Arkansas/Texas/ND/No Fault etc - 8/9/07

[Smartmarriages]

- PRE-MARRIAGE LESSONS AIMED AT REDUCING DIVORCE
- MARRIAGE EDUCATION CATCHES ON
- REPLIES TO "A PRIEST'S SUGGESTION"
- NO-FAULT DIVORCE AND THE "TAKINGS DOCTRINE"
- NORTH DAKOTA COHABITATION LAW
- LUBE JOBS: SEX MANUAL TRIES TO JUMP-START MARRIAGES

###########################

- PRE-MARRIAGE LESSONS AIMED AT REDUCING DIVORCE

Pre-Marriage Lessons Aimed At Reducing Divorce Rate
www.todaysthv.com
August 9, 2007

[[Most important part of this article is a link to TAKE A POLL about whether
or not the state should spend money on marriage education.  Weigh in at:
http://www.todaysthv.com/default.aspx#poll

And, the most encouraging part of this article is the closing opinion from
the Arkansas ACLU attorney, below. - diane ]]

> Arkansas ACLU Attorney Holly Dickinson, who believes marriage is a state
> interest. In an emailed statement she writes, marriage education can be a
> legitimate state interest. The state must ensure that it is not favoring one
> group over another. The program must be fairly applied, and not favor one
> group over another. For example, favoring one racial group, or one gender, or
> one religious interpretation in order to comply with the constitution. Whether
> or not this is a wise use of state funds is a political question to be
> answered by elected leadership and the public, based on the needs of the
> community and the other responsibilities of government.
 
Arkansas is one of three states that have passed covenant marriage laws.

In 2005, then Governor Mike Huckabee and his wife Janet, along with hundreds
of other couples, participated in public covenant marriage ceremony at
Alltel Arena on Valentine's Day.

A covenant marriage allows couples to undergo a stronger marriage contract
and makes it harder for couples to get a divorce.

Family Council Executive Director Jerry Cox would like to see the state do
more.

He says, ³The best way for a person to have a good marriage is to on the
front end to help people understand what a good marriage is, how to manage
their money, how to resolve conflict."

Texas is the latest state aiming to reduce divorce rates and strengthen the
family, appropriating $7.5 million to create optional marriage education
courses.

Cox says, ³I think it's proper that the state do this because it really is
the society doing something good for society."

Arkansas lawmakers have also put aside funds for similar programs, but
turned down an initiative, in the last legislative session that would have
provided couples seeking a marriage license with a brochure on marriage
tips.

Just like in the Warner Brothers movie, ³License To Wed", some brides-to-be
think a little counseling isn't such a bad idea.
Cailin Noble says, ³A lot of people have been jumping into marriage; they
run off and elope, which is fine. It's a nice way to get to know your future
husband or future wife."

But some say, it should be left up to the professionals, with no state funds
involved.

Noble¹s bridesmaid, Sara McCabe says, ³It should always be, you can always
go to talk to a priest, it shouldn't be something that's been paid for. The
church should be separate from the state, so the state funding money into
it, I think is a bad idea."

For Noble, whose big day is just weeks away, the counseling has made her
better prepared, ³I think it's going to help our marriage. We have gotten to
know each other a lot better."

Cox believes in marriage education. He says, ³I think there's a way to do
that in where people who want a faith emphasis can have it and those who
don't wouldn't necessarily have it."

Cox says statistics have shown that ten to 20 percent of all couples who
undergo pre-marital counseling decide not to get married.

We checked with Arkansas ACLU Attorney Holly Dickinson, who believes
marriage is a state interest.

In an emailed statement she writes, marriage education can be a legitimate
state interest. The state must ensure that it is not favoring one group over
another. The program must be fairly applied, and not favor one group over
another. For example, favoring one racial group, or one gender, or one
religious interpretation in order to comply with the constitution. Whether
or not this is a wise use of state funds is a political question to be
answered by elected leadership and the public, based on the needs of the
community and the other responsibilities of government.

#########################

- MARRIAGE EDUCATION CATCHES ON

8-8-2007
Www.citizenlink.com

Marriage Education Catches On

More than half of states now offer marriage education that includes some
form of premarital counseling, according to a published report.

Texas recently became the 29th to establish such a program, aimed at
strengthening marriages, reducing divorce rates and promoting family
stability, according to Stateline.org. Couples receive instruction in such
things as communications and conflict resolution. Most of these programs are
funded with five-year federal grants under the $1.5 billion federal Healthy
Marriage Initiative (HMI).

³The difference between couples that survive and thrive in marriage and
those that do not lies primarily in how couples understand and accept the
fact that at times they will disagree and how they handle their inevitable
differences,² according to HMI¹s Web site. Research shows that children in
two-parent families have much better long-term outcomes in the areas of
health, finances and crime.

#######################

- REPLIES TO "A PRIEST'S SUGGESTION"

Received over a dozen replies to this one -
http://lists101.his.com/pipermail/smartmarriages/2007-August/003478.html
which is amazing since so many of you are away.  Will share one that is
representative.    -diane

> Hi Diane!  Had to drop in my 2-cents worth.  God was the inventor of marriage
> for us Catholics and Christians alike and it was He who said "Thou shalt not
> commit adultery" and "Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church" and
> "Wives, respect your husbands."  HmmmŠ sounds A LOT like some other marriage
> books we all know and love!!!  Therefore, we get married in church settings to
> INCLUDE the Lord in our ceremony - to have our Pastor or Priest offer prayer
> and blessings over us - much like baptism is an outward act of the inward
> commitment that has occurred.  Will a church wedding guarantee marital
> success?  Church divorce statistics show that is not the case.  But the
> ceremony is an outward sign of the inward commitment taking place and when
> officiated by ones' Pastor, it is a decision to recognize the Author of love
> and faithfulness.  This is also a vastly different proposal from the Community
> Marriage Initiatives that are seeking multi denominational alliances to
> require premarital counseling sessions.  Let's not throw our hands up in
> defeat and leave the whole marriage thing to the state - rather, let's pull in
> those wanting a "church wedding" and teach them what we know thru classes,
> mentor couples, and follow-up.
> Jennifer Scott 

###################################

- NO-FAULT DIVORCE AND THE "TAKINGS DOCTRINE"
by Judy Parejko
The Wanderer ­ August 9, 2007
www.thewandererpress.com/

[[Judy Parejko, author of "Stolen Vows", is a regular at Smart Marriages.
You can reach her at: www.DivorceResourceCenter.com - diane]]

Private land ownership is a ³fundamental attribute² protected by the
Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Marriage is also
fundamental but it doesn¹t seem to have the same protection that land
does.

When I was invited by Pete Vere to write this month¹s column, my
topic was naturally no-fault divorce. But, I¹ve learned how hard it
is to articulate what my eight years of research on the topic has
revealed to me. So, I decided to include a personal story that offers
parallels and insights.

When I was seven years old, my dad took my mother to the hospital to
find out why she was sick. During exploratory surgery, the doctors
found cancer in her vital organs. They decided there wasn¹t much they
could do for her and after a few days, she came home.

In those days ‹ the 1950s ‹ the prognosis for her condition was grim
with treatment options ranging from primitive to nonexistent. Even
though I knew she was very sick because of the way people talked
about her, I never imagined she would die a year later. With her
loss, our family was ³broken.²

I was self-conscious about my situation because none of my school
friends were from broken families. When I was older, I also came to
learn that I¹d even blamed myself for my mother¹s death ‹ that I ³deserved²
it because of something I¹d done or hadn¹t done. After all,
God wouldn¹t do this unless there was a reason.

Years later when I looked back on that time, I realized that I didn¹t
know of any families that were broken by divorce either.

Things have changed. There are better treatments for cancer now and
not as many people die. As a society, we¹ve made it a priority to
fund research that advances medicine, and likewise, results in a
reduction in the number of families with an outcome like mine.

Even so, we have more broken families than ever, but the reason now
is divorce, not death. I offer this personal story because it helps
illuminate something that has been lost in obscurity. In my research
I discovered that there was a growing movement during the ¹ 50s and ¹
60s ‹ the same time that I was growing up ‹ that had as its mission
to preserve the family unit. Known as the ³Conciliation Courts²
movement, it could be compared to the ³Cure for Cancer² movement
that led to medical advances in the cancer field.

Conciliation Courts were the inspiration of a few judges who felt
disheartened watching families in their courtrooms broken by divorce
and who wanted to give children a better chance to grow up in intact
families, if at all possible. These courts were operating in Los
Angeles, Toledo, Phoenix, and other places, and they weren¹t afraid
to use the word ³reconciliation² to describe their mission. But, by
1970, the mission shifted to ³divorce with dignity,² which meant
that their work in advancing research on reconciliation ³medicine²
came to a halt.

How do we account for this? The best explanation I can find is that
sweeping law changes throughout the country served to overturn well-
established public policy regarding the importance of marriage and at
the same time, removed the impetus for individuals seeking help.

California was the first state to overturn its prior divorce law
when, on January 1, 1970, the no-fault divorce law that Gov. Ronald
Reagan had signed into law went into effect. Other states quickly
followed suit.

Very few people truly grasp the nature of no-fault divorce, but one
of the closest parallels I¹ve found to describe how it was designed
to work is the ³takings doctrine² which has been in the news most
recently due to a U. S. Supreme Court ruling. The ³takings doctrine²
means that a government body can use its power of eminent domain
under some circumstances to take land from private citizens The
similarity to no-fault divorce is that the state has the power to ³take²
marriage through a court order (called a divorce decree)
signed by the judge. There doesn¹t have to be a reason for divorce
anymore. Previously a ³complaint² had to be filed.

Most people don¹t see the ³takings² nature of divorce because most
turn into a ³mutual consent² process with both spouses cooperating
to conclude their marriage. But, if one spouse is not cooperative,
the state will use its power (eminent domain), which can include the
use of its ³police power² to enforce the order.

The blueprint for no-fault divorce was formulated in the late ¹60s
by a national group of lawyers who gather annually to draft ³model²
laws. Their endorsement of this public policy shift went a long way
in garnering support from public officials.

When one spouse is assured of the power of the state to help him or
her ³take² the marital status from the other party, why would there
be any incentive to seek help?

Judy Parejko is the author of Stolen Vows: The Illusion of NoFault
Divorce and the Rise of the American Divorce Industry -
www.stolenvows.com More information about the history of the
Conciliation Court movement can be found at: www.afccnet.org.

##########################

- NORTH DAKOTA COHABITATION LAW

Changes in cohabitation law undermine marriage, family
By Tom D. Freier,
August 08, 2007

As I reflect on the Forum article reporting ³It¹s now official² in regard to
the change in North Dakota¹s cohabitation law, I feel compelled to comment.

SB 2138, which passed the house by a single vote, moved the cohabitation
language in the North Dakota Century Code from the criminal section to the
fraud section of the code. While the change seems subtle, it sends a strong
message. While the Legislature may have believed it was dealing with the
cohabitation issue, it was really displaying their lack of support for the
institution of marriage.

The North Dakota Family Alliance believes the institution of marriage to be
the foundational bedrock of the family, and the family to be primary in our
society. While the NDFA can not and will not support the practice of
cohabitation, that view relates to the practice, and is not meant to pass
judgment on individuals. We encourage those individuals and others to
consider the committed union of marriage.

What is rather disappointing is the celebratory attitude of Sen. Tracy
Potter, D-Bismarck, as he reflects on the passage of SB 2138. Studies
document cohabitating circumstances pose special risks for women and
children. These same studies conclude:

- Cohabitating circumstances increase the risk of domestic violence for
women, and physical and sexual abuse for children.

- Cohabitation increases the acceptance of divorce.

- Failed multiple cohabitation experiences lead to the least likelihood of a
successful relationship, and the worst scenario for children.

- About 75 percent of the children born to cohabitating couples will see
their parents split up before their 16th birthday, compared to 33 percent
with married parents.

- The most unsafe of all family environments for children is that in which
the mother is living with someone other than the child¹s biological father.

Sen. Potter states that 23,000 will be affected by this legislation. We can
only assume, with the passage of this bill, that the proponents would expect
that number to increase. If the number of those who choose not to marry
increases, we can only conclude more women and children will be adversely
affected. Given this research information, as well as additional testimony,
it would seem the Legislature should have put their energies into
strengthening the institution of marriage.

Proponents referenced some older North Dakotans who by marrying may be
adversely affected financially, because of tax, benefits, or estate issues.
Logically, these issues should have been dealt with specific to each
individual issue.

The proponents of this bill made light of the issue, and shared concerns
that North Dakota is viewed as backward for its stance on traditional
marriage. Proponents touted that by passing this legislation many young
people who left North Dakota because of being embarrassed by our state¹s
view on traditional marriage would somehow return. The NDFA believes that a
great majority of North Dakotans, including young North Dakotans, continue
to support the institution of marriage.

While some would warn of trying to legislate morality, I believe most North
Dakotans would agree that our morality should influence our views and
actions on legislative issues. North Dakotans are respected as good,
hard-working, principled people. We have earned that respect by standing up
for what is right. Now is the time to stand up.

Freier is the executive director of the North Dakota Family Alliance.

###############################
- LUBE JOBS: SEX MANUAL TRIES TO JUMP-START MARRIAGES

Sex manual tries to jump-start marriages
Westfall Weekly News
07 August, 2007

By JOSEPH B.FRAZIER, Associated Press

PORTLAND, Ore. - At first glance, the net-stockinged blonde and her
come-hither look changing a tire on the cover of the new book "Lube Jobs"
triggers an impulse to lock up husbands and kids.

But authors Don and Debra Macleod just want to have a lighthearted look at
marital sex. Their book, "Lube Jobs," is a how-to manual aimed at
jump-starting marriages that have drifted into boredom or become stuck
because of todayŒs pressures and the endless litany of daily priorities.

"Lube Jobs: A WomanŒs Guide to Great Maintenance Sex" is essentially
lighthearted but addresses sensitive issues that are taboo in many minds.

A marriage, like a car, needs maintenance, an occasional jump-start, they
said, which inspired the title, sort of. They drew on their experiences and
those of others to maintain or fire up a normal relationship strung out by
dual jobs, churlish bosses, the kids, financial obligations and more.

They said they realized how overwhelming events can sap a marriage when
their son was born two months prematurely. The letter "B," they write,
stands for both "Baby" and "Boss." They credit the information they give in
"Lube Jobs" with saving their marriage after the stress they both endured
following their sonŒs birth.

"For the other 15, if IŒm feeling frisky, IŒll do something for her," he
said.

Debra Macleod is a petite, dark-haired woman who has a matter-of-fact wit
about a subject that makes some people squirm. She and her husband, a
stocky, sandy-haired man with a no-nonsense demeanor, tackle the topic head
on with an attitude of "well, it is what it is so letŒs say so."

"Most women experience ups and downs in their sexual attraction to their
longtime partners but for many women in otherwise healthy relationships the
ŒdownsŒ can be lifted with just a little effort," the couple writes.

"ItŒs time to take your relationship off cruise control, pull over and
perform a thorough roadside check," they advise.

They said that through honest answers and shared responses, both partners
gained insight into the othersΠfeelings and stresses.

"Are there areas that need work? ItŒs simple maintenance but when weŒre
flying along on cruise control it never seems to get done."

There are times, the authors say, when you know your car needs full
maintenance but there is no time to get it done. So settle for 10 minutes at
a drive-through lube station.

The 20 "lube jobs" described in the book, the authors say, "are a great way
to provide maintenance sex. They keep your man satisfied during those times
youŒd prefer to pass on the passion."

The appeal of parts of "Lube Jobs" will not be universal. But for couples
who want to get things back on track, there are endless detailed
suggestions, the Macleods say. Take your pick: Morning? Nighttime? In the
shower? Under the table? In a parked car.

You choose.

  
**************************
Send submissions and comments for the listserv to: diane at smartmarriages.com
Do NOT hit "reply". If you hit reply your email will go into cyberspace and
NO ONE will see your email.

This is a moderated list. Submissions and comments are read by Diane Sollee,
editor. Please indicate if your comment is NOT to be shared with the list.
PLEASE include your email address or url as part of your signature.

Please also understand that with thousands of subscribers, not all comments
can be shared. Also realize that opinions expressed are not necessarily
shared by members of the Coalition.

To SUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, or Change your subscription address,
use the form at: http://www.smartmarriages.com. Click Newslist - in the left
column under the puzzle piece.

To read past posts to the listserv, visit the Archive at:
http://lists101.his.com/pipermail/smartmarriages/

12th Annual Smart Marriages Conference, Hilton San Francisco Hotel,
July 2 - 5, 2008  
Pre-Conference Training Institutes June 30-July 2
Post-Conference Training Institutes July 6

List your program and resources on the Directory of Classes at
http://www.smartmarriages.com

Order conference audio & video CD/DVD/MP3s: 800-241-7785 or
http://www.iPlaybackSmartMarriages.com

Coalition for Marriage, Family and Couples Education, LLC (CMFCE)
Diane Sollee, Director
5310 Belt Rd NW, Washington, DC 20015-1961
http://www.smartmarriages.com
202-362-3332

FAIR USE NOTICE: This e-newsletter/site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We make such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of marriage, family, couples, divorce, legislation, family
breakdown, etc. We understand this constitutes a 'fair use' of such material
as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes. For more
information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you
wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.