Covenant Marriage is Legal???

[tropaka]

I know there are many types of religious marriage that are bound by specific laws of the church/sect etc but I had no idea that a few States actually allow covenant marriage as a legal option (harder to divorce etc). And I have a suspicion those behind these laws are somehow afraid of "sharia"...am I right?

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Covenant_marriage

covenantmarriage.com/

[uber frau]

Ahh yes, the irony is delicious. Or rather, it would be if it weren't all so fucked up.

Apparently the G-Bot is fond of them. IIRC, David and Nadia are 'covenant' married. There was complete radio silence when Ben and Audri were married but I wouldn't be surprised if they had a similar contract. The Botkins have.put their names to some screed about how repressive Islam is and how to restrictive it is to women. Pot, meet kettle...

[PhiMuLady]

Ah, yes, covenant marriage. I was pressured to do this by my future in-laws for my first marriage but dug my heels in and refused.

Louisiana's Covenant Marriage:

The couple who chooses to enter into a covenant marriage agrees to be bound by two significant provisions on obtaining a divorce or separation. These stipulations do not apply to other couples married in Louisiana:

The couple legally agrees to seek marital counseling if problems develop during the marriage; and

The couple can seek a divorce or legal separation for limited reasons only, as explained herein.

Declaration of Intent

In order to enter into a covenant marriage, the couple must sign a Declaration of Intent that provides:

A marriage agreement to live together as husband and wife forever;

The parties have chosen each other carefully and disclosed to each other "everything which could adversely affect" the decision to marry;

The parties have received premarital counseling;

A commitment that if the parties experience marital difficulties they agree to make all reasonable efforts to preserve their marriage, including marital counseling; and

The couple also must obtain premarital counseling from a priest, minister, rabbi or similar clergyman of any religious sect, or from a professional marriage counselor.

Affidavit and Attestation

After discussing the meaning of a covenant marriage with the counselor, the couple also must sign the Affidavit and Attestation form. This form is comprised of an attestation by the counselor with a notarized affidavit confirming that the counselor has discussed with them:

The profound implications of covenant marriage;

That the commitment to the marriage is for life;

The obligation of the couple to seek marital counseling if problems arise in their marriage;

That they have received the informational pamphlet published by the Attorney General entitled "Covenant Marriage Act."

The Declaration of Intent (comprised of the Recitation and the Affidavit with Attestation) must be presented to the official who issues the marriage license, along with the couple's application for a marriage license.

For both Covenant Marriage forms, click here.

Legal Separation in a Covenant Marriage

In order to obtain a legal separation (which is not a divorce and therefore does not end the marriage), a party to a covenant marriage must first obtain counseling and then must prove:

Adultery by the other spouse;

Commission of a felony by the other spouse and a sentence of imprisonment at hard labor or death;

Physical or sexual abuse of the spouse or of a child of either spouse;

The spouses have lived separate and apart for two years; or

Habitual intemperance (for example, alcohol or drug abuse), cruel treatment, or severe ill treatment by the other spouse.

Divorce in a Covenant Marriage

A covenant marriage makes divorce difficult. In a marriage that is not a covenant marriage, one may petition for divorce based upon audultery by the other spouse, conviction of a felony by the other spouse and his imprisonment at hard labor or death, or by proof that the spouses have lived separate and apart for six months before or after filing for divorce. In a covenant marriage, one may seek a divorce only after receiving counseling and may get a divorce only for any of the following reasons:

Adultery by the other spouse;

Commission of a felony by the other spouse and sentence of imprisonment at hard labor or death;

Abandonment by the other spouse for one year;

Physical or sexual abuse of the spouse or of a child of either spouse;

The spouses have lived separate and apart for two years; or the spouses are judicially or legally separated and have lived separate and apart since the legal separation for (a) one year and six months if there is a minor child or children of the marriage; (b) one year if the separation was granted for abuse of a child of either spouse; or © one year in all other cases.

Presently Married Couples

Couples who are presently married may execute a Declaration of Intent to designate their marriage a covenant marriage. They must sign a Recitation and Affidavit with Attestation similar to those above, after receiving counseling. The counselor must attest to the counseling. The intent to designate a marriage as a covenant marriage must be filed with the official who issued the couple's marriage license and with whom their marriage certificate is filed. If the couple was married outside of Louisiana, a copy of their marriage certificate, with the Declaration of Intent shall be filed with the officer who issues marriage licenses in the parish of the couple's domicile.

[rward]

In a covenant marriage, one may seek a divorce only after receiving counseling and may get a divorce only for any of the following reasons:

Adultery by the other spouse;

Commission of a felony by the other spouse and sentence of imprisonment at hard labor or death;

Abandonment by the other spouse for one year;

Physical or sexual abuse of the spouse or of a child of either spouse;

The spouses have lived separate and apart for two years; or the spouses are judicially or legally separated and have lived separate and apart since the legal separation for (a) one year and six months if there is a minor child or children of the marriage; (b) one year if the separation was granted for abuse of a child of either spouse; or © one year in all other cases.

A lot of states' own rules aren't much worse than that. Plenty of states require separation and living apart for a year before a divorce will be granted. I fail to see how this is special in any way.

[tropaka]

I think I'd choose the living apart option. I think the reason this is "special" because although it's not worded in a religious way, it's something that was pushed by conservative Christians ("Biblical Marriage") as their answer to rising divorce rates. So, eliminate no fault divorce and make it more difficult to leave unless you're abused....

[PhiMuLady]

A lot of states' own rules aren't much worse than that. Plenty of states require separation and living apart for a year before a divorce will be granted. I fail to see how this is special in any way.

I went through a divorce in this state - the difference is with a regular legal marriage only six months of separation is required with no children. With Covenant, it extends the separation time to two years.

[Talitha Cumi]

Imprisonment at hard labor? The fuck century are we in? AFAIK we don't keep people in black-and-white stripes out breaking rocks on the chain gang anymore.

*starts singing Po' Lazarus*

[Coconut Flan]

Along with the rest of the oddities of ultra conservatism, Louisiana appears to still have hard labor on the books.

[Handmaiden of Dog]

Along with all the other hard Right laws they have introduced or signed into law here in NC since January, they changed the requirements for a divorcing couple from one year living apart to two. I don't know what that extra year is supposed to accomplish. I'm sure anyone who has moved out and is waiting for a divorce has already made up their mind after a year. The only legal result is you would have to wait two years to marry your new partner.

[GawkingToo]

Along with all the other hard Right laws they have introduced or signed into law here in NC since January, they changed the requirements for a divorcing couple from one year living apart to two. I don't know what that extra year is supposed to accomplish. I'm sure anyone who has moved out and is waiting for a divorce has already made up their mind after a year. The only legal result is you would have to wait two years to marry your new partner.

Yikes! For all that sucks about Texas, at least we have no-fault divorce with no required separation period ("legal separation" isn't even a thing in Texas) and just a 60-day mandatory "cooling off" period from the time when you file for divorce until final judgment can be entered. (And if I recall correctly, even that period can be waived in certain domestic violence situations.)

[tropaka]

I just find it interesting that they can find (in the States that allow it) an additional legal requirement for dissolution of marriage. Different religions/sects already require certain standards for an acceptable divorce/annulment so I don't see how this got passed considering the separation of church and state. The Wiki page for it includes Islam and Judaism, but this seems to be a Christian thing. I just don't get how the laws would pass Constitutionally. Then again, I might be thinking as a Canadian...and in my mind if a spouse wanted to go under ordinary law, that would be taken above any secondary "religious" or special (Covenant) law. I am guessing it all ends up falling under contract law - you sign up for it with special restrictions, you have to deal with it (?)

[Arete]

That is how I understand the La law has not been shot down Constitutionally up till now. You have to sign special contracts above and beyond a regular state issued marriage license to get a "covenant" marriage. It is not the default legal marriage contract of the state. You don't get to decide after the marriage has taken place that it is one of these covenant marriages.

Frankly, this is one of those.....masturbatory conservative religious wingnut contract clauses that has not exactly caught fire in the rest of the US. And in ten more years the hard data will come out that the choice to declare some marriages covenant marriages made not a dent in Louisiana's divorce rates.

[singsingsing]

Imprisonment at hard labor? The fuck century are we in? AFAIK we don't keep people in black-and-white stripes out breaking rocks on the chain gang anymore.

*starts singing Po' Lazarus*

There are a lot of weird old fashioned phrases still in the law books. There is still a law where I live against, and I quote, "alarming Her Majesty."

[salex]

[

quote="singsingsing]

Actually I have a pic, but can't get it to show, so created a temp blog

I expect this is not considered "hard labor" and I'm guessing, given the lack of leg irons, these guys are on the "good" list of prisoners, who are trusted (trustees??) to do work outside. I didn't see guards, but I suspect there could be some kind of alarm system like the home arrest sort of things. Don't know. I don't remember what county this was, but we were at a county sheriff / jail area in Texas.

susansalexander.wordpress.com/2013/10/09/stuff-ive-seen/

[bionicmlle]

I'm sorry, but that law is so fucked up and beyond dangerous. So even if your spouse is beating the hell out of you or sexually molesting your children, you STILL have to go to counseling before you seek a divorce? Hopefully one session with a counselor would do it - it's completely inappropriate to do "couples therapy" with a couple in a violent or otherwise abusive relationship. I also find it odd that conservatives actually WANT the government involved in defining their religious marital contracts - if you make it available to everyone, then how is it extra speshul?

[Drina Adams]

In Ireland you've to be living apart for four years before applying for a divorce. And it was only introduced in 1995.

[tankgirl]

I'm sorry, but that law is so fucked up and beyond dangerous. So even if your spouse is beating the hell out of you or sexually molesting your children, you STILL have to go to counseling before you seek a divorce? Hopefully one session with a counselor would do it - it's completely inappropriate to do "couples therapy" with a couple in a violent or otherwise abusive relationship. I also find it odd that conservatives actually WANT the government involved in defining their religious marital contracts - if you make it available to everyone, then how is it extra speshul?

Yeah, and if one of them is molesting the kids in the neighborhood, but doesn't get busted by the cops, you are stuck with them, unless you do the 2 year thing, or they get arrested, as it only makes concession for molesting your own kids :angry-banghead:

[2xx1xy1JD]

I'm sorry, but that law is so fucked up and beyond dangerous. So even if your spouse is beating the hell out of you or sexually molesting your children, you STILL have to go to counseling before you seek a divorce? Hopefully one session with a counselor would do it - it's completely inappropriate to do "couples therapy" with a couple in a violent or otherwise abusive relationship. I also find it odd that conservatives actually WANT the government involved in defining their religious marital contracts - if you make it available to everyone, then how is it extra speshul?

That's what struck me the most. Any ethical marriage counselor following standards of professional conduct knows that you need to screen for domestic violence, and that counseling can't proceed until that is addressed. How on earth did nobody flag this as dangerous?

[nelliebelle1197]

Imprisonment at hard labor? The fuck century are we in? AFAIK we don't keep people in black-and-white stripes out breaking rocks on the chain gang anymore.

*starts singing Po' Lazarus*

You need to check out the prison system at Angola and Maricopa County, AZ. Of course we do.

[PhiMuLady]

The Angola Rodeo is this month. angolarodeo.com

Also, Oprah's network did a documentary on Angola's inmate led hospice program, which was very eye opening.

oprah.com/own-doc-club/Serving-Life-Trailer

edited link

[Talitha Cumi]

You need to check out the prison system at Angola and Maricopa County, AZ. Of course we do.

I forgot about Sheriff Joe. :headdesk:

[Arete]

Imprisonment at hard labor? The fuck century are we in? AFAIK we don't keep people in black-and-white stripes out breaking rocks on the chain gang anymore.

*starts singing Po' Lazarus*

After your done, I'll pick up by humming I Am A Man of Constant Sorrow.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Reading a bit more about the intention behind the law, I have to say that it's an example of how great intentions don't always make great laws.

In theory, I tend to agree that stronger and more committed marriages are better for kids.

In practice, though, I realize that the law is a pretty blunt tool and that it can't force people to behave decently to each other. I also realize that the court process itself can be harmful, and that there is something to be said for clear rules and laws that reduce the opportunity for fighting in court. Divorce involves hurt feelings. Living in a no-fault divorce area, I tell clients all the time that their hurt feelings may be very legitimate, but they are simply not relevant to the court process. My fear would be that if we make those things relevant and force people to testify about how awful their spouse was, we are just adding fuel to the fire. Folks will get stuck in the conflict, instead of figuring out how to move on, and that is not a good thing for children.

I don't see a 2 year separation period before divorce as being that draconian - it's one year where I live, but often takes longer to finalize a divorce because of the need to deal with things like child support first. What's different here is that the "wronged" spouse can go to court first, so they have more bargaining power. For a wife with kids who is abandoned by a cheater, that's a good thing. For someone trapped in a horrible marriage that doesn't quite meet the threshold of being clearly abusive, it's not. I can see people now having an incentive to go to court and prove that a bad marriage was actually abusive, which is what people did before no-fault divorce became common. Again, the original intention is fine, but the side effect is that you are giving people an incentive to fight and dig up every piece of evidence on how bad the other person was, instead of allowing them to settle things and move on.

[There are times that domestic violence is truly relevant in court, even in no-fault divorce areas. I want to know if there is a need for a restraining order to protect a client, or if a former spouse poses a risk to children.]

OTOH, I'll at least give the woman behind this law a bit of credit for one thing: if she was concerned about protecting marriage, focusing on pre-marital counseling and making divorce harder at least has some logic behind it, unlike DOMA. Here's a quote from her:

For Spaht, who kept the promise she made to God 14 years ago, the low adoption [of covenant marriage] rates are particularly disheartening. "There are a lot of hypocrites in this world," she says. "A lot of these people screaming about same-sex marriage? Boy, howdy, they sure know how to turn on a dime."

[salex]

Reading a bit more about the intention behind the law, I have to say that it's an example of how great intentions don't always make great laws.

In theory, I tend to agree that stronger and more committed marriages are better for kids.

In practice, though, I realize that the law is a pretty blunt tool and that it can't force people to behave decently to each other. I also realize that the court process itself can be harmful, and that there is something to be said for clear rules and laws that reduce the opportunity for fighting in court. Divorce involves hurt feelings. Living in a no-fault divorce area, I tell clients all the time that their hurt feelings may be very legitimate, but they are simply not relevant to the court process. My fear would be that if we make those things relevant and force people to testify about how awful their spouse was, we are just adding fuel to the fire. Folks will get stuck in the conflict, instead of figuring out how to move on, and that is not a good thing for children.

I don't see a 2 year separation period before divorce as being that draconian - it's one year where I live, but often takes longer to finalize a divorce because of the need to deal with things like child support first. What's different here is that the "wronged" spouse can go to court first, so they have more bargaining power. For a wife with kids who is abandoned by a cheater, that's a good thing. For someone trapped in a horrible marriage that doesn't quite meet the threshold of being clearly abusive, it's not. I can see people now having an incentive to go to court and prove that a bad marriage was actually abusive, which is what people did before no-fault divorce became common. Again, the original intention is fine, but the side effect is that you are giving people an incentive to fight and dig up every piece of evidence on how bad the other person was, instead of allowing them to settle things and move on.

[There are times that domestic violence is truly relevant in court, even in no-fault divorce areas. I want to know if there is a need for a restraining order to protect a client, or if a former spouse poses a risk to children.]

OTOH, I'll at least give the woman behind this law a bit of credit for one thing: if she was concerned about protecting marriage, focusing on pre-marital counseling and making divorce harder at least has some logic behind it, unlike DOMA. Here's a quote from her:

People get around these kinds of laws in a variety of ways. They file for divorce in another state, they keep lovers on the side/move in during the seperation period. Going to counseling under duress does not mean trying to salvage a marriage. If people want out, they will find a way.

While i'm for premarital counseling to get people talking about the big issues involved in sharing major decisions that comes with most marriages, I will never be convinced that making divorce harder makes marriages better. It may dissuade a few people. But, the longevity of my marriage is not based on the relative ease or difficulty of getting a divorce--it is based on compatibility and love within my marriage. We would likely be as we are within a convenat marriage, our normal marriage or no marriage at all....