that under the current one-year waiting period, if you have "isolated" incidents of sexual intercourse with your estranged spouse, it does not reset the clock to another one-year waiting period.
if that is the case I would expect under the new proposed legislation if you go 1 year 11 months and 25 days of separation with no "nookie" and give in for a last night of passion, the two-year clock starts ticking again.
In light of the prevalence of divorce and not just one divorce and re-marriage among America's heterosexuals, the GOP's opposition to same-gender marriage is arguably disingenuous if the intent is to protect the "sanctity" of marriage.
That said, it is true that in most states divorce has become routine with some couples treating divorce like writing a Dear John letter. Nevada boasts hotel programs that promise a divorce over a weekend. Kim Kardashian is not the only celebrity whose marriage lasted only a matter of hours or days.
That suggests that some couples enter into marriage without any sense of gravitas. Here today, gone tomorrow.... I am certainly not opposed to a state taking measures to raise the seriousness of marriage. The marriage licensing process itself may not cost the state much but the costs of divorces, property settlements and child custody cost the states billions.
At the end of the day if you have two individuals who have concluded their relationship is irreparably broken, there is no sense in holding these individuals in a legal status neither of them want at least as long as there are no children involved.
But that said, if Republicans want to strengthen marriage they need to not just make divorce more difficult or throw tax and other benefits into the mix. They need to craft policies that help families. That means investment and a commitment to families.
As a Swedish-American I am appalled at how little public policy interjects itself into such matters as maternity and paternity leave, childcare, pediatric care, etc. The argument is these are matters best left to "the market" where employees and employers are free to make these decisions. While one may argue that affording a couple up to as much as one year of parental leave at better than 60% of salary is overkill, the difference with the U.S. system is stark.
You don't protect and promote marriage and family by preventing same-gender individuals from marrying or from keeping two persons locked in a legal relationship for two years. You promote and protect these institutions by investing in them, by adopting policies that strengthen the families by giving parents time to bond with a newborn, to have access to affordable pre-natal and post-natal/pediatric care, access to affordable childcare, pre-K programs, etc.
= new reply since forum marked as read