tranzfixer Posted June 1, 2008 Share Posted June 1, 2008 nahihirapan ako dahil hindi ka marunong mag-quote to separate your words from mine. raise your hands to those who think i can't read and understand..... or post na lang kayo dito. The law is generally applied... specifics are ironed out in court. real cases i post have some semblance of truth. you don't even quote your legal reasons. you argued an incorrect point. - end of that. wala naman specific case that we are discussing here to point out your explanations. Ever wondered why lawyers are regarded as sharks? and given not so good adjectives? or kaya ka still lawyer wannabe is because of how you reason? Have you won in court? Probably not.... Did I say that it was applicable? I said that originally allowed then changed by the family code and now changed again by revilla. Sinabi mo pa do not compare death penalty with family code, etc. bakit hindi na puwede gamiting point ang civil code? tapos sabi mo obsolete na. di ba binago nga? and that was the point. Nababago. Tapos sasabihin mong obsolete na. Napaka recent change nga nung revilla law eh. You cannot even understand that I have already proven previous to the 1987 family code na allowed gamitin ng anak ang apelyido ng tatay. Ammendment:Addition, deletion, or change to a legal document. All parties to the agreement must formally consent to an amendment by signing it. Only then does the amendment become an integral part of the document, binding on all parties to the original agreement.some more point of research para dun sa ibang interesado kahit na hindi ako lawyer/wannabe. What are the grounds for annulment? 1. Lack of parental consent in certain cases. If a party is 18 years or over, but below 21, and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of the parents/guardian. However, the marriage is validated if, upon reaching 21, the spouses freely cohabited with the other and both lived together as husband and wife. 2. Insanity. A marriage may be annulled if, at the time of marriage, either party was of unsound mind, unless such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife. 3. Fraud. The consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife. Fraud includes: (i) non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime involving moral turpitude; (ii) concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than her husband; (iii) concealment of sexually transmissible disease or STD, regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the marriage; or (iv) concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism or homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time of the marriage. However, no other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute such fraud as will give grounds for action for the annulment of marriage. 4. Force, intimidation or undue influence. If the consent of either party was obtained by any of these means, except in cases wherein the force, intimidation or undue influence having disappeared or ceased, the complaining party thereafter freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife. 5. Impotence. At the time of marriage, either party was physically incapable of consummating the marriage with the other, and such incapacity continues and appears to be incurable. Impotence is different from being infertile. 6. STD. If, at the time of marriage, either party was afflicted with a sexually-transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to be incurable. If the STD is not serious or is curable, it may still constitute fraud (see No. 3 above). These reasons are not generally applicable to all kaya nga gusto nila ng divorce and generally (transfixer). Oo nga pala yung mga wife-beaters, addicts, lasenggero are very happy kasi your marriage cannot be voided. Sana gawin nilang mahirap to get into marriage para mahirap din to get out of it... Kaso it's so easy to get married. For people who get married to seek some guarantee. There is none in life. I wouldn't want my future wife to stay with me unhappy and just because we are married. I'm sure that people who got married wanted to make it work. For those that think that everything is fixable, news flash --- it ain't. I do not claim to know their problems and every individual is different. Some movies are reflective of current world society hindi kathang isip lamang although some are. Now pure fiction like Harry potter is different. "Story of Us" - couple who was at the brink of divorce but decided to work it out. The end.....nahihirapan ako dahil hindi ka marunong mag-quote to separate your words from mine. raise your hands to those who think i can't read and understand..... or post na lang kayo dito. hanap ka pa kakampi huh....looser.... The law is generally applied... specifics are ironed out in court you dont know what your talkin poor boy....not even a simple violation of traffic code.... Ever wondered why lawyers are regarded as sharks? and given not so good adjectives? or kaya ka still lawyer wannabe is because of how you reason? Have you won in court? Probably not.... very sweeping statement....wala ka na ba argument na bago...now personal attack to lawyers....shame on you... Did I say that it was applicable? I said that originally allowed then changed by the family code and now changed again by revilla. it was not originally allowed by the provision in civil code much more by the family code but ammended by revilla law allowing the use of surname of the father...even if you say or you dont say mali interpretasyon mo sa nabasa mo kung nagbabasa ka ba talaga.... Ammendment:Addition, deletion, or change to a legal document. All parties to the agreement must formally consent to an amendment by signing it. Only then does the amendment become an integral part of the document, binding on all parties to the original agreement. hala nagresearch ka pa sa wikepedia....di po yan ang ammendment na kailangan sa batas...ammendment by enacting a law which makes the former statute inapplicable....naku naman hijo wag ka post ng post ng kung ano ano kasi lalo lang nahahalata sayo na makitsismis lang alam mo... i think i have argued my point to an intelligent degree. I didn't assume to know everything--- you did that.I have made generalizations of what is being observed... how can you argue things which you did not learn...you argue thing based on what others say...and what you see in the movie...how come you will have full understanding of divorce, while we dont have a law applyng it..and for your information every countries have different application of divorce...maybe i did say that i know the whole context of what we are talkin in here contrary to you.... These reasons are not generally applicable to all kaya nga gusto nila ng divorce and generally (transfixer). Oo nga pala yung mga wife-beaters, addicts, lasenggero are very happy kasi your marriage cannot be voided. ok at nagresearch ka..ok yan at least nabasa mo...pero naintindihan mo ba? eh paano psychological incapacity di mo na sinama ...nasa kasunod na provision yan...halatang copy paste mo lang at di mo pingaralan ang post mo... it is applicable to all citizens of the philippines what makes that not applicable if the circumstances sorrounding the case did not fall on grounds you mentioned... anyway im done with my post....i rest my case....guys we do have different opinion here...we respect yours maybe its fair to accept ours...fair share..... :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: the statistics shows that high rate of annulment case does not show that we need divorce..it is just mean that people are using what the legal option to get out of marriage.. But i agree to all if we want na mabilis and walang hassle na pag dissolve ng kasal kailangan nga natin ang divorce...theres a need to ammend the family code....pero sa argument na kailangan ba natin sa aking palagay ay hindi pa... peace..... :hypocritesmiley: :hypocritesmiley: :hypocritesmiley: Quote Link to comment
friendly0603 Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 para kay transfixer - who seems to think he's a lawyer know it all. Parang interpretation of the law is the exceptional capacity of lawyers. idadag ko na. Psychological Incapacity (Article 36, Family Code EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 227 July 17, 1987)Sec. 2. Article 36 of Executive Order No. 209 is hereby amended to read as follows: "Art. 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization." Some Guidelines: Psychological incapacity, which a ground for annulment of marriage (which is different from divorce), contemplates downright incapacity or inability to take cognizance of and to assume the basic marital obligations; not a mere refusal, neglect or difficulty, much less, ill will, on the part of the errant spouse. Irreconcilable differences, conflicting personalities, emotional immaturity and irresponsibility, physical abuse, habitual alcoholism, sexual infidelity or perversion, and abandonment, by themselves, also do not warrant a finding of psychological incapacity. Among the grounds for annulment of marriage, psychological incapacity is the more (if not the most) commonly used. It is also one of the more controversial provisions of the Family Code (Article 36). The guidelines (shortened here) in the interpretation and application of Article 36 were handed down by the Supreme Court in Molina: 1. The plaintiff (the spouse who filed the petition in court) has burden of showing the nullity of the marriage. Our laws cherish the validity of marriage and unity of the family, so any doubt is resolved in favor of the existence/continuation of the marriage. 2. The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be (a) medically or clinically identified, ( alleged in the complaint, © sufficiently proven by experts and (d) clearly explained in the decision. Article 36 of the Family Code requires that the incapacity must be psychological - not physical, although its manifestations and/or symptoms may be physical. Expert evidence may be given by qualified psychiatrists and clinical psychologists. 3. The incapacity must be proven to be existing at “the time of the celebration” of the marriage. The evidence must show that the illness was existing when the parties exchanged their “I do’s.” The manifestation of the illness need not be perceivable at such time, but the illness itself must have attached at such moment, or prior thereto. 4. Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or clinically permanent or incurable. Such incurability may be absolute or even relative only in regard to the other spouse, not necessarily absolutely against everyone of the same sex. Furthermore, such incapacity must be relevant to the assumption of marriage obligations, not necessarily to those not related to marriage, like the exercise of a profession or employment in a job. 5. Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the disability of the party to assume the essential obligations of marriage. Thus, “mild characteriological peculiarities, mood changes, occasional emotional outbursts” cannot be accepted as root causes. 6. The essential marital obligations must be those embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the Family Code as regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221 and 225 of the same Code in regard to parents and their children. Such non-complied marital obligation(s) must also be stated in the petition, proven by evidence and included in the text of the decision. 7. Interpretations given by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be given great respect by our courts. 8. The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General to appear as counsel for the state. No decision shall be handed down unless the Solicitor General issues a certification, which will be quoted in the decision, briefly stating therein his reasons for his agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to the petition. Let’s examine some recent Supreme Court cases on what constitutes or doesn’t constitute psychological incapacity. In Antonio vs. Reyes (G.R. No. 155800, 10 March 2006), the Supreme Court sustained the nullity of the marriage based on the psychological incapacity of the wife (respondent). As concluded by the psychiatrist, the wife’s repeated lying is abnormal and pathological, and amounts to psychological incapacity (for the “digest” or a more detailed discussion of the case, click here). On the other hand, in Republic vs. Quintero-Hamano (G.R. No. 149498, 20 May 2004), the wife alleged taht her husband, a Japanese, failed to meet his duty to live with, care for and support his family. He abandoned them a month after the marriage. The wife sent him several letters but he never replied. He made a trip to the Philippines but did not care at all to see his family. However, while the husband’s act of abandonment was doubtlessly irresponsible, it was never alleged nor proven to be due to some kind of psychological illness. Aside from the abandonment, no other evidence was presented showing that the husband’s behavior was caused by a psychological disorder. It’s not enough to prove that a spouse failed to meet his responsibility and duty as a married person; it is essential that he must be shown to be incapable of doing so due to some psychological, not physical, illness. Although, as a rule, there was no need for an actual medical examination, it would have greatly helped the wife’s case had she presented evidence that medically or clinically identified his illness. This could have been done through an expert witness. ======hanap ka pa kakampi huh....looser....you dont know what your talkin poor boy....not even a simple violation of traffic code....very sweeping statement....wala ka na ba argument na bago...now personal attack to lawyers....shame on you... Aren't these personal attacks? haha is your account a group account? That again was a general observation. Of course, there are good lawyers out there. Just like there is good in every man. it was not originally allowed by the provision in civil code Baka ang sinasabi mo is about anak sa labas of already married individuals? Is this wrong? June 18, 1949 (merong term as natural child na illegitimate) Civil Code of the Philippines Art. 282. A recognized natural child has the right: (1) To bear the surname of the parent recognizing him:(2) To receive support from such parent, in conformity with article 291; (3) To receive, in a proper case, the hereditary portion which is determined in this Code. (134) I'm sure that ammendment has a better technical definition in law. But I don't really care about that. To the ordinary it is still a change even if rendered obsolete the previous law. It was originally allowed prior to 1987. how can you argue things which you did not learn...you argue thing based on what others say...and what you see in the movie...how come you will have full understanding of divorce, while we dont have a law applyng it..and for your information every countries have different application of divorce...maybe i did say that i know the whole context of what we are talkin in here contrary to you.... Siguro because I observe the world around me and I'm not limited to the Philippines. I'm sure every country (not countries) has a different application of divorce. I think America is more popular, don't you agree? ok at nagresearch ka..ok yan at least nabasa mo...pero naintindihan mo ba? eh paano psychological incapacity di mo na sinama ...nasa kasunod na provision yan...halatang copy paste mo lang at di mo pingaralan ang post mo... it is applicable to all citizens of the philippines what makes that not applicable if the circumstances sorrounding the case did not fall on grounds you mentioned... hindi ko na nilagay dahil so many times ko na sinabi kasi it is the most common. Nilagay ko yung iba naman. Oo nga pala, divorce is allowed in the philippines if a Filipino/Filipina is married to a foreigner. Quote Link to comment
complicated8 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 (edited) From Census/NSO website.Marriages (Based on civil registration. Not adjusted for underregistration) 2006 449,215 2005 504,763 2004 566,838 Marriages Decreasing, Civil Annulments Rising in the Philippines Read onhttp://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§io...;category=World http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2008/f...080214top6.html Fewer than 100 annulments a year are granted by the church where it can be proven the marriage was not consummated. Official data from the National Statistical Coordination Board yesterday found that 40 percent of adults aged 15 to 24 agreed to a bill that would legalize divorce. The number of Filipinos choosing to live with their partners rather than marry also rose steadily from 5.3 million to eight million over the 10 years to 2003, according to the data. Eighteen percent of young Filipino adults were willing to enter into live-in arrangements, while 24 percent approved of women engaging in pre-marital sex or going into relationships that do not lead to marriage, the figures showed. “The statistics as presented here reveal changing marriage characteristics of our Filipino women and most importantly the changing attitudes of our youth,” the board’s director Romulo Virola said. “It is also evident that the character of union among Filipino youth is changing because formal marriage has declined and cohabitation has increased.” (With input from Agence France Presse) Edited June 3, 2008 by complicated8 Quote Link to comment
tranzfixer Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Mixed marriage is a marriage by a filipino and foreigner. If the foreigner obtained a decree of divorce qualifying him/her to remarry under his/her national law , the filipina o filipino shall be qualified to get married in the philippines.we should not be discriminated if the ends of justice are to be served...however if the filipino or filifina will file the decree of divorce it is not allowed under our national law....NOTE...theres no truth for your statement....dont post misleading statement sir....kaya lang tayo inallow to get marry kasi to avoid injustice in remaining in a marriage while the foreigner partner ay nagpapakasaya sa pagpapakasal after divorce..hindi po tayo allow magfile ng divorce... "oo nga pala, divorce is allowed in the philippines if a Filipino/Filipina is married to a foreigner. " Quote Link to comment
DMC Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 divorce. i think its ok. but what i dont like is people gettin to marriage like its something that u can go in and out of that easily. Quote Link to comment
tranzfixer Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Baka ang sinasabi mo is about anak sa labas of already married individuals? Is this wrong? June 18, 1949 (merong term as natural child na illegitimate) Civil Code of the Philippines Art. 282. A recognized natural child has the right: (1) To bear the surname of the parent recognizing him:(2) To receive support from such parent, in conformity with article 291; (3) To receive, in a proper case, the hereditary portion which is determined in this Code. (134) SIR ganito na lang kasi po para na rin sa kaalaman mo at ng iba... sa civil code po 3 ang klase ng bata1.legitimate2.natural child3.spurious child ang natural child ay yung mga anak sa labas na nirecognized ng ama nila whether it is the child of a single or married individual...ibig sabihin di importante kung ang ama ng bata ay single or married at the time of the conception as long as he/she recognized by the father entitled siya sa provision na nasa taas.... ang spurios child naman ay yung bata na di narecognized ng ama.. at legitimate child wala naman tayo issue dito eh.... pero itong klasipikasyon na nabanggit ko ay naamyendahan na ng family code nga which provides that 2 na lang klase ng bata 1. legitimate2. illegitimate ang illegitimate na anak ay yung mga bata na born out of marriage by a single or married individual..wala silang karapatan na gamitin ang pangalan ng ama nila...they always bear the surname ng kaniyang ina..however in the case of single individual who after the birth of the child marry the mother of the child yung bata ay legitimated na ibig sabihin he/she entitle to the rights of legitimate child... and under REVILLA Law which provides that illegitimate child who is recognized by the father of the child he/she can use the father's name..and this law is applicable to those who born after the enactment of this law... siguro naman po malinaw na po sayo ang pagkakaiba...medyo napaghahalo mo kasi sir...but anyway medyo out of topic na to sa divorce....gusto ko lang malinawagan ka... and for your accusations im lawyer know it all...i beg to disagree..kasi lahat naman ng post ko dito ay available in all legal intermediaries and pinagaralan ko po...di po ako basta nagpopost ng kung ano ano sabi sabi....and my apology sa maling word na countries except country...but i think law on divorce is not based on popularity...at kung alam mo ang batas tungkol sa divorce sa america ng dahil lang sa kwento ng kaibigan mo e di idol kita di mo na kailangan pag aralan ang bagay bagay bagkus nakukuha lang ito sa tsismis... case law on divorce cases is available in US jurispudence...maybe you better check it out para malaman if alam mo nga ang topic na ating pinaguusapan... pero sa kabila ng ating pagtatalo tungkol sa isyu na ito di ko naman sinasara yung pinto sa divorce law sa pilipinas pero kgaya ng nasabi ko di na natin pa ito kailangan at di ito ang sagot sa lumalalang problema sa pamilya , sa lumalalang pagmamaltrato sa asawa, sa lumalalang numero ng annulment cases at lumalalang pakikiapid sa di asawa...nasa tao o nasa magasawa ang sagot sa lumalalang problemang ito..huwag naman natin sisihin ang estado sa di paggawa ng batas sa divorce...pero kung isyu ng pagnanakaw at pagsisinungaling nagkakasundo tayo ang estado o ang gobyerno me kasalanan nito... :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: Quote Link to comment
wizard23 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 divorce should be allowed in the philippines for the sake of battered wives especially or in some cases where the relationship is better off if the couples separate legally by divorce. Quote Link to comment
friendly0603 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Mixed marriage is a marriage by a filipino and foreigner. If the foreigner obtained a decree of divorce qualifying him/her to remarry under his/her national law , the filipina o filipino shall be qualified to get married in the philippines.we should not be discriminated if the ends of justice are to be served...however if the filipino or filifina will file the decree of divorce it is not allowed under our national law....NOTE...theres no truth for your statement....dont post misleading statement sir....kaya lang tayo inallow to get marry kasi to avoid injustice in remaining in a marriage while the foreigner partner ay nagpapakasaya sa pagpapakasal after divorce..hindi po tayo allow magfile ng divorce... "oo nga pala, divorce is allowed in the philippines if a Filipino/Filipina is married to a foreigner. " What I meant by allowed is recognized by the philippines.... This came from a law website from teh philippines. Mali pa rin ba? Pinaliwanag mo lang what I said. Kaya nga foreigner kasi allowed ang divorce sa kanila. So, will a pinay/pinoy still have a valid unbreakable marriage when the other party is divorced? "However, there are certain instances wherein the divorce secured abroad by the foreigner-spouse, and even by former Filipinos, are recognized under Philippine laws." Quote Link to comment
friendly0603 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Baka ang sinasabi mo is about anak sa labas of already married individuals? Is this wrong? June 18, 1949 (merong term as natural child na illegitimate) Civil Code of the Philippines Art. 282. A recognized natural child has the right: (1) To bear the surname of the parent recognizing him:(2) To receive support from such parent, in conformity with article 291; (3) To receive, in a proper case, the hereditary portion which is determined in this Code. (134) SIR ganito na lang kasi po para na rin sa kaalaman mo at ng iba... sa civil code po 3 ang klase ng bata1.legitimate2.natural child3.spurious child ang natural child ay yung mga anak sa labas na nirecognized ng ama nila whether it is the child of a single or married individual...ibig sabihin di importante kung ang ama ng bata ay single or married at the time of the conception as long as he/she recognized by the father entitled siya sa provision na nasa taas.... ang spurios child naman ay yung bata na di narecognized ng ama.. at legitimate child wala naman tayo issue dito eh.... pero itong klasipikasyon na nabanggit ko ay naamyendahan na ng family code nga which provides that 2 na lang klase ng bata 1. legitimate2. illegitimate ang illegitimate na anak ay yung mga bata na born out of marriage by a single or married individual..wala silang karapatan na gamitin ang pangalan ng ama nila...they always bear the surname ng kaniyang ina..however in the case of single individual who after the birth of the child marry the mother of the child yung bata ay legitimated na ibig sabihin he/she entitle to the rights of legitimate child... and under REVILLA Law which provides that illegitimate child who is recognized by the father of the child he/she can use the father's name..and this law is applicable to those who born after the enactment of this law... siguro naman po malinaw na po sayo ang pagkakaiba...medyo napaghahalo mo kasi sir...but anyway medyo out of topic na to sa divorce....gusto ko lang malinawagan ka... and for your accusations im lawyer know it all...i beg to disagree..kasi lahat naman ng post ko dito ay available in all legal intermediaries and pinagaralan ko po...di po ako basta nagpopost ng kung ano ano sabi sabi....and my apology sa maling word na countries except country...but i think law on divorce is not based on popularity...at kung alam mo ang batas tungkol sa divorce sa america ng dahil lang sa kwento ng kaibigan mo e di idol kita di mo na kailangan pag aralan ang bagay bagay bagkus nakukuha lang ito sa tsismis... case law on divorce cases is available in US jurispudence...maybe you better check it out para malaman if alam mo nga ang topic na ating pinaguusapan... pero sa kabila ng ating pagtatalo tungkol sa isyu na ito di ko naman sinasara yung pinto sa divorce law sa pilipinas pero kgaya ng nasabi ko di na natin pa ito kailangan at di ito ang sagot sa lumalalang problema sa pamilya , sa lumalalang pagmamaltrato sa asawa, sa lumalalang numero ng annulment cases at lumalalang pakikiapid sa di asawa...nasa tao o nasa magasawa ang sagot sa lumalalang problemang ito..huwag naman natin sisihin ang estado sa di paggawa ng batas sa divorce...pero kung isyu ng pagnanakaw at pagsisinungaling nagkakasundo tayo ang estado o ang gobyerno me kasalanan nito... :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: Ang tanong ko eh mali o tama ba ang pinost ko? That was from the civil code. I put in the natural child which is out of wedlock but unmarried parents. Eto po yung section of the civil code about the parents of the natural child. "Only natural children can be legitimated. Children born outside wedlock of parents who, at the time of the conception of the former, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry each other, are natural. (119a)" Art. 277. In case the recognition is made by only one of the parents, it shall be presumed that the child is natural, if the parent recognizing it had legal capacity to contract marriage at the time of the conception. (130) Did the child have the right at the time the law was valid (prior to Revilla and before 1987 Family code) to use the surname of the father? Sorry sa mods kung OT - but I think it relates to marriage and the subsequent divorce and annulment issue. Sorry din kung OT (old testament) pero some of us were born prior to the revilla law and know people who abided by the civil code prior to the family code (1987). pre, if it happened to real people - it must be true di ba? I'm not questioning the details of the law of divorce. I'm not basing it on popularity. I posting the popular and known divorces. I'm posting for the regular joe of what happened to these people. Even Paul McCartney's divorce from the judge's decision is available on the web although lengthy. Quote Link to comment
friendly0603 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 medyo may misinterpretation dito sa pagtatalo natin pero siyempre i can't divulge details of who I know that underwent divorce, were annulled, etc.these are everyday experiences that are posted here. I think I will go to the legal thread if I want to. Here is a link with a lot of opinions on divorce. pro and against ---- http://politics.alleba.com/2005/03/20/divo...he-philippines/ Quote Link to comment
roughashlar Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 divorce should be allowed. Quote Link to comment
Guest Sniglet Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 how about if marriage is renewable every so often? Quote Link to comment
empress Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 It should pero may limit lang siguro in the number of marriages you can have. Quote Link to comment
binoe25 Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 nuon sabi ko hindi dapat magkaroon ng divorce d2 sa pinas kc katoliko tayo pero afetr ng ginawa sa akin ng x ko parang pumapabor na ko d2. Quote Link to comment
lancelink Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Yes - I believe if instituted it would eliminate a lot of the social hypocrisy. Just an opinion. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.