a whim.
But most of what we know from those other societies(besides Mormons) are from the rich and the kings and empeors and sultans. So of course for that position harem politics could lead to civil war, and the leader should probably be monogomous. But for lower ranking people the negative effects might not be drastic.From what we do know of those other societies, it gets you absolutely bonkers and definitely toxic intra-family politics with parents and relatives favoring *their* blood related children over the other children in the same family, and even if not, constant suspicion and accusations of them doing so.
To be fair it's not cheating if the rules the couple set for themselves allow it. It is adultery but it might not be cheating if that makes sense.Yep.
Either they have someone already lined up or they've already cheated.