Fox in Boston is reporting the upside-down-ness of our culture has reached the tipping point. We are now completely mad.
For generations, society looked askance at premarital sex. First, that was done away with so there was no shame at all to premarital sex. But now this would be the next step:
A new bill on Beacon Hill would ban parents from engaging in sexual relationships within the home until their divorces are final.
Supporters say the bill is meant to prevent domestic violence and shield children while the divorce is underway. Critics say it takes away parents rights.
Sooo…this bill would ensure that married people couldn’t have sex until their divorce? So much for liberals keeping government out of the bedroom, huh?
I’m sure this has no chance of passing but it’s truly awesome to point out how liberalism puts no limits on Big Government as long as it’s seemingly well intended to protect some minority group -as long as that group isn’t the unborn.
May 16, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Used to be in the olden days, before no-fault divorce, engaging in sexual relations would negate the divorce process. This may have not been true in all states, but it was so in Minnesota.
May 16, 2011 at 5:05 pm
Are they talking about sexual relationships between the married couple or between other people brought into the home (i.e. the other party in an affair)? I guess I naively assumed that having sex with someone other than your spouse in your own home was a common sense 'no-no' but then again, I have the tendency of giving people too much credit.
May 16, 2011 at 7:31 pm
Matt,
You might want to talk about, as a more important story, the literacy of local reporters. The bill actually says:
QUOTE
Section 31 of chapter 208 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2004 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph:-
In divorce, separation, or 209A proceedings involving children and a marital home, the party remaining in the home shall not conduct a dating or sexual relationship within the home until a divorce is final and all financial and custody issues are resolved, unless the express permission is granted by the courts.
END QUOTE
Link: http://www.malegislature.gov/Bills/187/Senate/S00851
May 16, 2011 at 7:41 pm
Matthew,
(In a not too serious vein)
I see how Catholics can use this to our advantage when discussing the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin.
Some have said that the language of Sacred Scripture indicates that the Blessed Virgin did not remain a virgin, and they point to the word "until": Joseph "knew her not until she had borne a son" (Mt 1:25).
Catholics say that the word "until" in this place does not mean that after she had borne a son, then Joseph "knew her". We say that it the word is limited to the time preceding the birth, and does not touch on any time period afterward.
We could use the same logic when discussing this ridiculous bill in Massachusetts: the idea being that from the moment divorce papers are filed, then there can be no maritial relations; and that the word "until" does not specify anything about the time afterward.
(Now, I'm not entirely serious about this. But, honestly, it was the first thing that I thought of when I read it.)
May 16, 2011 at 8:32 pm
@Adrienne: Marital relations with a spouse does nullify divorce proceedings. Marital relations with another, other than the spouse, would be actually adultery and could really mess up the divorce concerning children and rights. Forced relations is always rape and abuse. If one begins living with another in the marital arrangement who is going to get the social security payments???
May 16, 2011 at 8:36 pm
@Nicholas: Sacred Scripture says only what needs to be said. Not one word too many or too few. Reading Sacred Scripture requires the Holy Spirit.
May 17, 2011 at 1:17 am
It seems to me that if any part of the government can legislate a prohibition of sexual relations, in view of the present healthcare circumstances where the government is REQUIRING(AKA FORCING) people to purchase insurance or be fined, what is to stop a government from REQUIRING(AKA FORCING) people to have sex against their will?
I ask this quite seriously with two other circumstances in mind regarding the over reaching abuse of authority in our government.
Specifically at these links:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/7502-congress-considers-endless-war-worldwide
and
http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/national-defense-authorization-bill-h-r-1540-gives-president-the-right-to-continue-wars-without-approval-also-to-declare-war-within-america-itself/4071
Together with this:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/15/indiana-high-court-rules-people-resist-illegal-entry-police-homes/
Folks, we are seeing the increasing evisceration
of our freedoms in a coordinated manner by powers able to replace rational thought with nonsense.
What is happening is extremely frightening and worthy of serious pondering and prayer.
To this child of the sixties, when I was young, the streets would have been teeming with young and not-so-young protesters were such legislation to have been proposed. But now, many of those same people ARE IN POWER, sometimes on both sides of the aisle, and their LUST FOR POWER has replaced what might once have been a thirst for freedom.
I am glad my days are winding down but am very concerned for my children, grandchildren and everyone's children and grandchildren.
May 17, 2011 at 3:42 am
@Anonymous: The government has OKed the breaking and entry into the privacy of a woman's womb and torn apart other persons. Our government is full of Godless people, evil people, very evil people, who because of the number of evildoers, believe themselves to be normal. Pray the rosary every day and do penance. So that if you are killed you will be ready. I hope to see you on the other side, then you and I will talk face to face.
May 17, 2011 at 5:04 pm
So…based on the clarification above, CMR made a dubious interpretation of someone else's bad summary of the bill without doing any fact-checking. You guys are the best trollers ever.
May 17, 2011 at 7:17 pm
Mark (and Anonymous), read it again. The part quoted in Mark's post makes it perfectly clear. The custodial parent cannot have sexual relations with ANYONE in their own house until the divorce is final, without express permission from the court. That would include the estranged spouse.
In theory, if the couple reconciled and chose to stop the divorce proceedings, it would be illegal for them to engage in such activities until the proper paperwork was filed to withdraw the petition for divorce.
Heck, they couldn't even "date" each other in an attempt to fix things, without permission from the court.
November 23, 2021 at 7:03 am
And how are they going to check the fact of the violation?))))
In fact, an inadequate proposal. Here, for example, are given the terms of divorce https://paonlinedivorce.com/how-long-does-a-divorce-take-in-pennsylvania/ (depending on what kind of) from 4 months to several years. A SEVERAL YEARS, Karl! With such troubles, it is easier not to marry at all.