Link: https://www.chron.com/news/article/no-fault-divorce-texas-22388588.php

For people like Morgan, however, no-fault divorce has stripped him of what he views as a constitutional right to protest the dissolution.

He told Chron his views were shaped by watching his father go through a divorce and later experiencing divorce himself, one he did not want.

"When we utter our vows, many people say, 'Till death do you part.'....My vows are more important than anything… I made this vow to God, and my wife was the beneficiary of my vow," Morgan argued.

Sounds like he wishes for someone to die.

So go ahead and die, you asshole. She was your wife, not your property. If you had ever even sort-of understood that then you might not be divorced.

my wife was the beneficiary of my vow

Or maybe not so much.

First of all, this is Texas. A state where a teenage girl knew she was going to be beaten — not spanked, but beaten — for listening to secular music on the family computer, so she set up a hidden camera and filmed, then posted the beating online, which was participated in by both parents, who seemed to enjoy it. But, because the father was a judge or lawyer or some such, nothing ever really came of it. The video went viral some 10-15 years ago.

This is a US state which has established, through legal precedent, that women and girls are property.

As for what this actually means (I read the article), what it means is that the Republican Party wants to ban no-fault divorce, which is divorce without cause, and they want to ban single-party divorce. They want it so both parties have to agree to it. If the woman wants to leave but the man doesn't want her to, that's his property under proposed Texas law and he can retain ownership.

Of course, marriage is a business contract where assets obtained after the marriage are split. The problem with no-fault marriage, to these people, is that a woman can leave of her own volition, that her husband has to treat her well to keep her, and that she can take what's hers. What they want is a situation where a woman can't leave unless the man releases her, and if she does something to end the marriage, such as adultery (cheating on him), she can lose everything she's earned since the marriage, which further keeps her in the man's control.

And this is what a lot of Texas votes for. Of course, if you look up the big schools in Texas, and then overlay a map of these universities with a voting map, you'll see the blue spots are where the schools are, just like in any red state. People with education almost exclusively vote blue. People without... vote red.

Morgan, divorce or not, she doesn't want to be with you.

"For people like Morgan, however, no-fault divorce has stripped him of what he views as a constitutional right to protest the dissolution."

This guy thinks his unalienable rights are for "life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and also my wife."

I'm sure he's never actually read the constitution or the bible.

It's not about anything she wants, obviously.

Don't get married in Texas, Jesus.

See, I don't care if someone doesn't want to end their own vows. You can make a vow to do anything. As long as it only involves you, then you do you.

Everyone else, though gets to make their own decisions for themselves. If they don't want to continue in a legal marriage contract, they can leave it. That's a personal choice and they live with the consequences of that choice. Split the wealth, work out kids, and move out.

I wouldn't wish a divorce on anyone. Been there, it sucks. Even if it's the right choice, it sucks. But sometimes the suck of the divorce is less than the suck of staying, so people can choose to leave a relationship. That's what adults do.

Trying to force your ex-partner to stay is because you're a coward. Face your own life and the voices (edit: choices) you made.

On his podcast in 2023, Crowder lamented that his wife no longer wanted to be married to him, "and in the state of Texas, that is completely permitted."

"It's been the most heartbreaking experience of my life," Crowder said, "But in today's legal system, my beliefs don't matter. In Texas, divorce is permitted when one party wants it, period."

Days after the podcast aired, video footage from a Ring camera was leaked showing Crowder berating his then-pregnant wife during an argument at their home. The footage, recorded in June 2021, showed his wife, who was eight months pregnant at the time, attempting to leave as Crowder confronted her over what he described as a lack of "discipline and respect."

Don't get married.

stuff like this is going to lead to a lot of husbands becoming "suddenly ill" after eating dinner. in biblical days, women had ways of getting out of abusive relationships.

I always say Alternative to divorce is death do you part. Looked at some numbers and its terrible.

When unilateral “no fault” divorce laws started passing one state at a time, starting with Governor Ronald Reagan in California in 1969, researchers wanted to see the effect. In states that passed unilateral no-fault divorce, they observed:

The suicide rate for wives drop by 8-16%.

The domestic violence rate by and against both men and women dropped by 30%.

The homicide rate of women murdered by their partner dropped by 10%.

Better yet...

It’s even more dangerous for a woman to have sex in Texas

Fucking a republican is always bad for your health, reputation, money, and status

I was going to make some suggestions but on checking google for US laws. Lol you guys are fucked, I thought shit like this only happened in countries like Iran.

K, but your partner is not your property. Not allowing people to get divorced will just mean they leave in the middle of the night with no warning, or shoot you in the face. Pick your poison, I guess, if you don't believe in amicably splitting from someone whom no longer connects with you.

And blowing cigar smoke in her face, while she was 8 months pregnant. The man does not even care enough for his own child not to do that let alone his wife.

What does this guy want? That she stays against her will?

Conservatives are bad people with poor empathy skills.

Why even bring that up? It's not what this article is about. Even if that's a problem, it's an entirely different discussion from what's in the article.

Men who show up to court, fight for custody, prove they are capable of having thier kids (the mothers have to this too), are granted what they ask.

I was raised by a father, while my mom got burned hard by the divorce. Ive also met a few other single fathers, where the court deemed the mother unfit, and awarded full custody of the child to the father. It absolutely happens. I dont hang out in crowds outside the working class, I dont know anyone who has ever had to pay alimony so I cant speak to that.

People who "lose access to thier kids" that ive met... earned that. Plenty just "make it work".

And, this has abaolutely nothing to do with no fault divorce. People die when they are forced to live in conditions they dont want to. By suicide, drugs, murder, slow death by poor coping mechanisms... why is this an argument for you view?

edit, and uh, excuse me:

https://people.com/michigan-dad-killed-wife-children-before-setting-home-fire-suicide-12027885

which is okay? The women that leave because theyre not happy? Ive had men leave me because they werent happy? I didnt cry (much) about it, and moved on to find someone I could make happy?

Women can leave a safe relationship without poisen. A controlling nightmare a person could be trapped in.. anyone with their back against the wall will make choices.

Your statement also completely ignores the men who end up in abusive situations.

Y'all-Qaeda

Yes. Thats exactly what these types of people want.

When one party wants to terminate the relationship and the other disallows that from happening, that is by definition an abusive relationship. There's no such thing as a non-abusive relationship with someone who doesn't want to be in that relationship in the first place.

and later experiencing divorce himself, one he did not want

Too fucking bad? You don’t get to opt out of divorce.

I made this vow to God, and my wife was the beneficiary of my vow

What a worthless vow, made to something that doesn't even exist.

Okay, marriage is a religious thing, then. The government shouldn't be involved in marriage in the first place. Let's governments do civil unions only and religions do marriages. Completely separate things.

One is about sharing assets and that sort of thing, which can be enforced by the government, and the other is making promises with make believe entities, which is only enforceable in the land of make believe. It seems like everybody should be happy with this arrangement.

Why can't I lock you into marriage and then treat you like shit? I made a vow that you'd be chained to me

Apparently a common story before divorce.

If anything, this should be what encourages religious chuds to accept no-fault divorce. Either let go of the relationship, or die.

I don't understand this. This seems to be based on religion. The bible doesn't say god is for your one lifetime, it says forever and ever, or something like that. So they they are saying that marriage is for a lifetime? But God grants eternal life. Supposedly. Perhaps the "lifelong" commitment is in fact an admission that they don't believe in their religion? Because if marriage is limited to one lifetime, it is essentially a contract, not a religious observance.

I have to be careful about trying to analyze the absurdities of religion too carefully, it will literally drive a person insane with its logical inconsistencies.

Marriage has historically been a utility thing. Humans work better in groups including pairs.

It's not about religion. It's abusing religion to exert control maliciously. They don't want their wives to have agency to just walk out the door and file for divorce. They want to force that legal relationship on the woman until the man agrees to sever it. They don't care that frequency of suicides and spousal murder went down after no-fault divorce became a thing. They don't want to have to be a good enough husband for their wife to want to stay their wife.

Texas wives about to relearn a use for those guns they like so much.

In other words, another "I treated my wife like shit and then she divorced me, how dare she!?" asshole

My wife's ex is one like that, literally asked me to sign the "transfer of ownership papers hurr durr"

He constantly is full with "I gave you everything!" Which you have to read as: I gave you money, nothing else, no love, no joy, no happiness, only money things like an expensive house, expensive car, money for bigger tits and botox, which she refused, so she got the constant criticisms about how she looked.

If your partner doesn't want to be with you anymore oy for a reason. Maybe the love is gone, that happens, maybe they fell in love with someone else, that happens, or maybe you're a giant narcissistic raging asshole with psychopathic tendencies who loves to use his children as chess pieces to always get what you want.

Either way, if your partner doesn't want to be with you and you force your partner to stay with you... You really think that is a good idea?

Are we really going back to the "yeah my husband slipped and fell on his gun" times? Idiots

You can't just say "that isn't what I said" and then delete what you said, lol

Howdy Arabia

Mushroom poisoning

Don't fuck Republicans

1. Let's get his ex-wife's side of the story. I'm going to guess with 99% accuracy that Morgan is a huge asshole.

2. I don't think marriage should be "till death". I believe that leads to people being complacent. It also leads to messy divorces.

Marriages, like most other contracts, should have a set duration with the option to renew if mutually agreed. Suddenly people need to care if they want the renewal. Divorce becomes much more predictable. Couples who aren't so sure can sign up for one year and see how it goes. Term duration could help guide life decisions - they say they want kids but won't sign up for the Maximum (20 year) duration? What's that all about?

This isn't just negatives, either. There's a huge upside in the celebration space. Long term marriages become moderately more impressive. Everyone cheers.

1. Now, let's talk polygamy...

All I got was that Morgan and his dad are huge POS, bad spouses, and probably abusers.

Stripping him of a constitutional right to protest...Dumbass you have the 1st amendment that gives you the right to talk to your spouse and make changes that make you a crappy spouse that no one wants to love.

What a shitty human but then again it was already pointed out he was a conservative in the article.

Property don't get to own things.

Before then, spouses seeking a divorce generally had to provide sufficient evidence of wrongdoing to persuade a court to grant one

Grounds included adultery, abandonment, extreme cruelty, intemperance and lengthy imprisonment.

Aside from the obvious that it's wrong to keep someone locked in a marriage they don't want, this seems like an enormous waste of court resources, taking the time to determine facts and make subjective judgments to make the details of people's personal relationships a matter of law. How can someone be so deranged as to think their spouse wanting to leave them is the responsibility of the government to fix?

It's rape mentality because guys like this are rapists

When you've already twisted your world to accept that god speaks through liars, pedophiles and murderers, and cares so deeply about your cock that he sent holy orders on how to even touch it, it's not a far stretch.

Make whatever vows you want. You dont get to control another person's vow.

I'm telling you, officer. He LOVED the sweet bitter taste of antifreeze. I warned him so much!

It sounds like he has been through one and working his way through a second.