Report comment

You are so right, Nicholas! What if the ‘Respondent’ responds to the Petitioner’s Statement that as far as he/she is concerned the marriage has not irretrievable broken down – has there to be a hearing to decide whether or not that is the case? If there is, whoever is successful will blame the other party, so ‘No fault divorce’ is an absurdity! If a marriage has broken down it is usually because of the fault of one party or other, or the fault of both parties however much the ‘do-gooders’ want to say otherwise. The number of married parties who happily drift apart with smiles on their faces, both scattering rose petals as they skip on their way humming a cheerful song, instead of getting hot under the collar and foaming at the mouth about arrangements for the children or who is going to have the house etc., you could, I imagine count on one hand (relatively). The only real answer (and I have said this before in these columns) is to do away with marriage as a legal concept. ‘Marriage’ is a contract and you cannot (in any other branch of the law) walk away from a contract and think you can get away with it. Those who are serious in wanting to commit their lives to each other, either in the sight of God or as a civil pledge could still do so, either in a Church or a Synagogue or a Mosque or somewhere else of their choice. They have tried to bring in ‘no-fault’ divorce before and what a disaster that was! ‘Fault’ is a reasonable basis to cause a marriage (not to forget civil-partnerships of course) to be dissolved – allowing one party just to walk away from such a union is not.
By the way, Anon. 14.54, it is universally accepted by theological academics that the story of the woman taken in adultery (John 8: 2-11) was a much later addition to ‘John’s’ Gospel, (i.e. a made-up story) as the earliest known manuscripts do not have it. Not that this makes any difference to your argument, it’s just me being finicky!