That's one way to solve the problem


It isn't often that you see anything sensible coming out of an Indian court of law. But this is one rather happy exception:
An Indian court has ruled that a divorced woman can only continue receiving financial support from her ex-husband if she never has sex with another man. 
A high court judge in Madras, on the east coast of India, said that a woman having sex after divorce was virtually the same as adultery, it has been reported. 
Justice S Nagamuthu passed his judgement after a case in which a husband said his wife had been living a 'wayward life' while she retaliated by accusing him of 'illicit intimacy' with his own niece. 
Human rights activists have attacked the decree as 'regressive'. 
Despite stating that financial support was there to help divorcĂ©es, he added that women must also remain faithful to their former partners to merit being given the money. 
The Times reports the judge as saying: 'Even after a decree for divorce is granted, if the wife wants to retain her right to claim maintenance from her former husband,she is expected to continue to maintain the same discipline as she was expected to maintain during her marital ties. 
'Since the man carries the obligation to maintain his divorced wife, the woman also carries the obligation not to live in a relationship with another man.
I have to say, this is an unusually clever idea. Now, I have absolutely no idea whether it would pass muster under the American Constitution- though, given that the Supreme Court has essentially just invented rights to abortion and gay "marriage" out of thin air in the not-very-distant past, that is not exactly a high bar to smash into headfirst.

Under the Indian Constitution, of course, this could probably be found to be legal. That is because the Indian Constitution is a masterpiece of chaos and tortured reasoning. It runs over 500 pages and is, essentially, unreadable. And like most countries which use unreadable and highly illogical legal canons, "rights" get invented out of thin air from that document all the time.

But enough about India. Just imagine what would happen if we were to extend the same notion to the West. No-fault divorce would virtually disappear overnight, because this ruling would immediately place real, tangible consequences directly upon the choices that a woman can make following a divorce.

Suddenly, simply divorce-raping a man in order to take him to the financial cleaners, and thereby secure alimony, an "independent" lifestyle, and child support would no longer be nearly so attractive.

Suddenly, stories like Donovan Sharpe's scrotum-shriveling testimony about the time he tried to turn a whore into a housewife would become far less common.

The problem with this notion lies, of course, in its enforcement. How, exactly, would a court determine whether or not a newly-divorced woman was "shopping around", so to speak, without intruding egregiously upon said woman's rights as a (presumably) free-thinking adult? Moreover, how would one manage to avoid violating the cardinal rule of the Western justice system- namely, the notion that accused are innocent until proven guilty- without presuming guilt?

These are all questions which have to be addressed as both theoretical exercises and matters of practical policy. But, if the West is going to do anything about its sky-high divorce rates and collapsing fertility, it could do worse than attempting to restrain women from simply sponging off men.

To be clear, there are plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons for a woman to seek a divorce from a man. If he is physically abusive, for instance, then not only is divorce merited, it is usually required. And if he is a sexual predator upon young children, well, divorce is far too kind for him; my preferred punishment for that sort of man involves a procedure most commonly used on dogs to prevent them from breeding out of control, but my version doesn't involve anaesthesia or disinfectants.

But a woman who seeks a divorce and then proceeds to wring large sums of money from her erstwhile husband in order to "maintain her lifestyle" is simply playing the system. If the West seriously wishes to tackle that problem, then for once, it might try learning something from the East in order to do so.

Comments

Popular Posts