Divorce In The Philippines

[friendly0603]

definitely not. It destroys the essence of marriage

What is the essence?

 

 

Yes to "no to divorce"

 

Marriage shouldn't be trial and error.

 

We are a Christian country. Christ forbids it.

If the relationship is one of a hell, get out thru a legal annulment.

 

File a case, if lawyers cannot help you, go to church seek God's advice., undergo seminars focusing and giving positive advices for couple struggling on their marriages. Seek help for people whose marriages are fixed , not to those who will add salt to the wound.

 

It is a covenant and a contract. Let your yes be yes and no be no. No double minded when facing the altar.

I'm sure Christ forbids a lot of what happens in MTC too

Not everyone is Christian and not everyone goes to the altar.

 

Why are you ok with annulment and not divorce? Both of them rescind marriage.

Edited December 1, 2012 by friendly0603

[NightWriter]

When people put Nationalism for Divorce, they are hypocrites. How many poor women suffering in bad marriages end up committing suicide because their husbands beats the crap out of them? These women cannot afford an Annullment because its costs at 160 thousand to 200 thousand pesos. This is not about Nationalism, this is a social stigma. Usually the filipinas pay for the annullment because these bastards they marry couldn't care less if they want it done or not.

 

Divorce is much better for the right reasons and it will be much faster than the anullment. Its not for everyone but it will save a lot of women's lives.

 

Nationalism, kiss my ass! if you are really interested in nationalism, why won't you participate with the people who are rallying for a lost cause on the streets, in front of the US Embassy.

 

Divorce is the solution.

[vinoepapas]

For me divorce is fine. If hindi naman na talagang magwork ng relationship at nasubukan na lahat ng paraan, eh kaylangan na yang ihinto para di kayo magkasakitan.

Unang una sa lahat,dapat kasi sigurado ka sa isang tao bago mo siya pakasalan

[vinoepapas]

I agree with legalizing Divorce in the country. People make mistakes all the time and sometimes the mistake is made with picking the person to marry. Everyone deserves another chance at happiness.

 

I agree with you. If di na talaga kayang magwork then you should stop your relationship.

[islekimp]

having seen what a anullment does to either party ( man or woman) it breaks families apart to build a better future because of this issue, it is true certain things do happen and divorces must come upon..... then again religion comes into play with mix of politics (example RH bill)..............

 

are marriages done all the time because of 2 people full known each other (bad and good things) > no

 

> should people be married for the good reason > yes

 

>should man or woman be given equal chance if a mistake is made ( very arguable ) >yes

[johnnydrama]

When people put Nationalism for Divorce, they are hypocrites. How many poor women suffering in bad marriages end up committing suicide because their husbands beats the crap out of them? These women cannot afford an Annullment because its costs at 160 thousand to 200 thousand pesos. This is not about Nationalism, this is a social stigma. Usually the filipinas pay for the annullment because these bastards they marry couldn't care less if they want it done or not.

 

Divorce is much better for the right reasons and it will be much faster than the anullment. Its not for everyone but it will save a lot of women's lives.

 

Nationalism, kiss my ass! if you are really interested in nationalism, why won't you participate with the people who are rallying for a lost cause on the streets, in front of the US Embassy.

 

Divorce is the solution.

 

Makes sense...you see so many Pinays married to foreign men, but not too many the other side around.

 

Apparently one disincentive for non-Pinay spouses in marrying Pinoys has to be the lack of divorce provision in our law which I consider downright stupid. Now where does nationalism enter into the equation - so that we have bragging rights to be the only civilised nation without a divorce law? Of course, divorce isn't supposed to be a fast-break solution to the ongoing phenomenon of dysfunctional marriages happening for some reason or another - that is why the provision of alimony exists - but it also acknowledges human fallibility and its role in marital discord.

 

Under present Philippine society, married couples are expected to attain divine levels of perfection in order to match that ideal set to them by their Creator

[NightWriter]

Makes sense...you see so many Pinays married to foreign men, but not too many the other side around.

 

Apparently one disincentive for non-Pinay spouses in marrying Pinoys has to be the lack of divorce provision in our law which I consider downright stupid. Now where does nationalism enter into the equation - so that we have bragging rights to be the only civilised nation without a divorce law? Of course, divorce isn't supposed to be a fast-break solution to the ongoing phenomenon of dysfunctional marriages happening for some reason or another - that is why the provision of alimony exists - but it also acknowledges human fallibility and its role in marital discord.

 

Under present Philippine society, married couples are expected to attain divine levels of perfection in order to match that ideal set to them by their Creator

 

What people are not aware of is the statistics of the people who want their annullments in a month, hundreds! Perfection ,maybe, hypocrisy Yes.

[Fiz]

I agree and want divorce in our country, but RH bill no.

[Fiz]

Yes to "no to divorce"

 

Marriage shouldn't be trial and error.

 

We are a Christian country. Christ forbids it.

 

If the relationship is one of a hell, get out thru a legal annulment.

 

File a case, if lawyers cannot help you, go to church seek God's advice., undergo seminars focusing and giving positive advices for couple struggling on their marriages. Seek help for people whose marriages are fixed , not to those who will add salt to the wound.

 

It is a covenant and a contract. Let your yes be yes and no be no. No double minded when facing the altar.

 

Christ forbids? Actually Christ sanctioned it in for a certain situation - something that can be discussed by more knowledgeable people.

[one_hot_momma]

it's about time.....long overdue na nga eh.

[BornAtNight]

What is the essence?

 

 

 

I'm sure Christ forbids a lot of what happens in MTC too

Not everyone is Christian and not everyone goes to the altar.

 

Why are you ok with annulment and not divorce? Both of them rescind marriage.

 

When I say it is a Christian country, majority of the people are Christians. Obviously we are n0t a muslim COUNTRY. We based the majority of the law in the bible teachings, obviously not to koran. Just saying po.

 

separation is only legal in the presence of infidelity, murder,and worst case scenarios (do I have to elaborate that) but n0t. ...

 

because people change, wife became too fat mambababae n ko para mag away kame hangang hiwalayan nya ako,husband became bald and I'm too sexy for him, its no longer working blah blah, we are n0t happy anymore, I just found out that he or She's not the one. We want to be separated so let it be!

 

Hindi talaga uubra yan s Pinas, mas marami mananamantala kesa makikinabang. Lulusot at lulusot ang Pinoy.

 

 

E bakit nga b mahal ang annulment? Sguro kasi mahal ang justice sa Pilipinas?

And that's another story.

 

 

For me, divorce is definitely not the solution.

 

Its n0t meant to be.

[friendly0603]

When I say it is a Christian country, majority of the people are Christians. Obviously we are n0t a muslim COUNTRY. We based the majority of the law in the bible teachings, obviously not to koran. Just saying po.

separation is only legal in the presence of infidelity, murder,and worst case scenarios (do I have to elaborate that) but n0t. ...

Yes, it's a Christian country. But if a law is based on a christian belief/religion should it still not apply to non-christians? Muslims have divorce but because I'm not a muslim it's not applicable to me. You can have divorce legally but have no divorce based on your faith. The church doesn't allow divorce. So what are your options if you are already legally separated and want to marry again? If Christ is your guiding principle in life, you can follow everything he teaches. Doesn't mean everybody has to follow that too. The church can always say "no to divorce" to its followers.

 

because people change, wife became too fat mambababae n ko para mag away kame hangang hiwalayan nya ako,husband became bald and I'm too sexy for him, its no longer working blah blah, we are n0t happy anymore, I just found out that he or She's not the one. We want to be separated so let it be!

Hindi talaga uubra yan s Pinas, mas marami mananamantala kesa makikinabang. Lulusot at lulusot ang Pinoy.

Yes, people change. It's either you change together, accept the changes or not. It shouldn't be forced upon because you entered into a contract.

 

E bakit nga b mahal ang annulment? Sguro kasi mahal ang justice sa Pilipinas?

For me, divorce is definitely not the solution.

Its n0t meant to be.

What's not meant to be? What is the solution? I'm sure divorce will be expensive too. I don't believe that it'll be cheap.

[shampooh]

Ano pa ang use ng marriage kung may divorce naman. Wag a lang kayo magpapakasal kung hindi ninyo kaya mga responsibilities

[bill_262003]

Ano pa ang use ng marriage kung may divorce naman. Wag a lang kayo magpapakasal kung hindi ninyo kaya mga responsibilities

I agree with this. But there is a thin line/gray area in all of this.

 

I agree that a Divorce Law is needed in our country. But Divorce should be with basis. In almost all countries that have Divorce Laws, there is a so called "No Fault" Divorce. Wherein, both parties agree that no one is at fault, but they both agree to terminate their marriage.

 

This is the part of the Divorce Law that I think can backfire. Why? With such a clause, you can now file for divorce just by a whim and for no particular reason. This would mean that once you hit a tough part of your marriage, it is very easy to opt out. Now marriage can become "trial and error" as one poster implied. Where you try if the marriage can work if not then opt out.

 

With that, what is the purpose of getting married if you could easily opt out.

 

In the same manner, if you have a business contract between two parties/businesses, one cannot renege on the contract just because he/she feels like it. Business contracts usually have escape clauses but it has to have reason.

 

In the same way, that is the essence of a marriage. It is a commitment (and it does have a contract) to do your part in the marriage. If you hurt your partner then, you could file for divorce. But if you find out later that you don't like his/her snoring and want to divorce him/her? Now that I feel is not keeping your end of the contract/commitment.

 

So to answer the question of a previous post. What is the essence of marriage? The essence of marriage is the commitment to love each other, the commitment to do your part in the marriage. That is the essence of marriage. Now if we will allow "No Fault" Divorces to happen, then the essence is lost.

Edited December 4, 2012 by bill_262003

[shampooh]

Again nose bleed

 

Wala bang emoticon na nosebleed?

[friendly0603]

In the same manner, if you have a business contract between two parties/businesses, one cannot renege on the contract just because he/she feels like it. Business contracts usually have escape clauses but it has to have reason.

 

In the same way, that is the essence of a marriage. It is a commitment (and it does have a contract) to do your part in the marriage. If you hurt your partner then, you could file for divorce. But if you find out later that you don't like his/her snoring and want to divorce him/her? Now that I feel is not keeping your end of the contract/commitment.

 

So to answer the question of a previous post. What is the essence of marriage? The essence of marriage is the commitment to love each other, the commitment to do your part in the marriage. That is the essence of marriage. Now if we will allow "No Fault" Divorces to happen, then the essence is lost.

The problem with the comparison to a contract is that contracts expires. That's why even if there are no escape clauses, it's still ok.

If the comparison is to a lifetime commitment, priests/nun enter a lifetime commitment but can still get out of it.

 

Usually when relationships end, it's nasty. How often do you think a no fault divorce would happen? If they are both mature individuals, it's very possible. But that means that "no fault" would be a good thing for both of them and affected parties. So why are we afraid of this being abused?

Are most people paranoid?

 

People fall in love and one of the major reasons to get married. I would assume that people who entered a marriage have no intention of breaking it. And that they tried their best to make it work and it didn't. I maybe naive but I think divorce would be the last option when everything else falls apart. Some things just can't be fixed.

 

If the love died, is the commitment enough to make a marriage last? If that is the essence of marriage?

Edited December 4, 2012 by friendly0603

[johnnydrama]

Yes, it's a Christian country. But if a law is based on a christian belief/religion should it still not apply to non-christians? Muslims have divorce but because I'm not a muslim it's not applicable to me. You can have divorce legally but have no divorce based on your faith. The church doesn't allow divorce. So what are your options if you are already legally separated and want to marry again? If Christ is your guiding principle in life, you can follow everything he teaches. Doesn't mean everybody has to follow that too. The church can always say "no to divorce" to its followers.

 

Yes, people change. It's either you change together, accept the changes or not. It shouldn't be forced upon because you entered into a contract.

 

What's not meant to be? What is the solution? I'm sure divorce will be expensive too. I don't believe that it'll be cheap.

 

Of course, whenever there is divorce, there should also be the provision for alimony so that the party wanting it won't just skip to the next bed, lay his seed, then boom!

 

What I do not find comforting is the assertion that divorce should not be legalized in the Philippines because we are "Christian"? Do you mean Roman Catholic, or those country-club "born-agains"? What does that leave the Mormons, the Buddhists and Wiccans based here?

 

If we want our families to attain the ideal desired to mitigate the existence of a divorce law, we may as well do away with politics (since working in Senate and/or Congress takes too much time away from being a father and husband - just ask Sen. Chiz Escudero), showbiz and conspicuous consumption in general.

 

We may as well revert to Middle-Ages style pastoralism and tribal clan-dwellings instead of cities

[bill_262003]

The problem with the comparison to a contract is that contracts expires. That's why even if there are no escape clauses, it's still ok.

If the comparison is to a lifetime commitment, priests/nun enter a lifetime commitment but can still get out of it.

 

Actually most business contracts have escape clauses. The escape clauses just have a reason. What i am saying is what if you have a contract, you are a construction company and a client gets you to build a structure. Now during the course of the contract, you are mid-way thru. The client just drops you with "no-fault" or no-reason. Wouldn't you be on the loosing end? What about your investment made to the contract? So what is the essence of the contract if one party can just opt out with no reason at all. Now in the same scenario, if there was an escape clause that says, client can withdraw if contractor cannot finish by a certain date. Then as the contractor, you are at fault for not finishing on the said date, then the client can opt out of the contract. But there has to be a reason. An aggrieved party, so to speak, before the contract is terminated.

 

Usually when relationships end, it's nasty. How often do you think a no fault divorce would happen? If they are both mature individuals, it's very possible. But that means that "no fault" would be a good thing for both of them and affected parties. So why are we afraid of this being abused?

Are most people paranoid?

 

We have no statistics here for that. But in the U.S. roughly 80% to 97% of divorce go via the "No-Fault" Divorce (different per state because of different laws per state. the 97% is in Louisiana.) Why go via the No-Fault divorce? Because it is easier. As the saying goes, "Water will always go to the path of no resistance".

 

Now here is the most horrifying figure, 80% of no-fault divorces are one way. This means the divorce is not mutual and that the husband/wife is not agreeable to ending the marraige. The no-fault divorce law takes away that (husband/wife who is not agreeable to end the marraige) control over whether or not they can save their marriage.

 

People fall in love and one of the major reasons to get married. I would assume that people who entered a marriage have no intention of breaking it. And that they tried their best to make it work and it didn't. I maybe naive but I think divorce would be the last option when everything else falls apart. Some things just can't be fixed.

 

That may be the thinking now of us Filipinos. To try to save the marriage. But again, if you give an easy way out, people will go that route. Again lets take a look at the U.S. (a country with no-fault divorce), "for 55 percent to 60 percent of couples who go into divorce, these are not bad marriages. They are just not ecstatic marriages". So they end up in a divorce because everything is not as they picture them to be. It is not all rosy and the feeling of heaven (but its not a bad marriage per se).

 

If the love died, is the commitment enough to make a marriage last? If that is the essence of marriage?

 

Hmmm... if the love has died.... What kind of love? The puppy love before? Maybe the love has evolved to something else. How can one even quantify love?

 

Again, I agree that we need a divorce law. But we should be very careful about this. It should be with reason. And burden of proof should be on the one filing the divorce.

 

Heck, even in a job, there has to be a reason for your employer to fire you. As one family court judge said, "It is easier to divorce my wife of 26 years than to fire someone I hired one week ago. The person I hire has more legal clout than my wife of 26 years. That's wrong."

[friendly0603]

Actually most business contracts have escape clauses. The escape clauses just have a reason. What i am saying is what if you have a contract, you are a construction company and a client gets you to build a structure. Now during the course of the contract, you are mid-way thru. The client just drops you with "no-fault" or no-reason. Wouldn't you be on the loosing end? What about your investment made to the contract? So what is the essence of the contract if one party can just opt out with no reason at all. Now in the same scenario, if there was an escape clause that says, client can withdraw if contractor cannot finish by a certain date. Then as the contractor, you are at fault for not finishing on the said date, then the client can opt out of the contract. But there has to be a reason. An aggrieved party, so to speak, before the contract is terminated.

I know that. That's why you can't put in clauses that are unlawful/illegal as well. That's what the contract is for as a guarantee.

 

We have no statistics here for that. But in the U.S. roughly 80% to 97% of divorce go via the "No-Fault" Divorce (different per state because of different laws per state. the 97% is in Louisiana.) Why go via the No-Fault divorce? Because it is easier. As the saying goes, "Water will always go to the path of no resistance".

Now here is the most horrifying figure, 80% of no-fault divorces are one way. This means the divorce is not mutual and that the husband/wife is not agreeable to ending the marraige. The no-fault divorce law takes away that (husband/wife who is not agreeable to end the marraige) control over whether or not they can save their marriage.

Question is so what? If you found someone who isn't committed to you, why do you want them to stay committed? So that both of you can suffer? This just means that one or the other wanted to end it. Give a separation period to work it out like the Australia version of no-fault.

 

That may be the thinking now of us Filipinos. To try to save the marriage. But again, if you give an easy way out, people will go that route. Again lets take a look at the U.S. (a country with no-fault divorce), "for 55 percent to 60 percent of couples who go into divorce, these are not bad marriages. They are just not ecstatic marriages". So they end up in a divorce because everything is not as they picture them to be. It is not all rosy and the feeling of heaven (but its not a bad marriage per se).

Why did you want to be married in the first place? How do you define a bad marriage? This is all very relative.

 

Hmmm... if the love has died.... What kind of love? The puppy love before? Maybe the love has evolved to something else. How can one even quantify love?

Again, I agree that we need a divorce law. But we should be very careful about this. It should be with reason. And burden of proof should be on the one filing the divorce.

Heck, even in a job, there has to be a reason for your employer to fire you. As one family court judge said, "It is easier to divorce my wife of 26 years than to fire someone I hired one week ago. The person I hire has more legal clout than my wife of 26 years. That's wrong."

If that puppy love is the reason you got married, then it's the one that died. Should puppy love be enough to get married? Maybe it shouldn't.

Why don't we make marriage more difficult than divorce/annulment? This could solve your issues. Marriage is so easy. That's the problem with it.

 

You can't fire your employee but the employee can quit anytime. How's that comparison? If your business is dependent on how good that employee is, you'll still lose it unless you find a replacement.

 

Being stuck in your situation isn't right for me as well. You should be in that marriage because you want to be in it and not because of a contract.

Edited December 5, 2012 by friendly0603

[bill_262003]

I know that. That's why you can't put in clauses that are unlawful/illegal as well. That's what the contract is for as a guarantee.

Precisely, that's what the marriage is for. A guarantee that you commit to the marriage. Again, if you can just renege on the business contract anytime just because you don't feel like it, then that what's the use of a business contract?

 

Question is so what? If you found someone who isn't committed to you, why do you want them to stay committed? So that both of you can suffer? This just means that one or the other wanted to end it. Give a separation period to work it out like the Australia version of no-fault.

So the question is what's the point of marriage if there is no commitment to work things out first. The separation period is suppose to be the time for couples to work things out first, U.S. also has this and almost all countries that have "No Fault" divorce has this. Has this affected their divorce rate? No. The thing is, separation period just delays it. Why are you suffering? He/She did something wrong to you (hurt you/cheated on you)? If so then you have a reason.

 

Again, look at the statistics. Around 55% to 60% of the people filing for No-Fault divorce are not suffering. It's not even a bad marriage. Its just not all rosy and heavenly all the time.

 

Why did you want to be married in the first place? How do you define a bad marriage? This is all very relative.

 

If that puppy love is the reason you got married, then it's the one that died. Should puppy love be enough to get married? Maybe it shouldn't.

Why don't we make marriage more difficult than divorce/annulment? This could solve your issues. Marriage is so easy. That's the problem with it.

 

Again, that's precisely the point. Having an easy divorce would make the decision to marry more meaningless and easy. If you know that getting a divorce has to have a valid reason, wouldn't you think hard before getting a married? If divorce was easy, then you wouldn't think long and hard before getting married. You want to make getting married harder? Then make divorce harder, people will think hard before getting married.

 

You can't fire your employee but the employee can quit anytime. How's that comparison? If your business is dependent on how good that employee is, you'll still lose it unless you find a replacement.

Here's what a lot of employees don't know. If you file a resignation without just cause, the employer can force you to stay for 30 days or until such time that the employer can find a replacement for you, otherwise the employer can charge you for damages. If you resign with a just cause (causes are listed in the labor code), you can just quit anytime.

 

Being stuck in your situation isn't right for me as well. You should be in that marriage because you want to be in it and not because of a contract.

Again, that's the point. You are not stuck. There is divorce. You just have to prove your reason why you want a divorce.

 

As I have been posting, I agree that a divorce is needed. We just need to be careful in making that law. Make sure there is a good/valid reason before one can file for divorce. And the reason should be substantial.

Edited December 5, 2012 by bill_262003

[friendly0603]

Precisely, that's what the marriage is for. A guarantee that you commit to the marriage. Again, if you can just renege on the business contract anytime just because you don't feel like it, then that what's the use of a business contract?

For me, that's a false concept. Contract is made for service with payment. Guarantee for marriage - hmmm? This is like predicting that you know what the future holds and that you'll stay "no matter what".

So the question is what's the point of marriage if there is no commitment to work things out first. The separation period is suppose to be the time for couples to work things out first, U.S. also has this and almost all countries that have "No Fault" divorce has this. Has this affected their divorce rate? No. The thing is, separation period just delays it. Why are you suffering? He/She did something wrong to you (hurt you/cheated on you)? If so then you have a reason.

Again, look at the statistics. Around 55% to 60% of the people filing for No-Fault divorce are not suffering. It's not even a bad marriage. Its just not all rosy and heavenly all the time.

So are you proposing a list of reasons? Again, what is a bad marriage? So if 10% of the time is good or acceptable, 90% of the time that it sucks should stay committed. Are the divorced people happier? Or not?

Again, that's precisely the point. Having an easy divorce would make the decision to marry more meaningless and easy. If you know that getting a divorce has to have a valid reason, wouldn't you think hard before getting a married? If divorce was easy, then you wouldn't think long and hard before getting married. You want to make getting married harder? Then make divorce harder, people will think hard before getting married.

The point is getting married is easy with or without divorce. With statistics, do you know the percentage of rejected proposals? Or what % of weddings don't push thru because the couples thought long and hard and decided to break off the relationship? I assume it will be a very small percentage. Annulment is hard enough which is the current option for the Phils. There is no simple annulment as well

Here's what a lot of employees don't know. If you file a resignation without just cause, the employer can force you to stay for 30 days or until such time that the employer can find a replacement for you, otherwise the employer can charge you for damages. If you resign with a just cause (causes are listed in the labor code), you can just quit anytime.

I know that. If you sign and read your contract, you should know that. You should know that 30 days notice is required but employer can waive that as well and that they can fire you anytime for cause as well. I give 30 days notice because I want to leave. Will 30 days convince me to make me stay longer or change my mind? I can actually go earlier by using my remaining leave. Also, people who don't care about the previous employer will resign or even go AWOL. Even with marriage, 30 days is easy if this is the notice period for divorce. Did we get anywhere to comparing employment contracts to marriage?

Again, that's the point. You are not stuck. There is divorce. You just have to prove your reason why you want a divorce.

As I have been posting, I agree that a divorce is needed. We just need to be careful in making that law. Make sure there is a good/valid reason before one can file for divorce. And the reason should be substantial.

There is no divorce in the Phils. You are stuck as of present day 2012 Phils.

 

Nothing stops you from re-marrying your ex-wife if you can really work it out. Also, if you believe in your church's no divorce stand - then you can still follow that.

Edited December 5, 2012 by friendly0603

[bill_262003]

For me, that's a false concept. Contract is made for service with payment. Guarantee for marriage - hmmm? This is like predicting that you know what the future holds and that you'll stay "no matter what".

I never said no matter what. I said, if there is a reason you can renege on a contract. But there has to be a reason, otherwise what is the point of the contract. Contracts are not only for services with payments. Have you Memorandum of Agreements can be signed between two businesses agreeing to terms on how they will do business (Example confidentiality agreement, non-compete agreement, etc.).

 

So are you proposing a list of reasons? Again, what is a bad marriage? So if 10% of the time is good or acceptable, 90% of the time that it sucks should stay committed. Are the divorced people happier? Or not?

Actually, there are list of reasons. For countries that don't implement the "No-Fault" divorce, there is a list of valid reasons. Much like our Annulment law and Legal Separation Law, which has a list of valid reasons (example, being physically or mentally abused, adultery, etc.)

 

Now for your question, are the divorced people happier? If 80% of the No-Fault Divorce is one sided (meaning only one party wants out), then 80% are not happy. Now for the one's who did file the divorce and remarry, 70% of them will end up filing for divorce again. So are they still happy? I guess not. Now I am only talking about the couple, bring in to the equation the children.... All of the children of divorced couples are unhappy.

 

The point is getting married is easy with or without divorce. With statistics, do you know the percentage of rejected proposals? Or what % of weddings don't push thru because the couples thought long and hard and decided to break off the relationship? I assume it will be a very small percentage. Annulment is hard enough which is the current option for the Phils. There is no simple annulment as well

 

How then do you propose to make marriage harder? You feel that right now it is easy to get married without divorce, then all the more easier it will be if you have divorce. Its a simple logic. With an easy way out, you will not think twice. Think of it this way, if you buy an item and the store policy is no return no exchange. Wouldn't you think harder before buying an item? Wouldn't you check the items harder for damages before buying it?

 

I know that. If you sign and read your contract, you should know that. You should know that 30 days notice is required but employer can waive that as well and that they can fire you anytime for cause as well. I give 30 days notice because I want to leave. Will 30 days convince me to make me stay longer or change my mind? I can actually go earlier by using my remaining leave. Also, people who don't care about the previous employer will resign or even go AWOL. Even with marriage, 30 days is easy if this is the notice period for divorce. Did we get anywhere to comparing employment contracts to marriage?

Just so you won't get into trouble, if go AWOL or file a leave you will still get into trouble and employer can file for damages. Even if its not in your employment contract it's in the labor law. At any rate, lets leave the employment discussion since it is getting to OT.

 

There is no divorce in the Phils. You are stuck as of present day 2012 Phils.

 

Nothing stops you from re-marrying your ex-wife if you can really work it out. Also, if you believe in your church's no divorce stand - then you can still follow that.

You have always used argument of forcing or stuck. It is not about forcing but about having responsibility. The issue is taking responsibility for one's actions in ending the marriage. With no-fault divorce, the spouse who files for divorce without grounds accepts no burden of responsibility. Indeed, that spouse gains all the advantages. If divorce needs a cause, then the spouse who files for divorce has to accept the responsibility of why the marriage broke down.

 

You are not stuck as of the present. There is Legal Separation and Annulment. Hmmmm, you are assuming I am against divorce. Let me re-iterate this again, I am not against divorce. Just the divorce without proving any fault of any party.

[friendly0603]

I never said no matter what. I said, if there is a reason you can renege on a contract. But there has to be a reason, otherwise what is the point of the contract. Contracts are not only for services with payments. Have you Memorandum of Agreements can be signed between two businesses agreeing to terms on how they will do business (Example confidentiality agreement, non-compete agreement, etc.).

I just that's the reality of marriage in the philippines. It is a no matter what. Exclusions are limited and we all know that.

Now for your question, are the divorced people happier? If 80% of the No-Fault Divorce is one sided (meaning only one party wants out), then 80% are not happy. Now for the one's who did file the divorce and remarry, 70% of them will end up filing for divorce again. So are they still happy? I guess not. Now I am only talking about the couple, bring in to the equation the children.... All of the children of divorced couples are unhappy.

I'm sure there are children that are happier that have separated parents than having the constant war at home for those who stay together. Initially, they will be unhappy but later on they'll realize that their parents should have the right to pursue their own happiness separately if they cannot find it together.

How then do you propose to make marriage harder? You feel that right now it is easy to get married without divorce, then all the more easier it will be if you have divorce. Its a simple logic. With an easy way out, you will not think twice. Think of it this way, if you buy an item and the store policy is no return no exchange. Wouldn't you think harder before buying an item? Wouldn't you check the items harder for damages before buying it?

Let couples go thru something similar as annulment for marriage. A very lengthy process.

 

How can easy be easier? That's like saying I can buy it in store or online. Can I ask how long you waited to get married?

Unfortunately, some damages are seen after buying it. But if those are inherent flaws (non-visible), you can replace and return it. You can't do that with marriage.

Just so you won't get into trouble, if go AWOL or file a leave you will still get into trouble and employer can file for damages. Even if its not in your employment contract it's in the labor law. At any rate, lets leave the employment discussion since it is getting to OT.

I know that. But the trouble is minimal and even the employer won't seek a lengthy case just to sue you especially if you have no funds or you go outside the country.

Like I said before, no use comparing the employment contract or our work/employment laws.

You have always used argument of forcing or stuck. It is not about forcing but about having responsibility. The issue is taking responsibility for one's actions in ending the marriage. With no-fault divorce, the spouse who files for divorce without grounds accepts no burden of responsibility. Indeed, that spouse gains all the advantages. If divorce needs a cause, then the spouse who files for divorce has to accept the responsibility of why the marriage broke down.

What if you are the abused one and wants a divorce? Is it your responsibility? What are the implications of this responsibility that you are so adamant about?

You are not stuck as of the present. There is Legal Separation and Annulment. Hmmmm, you are assuming I am against divorce. Let me re-iterate this again, I am not against divorce. Just the divorce without proving any fault of any party.

It's the reality for people waiting to go on with their lives. They're stuck. How long do these options take? Annulment is a farce since the most used excuse is psychological incapacity. Legal separation doesn't allow you to get married again (if you ever want to?). You are still liable for Adultery, Bigamy, etc.

If these 2 options are really practical for most people, they would not ask for a divorce law.

 

I know you're not against divorce. We just have differing opinions about controlling how people end their relationship. Especially when these are their own personal lives that are affected and not ours. There is no control in how people enter it.

I believe that there is statistics that arranged marriages have very low divorce rates.

Edited December 6, 2012 by friendly0603

[bill_262003]

How can easy be easier? That's like saying I can buy it in store or online. Can I ask how long you waited to get married?

Unfortunately, some damages are seen after buying it. But if those are inherent flaws (non-visible), you can replace and return it. You can't do that with marriage.

<snip>

What if you are the abused one and wants a divorce? Is it your responsibility? What are the implications of this responsibility that you are so adamant about?

Again, your examples for divorce all have valid reasons. I am not against divorce if you have a valid reason (your example above, is abuse).

The burden of responsibility is on the one filing divorce to prove that there was indeed abuse. Just a simple task of proving that you were abused. Maybe a picture of your bruises, etc. That is all that I am asking from the ones filing divorce. To prove or to give a reason why they are filing for divorce.

 

If you file for divorce and indicate in your reason, "la lang, gusto ko lang makipag hiwalay". Then responsibility is lost. Responsibility to the people who are gonna be affected by the divorce (which includes the partner, the children and even the future partners).

 

Let's not even discuss if they (the children) are gonna be happy or not. You have a responsibility to them, since it is their lives you are affecting (whether fr the good - as you argued that it might be better for them or for the bad - which is the reality... just look at the troubled teens in the U.S. most come from failed marriages).

[friendly0603]

Again, your examples for divorce all have valid reasons. I am not against divorce if you have a valid reason (your example above, is abuse).

The burden of responsibility is on the one filing divorce to prove that there was indeed abuse. Just a simple task of proving that you were abused. Maybe a picture of your bruises, etc. That is all that I am asking from the ones filing divorce. To prove or to give a reason why they are filing for divorce.

If you file for divorce and indicate in your reason, "la lang, gusto ko lang makipag hiwalay". Then responsibility is lost. Responsibility to the people who are gonna be affected by the divorce (which includes the partner, the children and even the future partners).

Let's not even discuss if they (the children) are gonna be happy or not. You have a responsibility to them, since it is their lives you are affecting (whether fr the good - as you argued that it might be better for them or for the bad - which is the reality... just look at the troubled teens in the U.S. most come from failed marriages).

I'm sure that the level of unhappiness for those who want a divorce varies from person to person. Even the person that says "la lang" could have some sort of mental illness. We just don't think it's real coz it doesn't happen to us.

 

What if my partner doesn't want to have sex with me anymore? What if I have ED? The partner may not cheat but you can't pursue others because you are married. If you are having sex out of obligation only, won't it suck as well? Once the love is gone, the intimacy will go as well. I may still try to be responsible for the family but am still unhappy in my hypothetical marriage which is totally acceptable for you since it's not a "bad marriage".

 

The problem with divorce is that it's messy. A lot of men aren't responsble for their children - legal or illegal. If you have illegal kids after getting married, aren't you supposed to be charged with adultery already? Somehow it's not common and some illegitimate children are actually famous enough to be noticed yet the government does nothing.

 

As long as divorce is as expensive as annulment, not many people will seek it and just separate without the legalities. If men were held liable for the cost of divorce, alimony and child support, this will most likely not fly in Phil. society.

 

Why doesn't the law intervene when you want to get married but want to if you want to end it? I know we all want some sort of guarantee but life doesn't really work that way.

This is the reason why even the Pinoys who live overseas want to get married in the phils. They feel "some guarantee" because there is no divorce in the Phils. What they don't know is that they can be divorced overseas - it's just more expensive and it's still have no effect in the phils. So what? The Phil government can only implement their law in the phils anyway. It's just that not everyone can pursue other means outside the Philippines.

 

We have this fear that once there's divorce, the children are forgotten automatically. It all depends on what kind of parents you have and not the marriage. I'll let that go.

 

Try and watch "Bye Bye Love" and see a view of Rob Reiner on divorce. But I'm sure each experience will vary in divorce.

Edited December 6, 2012 by friendly0603