Bill Forces People Going Through Divorce To Get A Judge’s Permission Before Having Sex

[ismnotwasm]

( I feel like posting "crazy shi* Republicans say" today)

There’s nothing that sets the mood for a romantic evening like petitioning a judge for permission to have sex at the end of the night.
If Massachusetts State Sen. Richard J. Ross (R) gets his way, that’s exactly what many women (and men) would have to do if they have children and are going through a divorce. In fact, not only would permission-less coitus be banned, but so too would the romantic evening and many dating activities.
Ross’ bill seeks to amend Massachusetts divorce law with the following provision (emphasis added):
In divorce, separation, or 209A proceedings involving children and a marital home, the party remaining in the home shall not conduct a dating or sexual relationship within the home until a divorce is final and all financial and custody issues are resolved, unless the express permission is granted by the courts.
The legislation, S787, was first filed in early 2013. On Thursday, it received an extension for consideration in the State House until June 30. In its current state, the bill does not specify what the penalty is for pre-divorce copulation.
Massachusetts law currently mandates a waiting period of at least 120 days for divorces to become finalized, and that’s only after a judge has approved the separation agreement. In other words, it could take at least four months, if not longer, before a person getting a divorce is legally allowed to fornicate.
Ross, who serves as Minority Whip, took over former Sen. Scott Brown’s (R-MA) state Senate seat in 2010.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/03/21/3417400/massachusetts-judge-sex/

[louis-t]

1. Repugs are all for smaller gubmint unless it involves

putting their hands in your wife's crotch and telling her what she can and can't do with it.

[pipoman]

2. Actually it doesn't do that at all

It requires a judges permission to have sex in the jointly owned home if there are kids living there.

In other words, it could take at least four months, if not longer, before a person getting a divorce is legally allowed to fornicate.

only if one can't read and understand does it mean any such thing. ..

[ismnotwasm]

3. Ah!

Thanking you for your enlightening response.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

4. I wish a mandate really could force people to act responsibly. Perhaps, in some small way,

this will force (enlighten) some to think about the consequences of an action and how it could affect others in the house/home.

I really think his energies could be better utilized elsewhere.

It is kind of intrusive law into an adult's private life.

I use the term adult, loosely here.

[pipoman]

5. I suspect the real issue is

to reduce filings for custody based on this. Having worked many divorce actions over many years this is without a doubt one of the most often argued topics. Further it is likely the cause of more domestic disturbances during divorce proceedings than any other single issue. Regardless whose idea it was, it may be a good idea in the long run. ..

Further, i believe it would be reasonable to include the non custodial parent when the children are staying with them. ..the part about including a jointly owned home is probably the only legal justification for the law.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

6. I can see that argument ... only time will tell.

However, I am not sure that another reason to drag out proceedings is really helpful to anyone.

[ismnotwasm]

7. I can't see it being enforceable

People could rent a room and get a babysitter, sure.

In reality, I don't think that's what will happen. As you point out, how many divorce cases are based on infidelity in the first place?
Wouldn't the kids have to testify if this was brought up as an issue?

[pipoman]

8. Every divorce lawyer has a list of do's and dont's

For their clients. Don't contact the other party except through the lawyer, don't drive by, show up at the others work, don't do anything to piss the judge off, etc. It's enforceable. Renting rooms during divorce isn't an option, nor is clearing out bank accounts, moving money, selling property, etc. And yes, kids would and often are used as witnesses in divorce and custody cases.

This could result in something good. For the kids, the courts, the police, and the parties involved. I view it as a reasonable restriction while a divorce is pending.

The simple solution for the custodial parent, of they really can't control themselves during the divorce proceedings, would be to move into an apartment or something. I don't see anything that prohibits the custodial parent from moving in with someone else, though it may require a hearing to move the kids. ..

Oh, and pre divorce orders are usually dictated by the partner who files first. Then several days or weeks later there is a hearing on the initial orders.

[ismnotwasm]

9. Huh.

That's pretty sad. I've never been divorced, so I have no personal experience with it--I hear the stories, but they're always anecdotal and biased. My husband ended up with custody of his daughters because his wife just up and left. He always protected them, as best as he could I came along about 2 later.