It failed during the previous session and hopefully it will this time around, also.
9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Amen, MH. They're working hard to spend that budget surplus, one piece of toshy legislation at a time. Eventually we'll all be quite Christlike by their efforts.
6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
How in the world do these people get elected consistently? Because they have an "R" after their name and no one is paying much attention!
9 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
If it wasn't for all these ridiculous bills introduced, they could be out of there by the end of February. Instead, they will drag the session out until the law says they must go home.
I am beginning to think that all people elected to a position in the state legislature need to undergo an mental examination before they can occupy a seat in the legislative body.
Either they are crazy as loons or just plain nuts or both.
9 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
I thought the repupublicans were for less gov't intrusion into our lives?
6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
There are a bunch of RINO's in ND, but to be fair, the sponsor of this bill is a democrat. What is really strange is that two of the co-sponsors are normally very conservative. Go figure.
7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
animal, you have an interesting take on the issue: wait a year before marriage. Hmmm...
And, yes, isn't it about time that all the liberals here should loudly and proudly acknowledge that a DEMOCRAT sponsored this? Who would have imagined a DEMOCRAT not knowing "(t)hat the government should not involve itself in care of souls?" Maybe the memo didn't reach everyone yet, Veritas...
8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Gays cannot get married, however the state gov't fills it must step in to stop the divorce rate for married couples of heterosexuals? Go figure?
3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Marriage is only important to the government because of ownership of taxable properties. I don't think the government likes it when we use ways to get out of capital gains and estate tax.
6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
it was kingdom and WA that threw party line into the discussion. I clarified. Take it out on one of us, not animal who happened to comment. but, I agree, stupid runs on both sides of the aisle.
3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
That situation for a year, for the children, would be terrible. The government is poking their nose in every situation. It is time for their noses to get pinched.
9 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
And if a physical assault occurs during the 6 month period, can the legislature be held accountable as an accomplice?
After all they forced the couple to remain together, they are responsible for the situation created by them.
Lawsuit time filed by the injured party. The state has a billion dollars, might as well let those who are going to divorce to get their fingers on some of it, by hook or by crook.
Looks like that will happen too.
5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Well the law does not force a couple to still cohabit while they wait, so on a practical level an abused spouse would not necessarily have to endure another six to twelve months. It's just an unnecessary delay to finalising the details. Somebody means well with the measure, but it would likely have been more effective to provide for (optional) counseling services rather than make every couple seeking divorce go through sessions. Plus the bill doesn't seem to make any exceptions for couples who already have tried counseling...
4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
I find that alot of counselors, have more problems,then the people they counsel.
TheDiogenist Feb-12-13 7:54 PM
Rational post. I agree.
2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
I agree with disgusted, again. I probably wouldn't have mentioned party if somebody else hadn't done it first. So it appears this legislation doesn't fit a template somehow? Hmmm...
4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
301 4th St SE , Minot, ND 58703 | 701-857-1900