That's one way to solve the problem
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 divorcées, 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.
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.