by Allen Quist
IR Endorsed Gubernatorial Candidate
No-fault divorce, which should be called "divorce on demand," is an issue that merits serious discussion and debate. The big issue, however, is not divorce itself, the big issues are the value of marriage, equality under the law, and the right of private citizens to be free from unnecessary governmental interference in their private lives.
Some people say that if the state attempts to keep marriages together, then the state is intruding itself into the private lives of our citizens. Actually, the opposite is true. It is no-fault divorce that is the intrusion into our personal lives.
In marriage, two private citizens have voluntarily entered into an agreement, or contract, to form a new family centered in the marriage relationship. By means of no-fault divorce, the government inserts itself into that marriage commitment and overrules it, thus saying that the commitment really doesn't mean anything. The state has no business overturning a private contract without cause. The state does, however, have a duty to protect individuals from being exploited by persons who break contracts without cause.
The second issue is the value of marriage. Whatever we value, we protect. The reason our government leaders don't protect marriage is because they don't recognize its value.
I believe that marriage is the basic building block of society and the most basic unit of government. Marriage needs to form the core unit around which the family revolves. In many ways the roles of husbands and wives are more important than the roles of other government leaders; and state government needs to learn how to protect and strengthen families, not burden them further or try to replace them.
I also believe that we cannot solve many of our most pressing problems until we rebuild the institution of marriage. For example, 70% of juvenile delinquents now come from homes without fathers. This is so, even though most single parents do a good job of raising their children. The most effective way to combat violent crime is to rebuild marriage and families.
The same is also true for most other social problems. For example, partner abuse is three times higher for couples who are not married than for couples who are married. And the rate of teenage promiscuity and pregnancy, the rate of teen abortion, depression, suicide, alcoholism and drug addiction, and even truancy are all much higher for children whose parents are not married.
The best thing we can do to help remedy all these evils is to rebuild marriage and families. I put it this way -- the family is the best social welfare program ever created.
We may have divorce without fault, but it is impossible to have divorce without victims. Numerous studies have revealed that victimless divorce is a myth. The time has come for Minnesota's political leaders to hear the voices of the many victims of no-fault divorce in our state.
The third big issue is equality under the law. I believe that the primary feature of good law is that it treats all interested parties equally. In no-fault divorce, however, the standing of each marriage partner is as unequal as it can get. The person who wants the divorce has 100% of the law on his or her side in so far as the marriage is concerned. If one of the partners wants to keep the marriage together, however, that person has no legal rights at all regarding the marriage. Similarly, any children involved have no legal rights at all.
The questions I ask are these: Why should the partner who wants the divorce have all the rights while the other partner and the children have no rights? Isn't this discrimination against persons who want to stay married? And, since 68% of those filing for no-fault divorce are men, doesn't this discriminate against women 68% of the time?
Is there another example of either state or federal law where the law always comes down on the side of a person who wants to break a contract without cause? I don't think there is.
It seems to me that a married person who wants to avoid divorce, in a case where there is not fault, should at least have the legal right to request a six-month waiting period, with required counseling, before a no-fault divorce is granted. I believe that a significant number of marriages could be put back together with this minimal requirement. We also need to consider other suggestions on how we can improve the broken system we now have.
Many of our best marriages involve couples whose marriage, at one time, was on the rocks. Similarly, many good marriages have been lost because of no-fault divorce.
There are many other things we need to do to strengthen marriage -- welfare reform, tax breaks for families, abstinence-based sex education, and better job opportunities, for example.
The big questions, however, are: Do we value marriage? Do we really value equality? And, do we value the right of private citizens to make meaningful contracts without the government stepping in and overturning those contracts without cause?
Whatever we value, we protect. The time has come for governmental leaders to get their values house in order. If that happens, the bankruptcy of no-fault divorce will be obvious, as well.
Allen Quist
Prepared by the Quist for Governor Committee, P.O. Box 170, Chaska, MN 55318, Telephone/Fax: (612)457-2319/451-2826