The no-fault divorce has been a bad thing overall,. . . .
You believe that people should be forced to stay married unless they meet criteria from a state-approved list of transgressions
I had not ever thought about that concept, but you stir a bit of interest. Given some bad circumstances, judgments and outcomes from the current setup - noted in this tread - maybe such criteria for granting of divorce would be better than what we are doing now. Can you give a short list for consideration?
Back in the day, grounds were stuff like adultery, conviction of a felony with a prison sentence, habitual intemperance, attempting to take the life of the other (I guess a backhand across the face was ok) or living separate and apart for 6 months or a year. It wasn't good.
