Should No-Fault Divorce Be Legal?

Statement

Couples shouldn’t be allowed to get a divorce without a really good reason.

Q1 Analysis

This may be a Q1 violation if you think the government shouldn’t have a say in whether you get a divorce or not, you want to avoid situations where people may be tempted to lie in order to comply with the law, or you don’t define "really good reason" rigorously.

Q2 Analysis

This may be a Q2 violation if you would not want to have to stay married because you could not convince a court that your reasons for divorce were good enough.

Discussion

This statement appears to take as given that keeping married couples together is a good thing. To maintain consistency, a "good reason" for a divorce must be one by which the bad being done by keeping the couple together outweighs the good of not breaking up a marriage.

Which (if any) of these would you consider to be a sufficiently good reason for a divorce?

When deciding whether a marriage should be kept together despite the couple’s wishes, a number of mitigating factors might be taken into account. Which (if any) of these should be considered when deciding whether a couple should be allowed to get a divorce?

You are encouraged to leave your answers to the questions posed in this post in the comments section. This post is based on an excerpt from Ask Yourself to be Moral, by D. Cancilla, available at LuLu.com and Amazon.com. See the 2Q system page for details of the philosophical system mentioned in this post.

Posted on December 31, 2010 at 9:52 pm by ideclare · Permalink
In: 2Q

One Response

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by ff42
    on January 1, 2011 at 1:43 pm
    Reply · Permalink

    “shouldn’t be allow” implies coercion, particularly government force. If the reason for government is to protect “life, liberty and pursuit (not attainment!) of happiness – otherwise known as property” how can it logically be deduced that government ought to be involved in marriage (or divorce) in the first place?

    Without government interference I would assume most marriages would be more like contracts and we have experience in dealing with prenuptial and failure-to-perform clauses.

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply