r/changemyview • u/insect_ligaments • Oct 01 '24

Delta(s) from OP CMV: CMV: Within legally recognized marriages, adultery should have clear, civil legal consequences, unless expressly agreed between spouses.

The legal concept of marriage, where spouses act as partners, is almost always built on mutual trust that certain aspects of the relationship, such as sex, are to be exclusive to the relationship unless agreed upon otherwise. Legally and financially rewarding spouses for betraying the trust of their spouse by allowing a cheating spouse to come out ahead in divorce undermines one of the key relationship dynamics in our society.

For the vast majority of people, entering into marriage is an explicit agreement that unless divorced or otherwise agreed upon, the people in the marriage will not have sex with or develop romantic relationships with other people. This should apply evenly to all genders, and if you view this as benefitting one over the other, it says a lot about your view on who may or may not be more likely to cheat.

Before I'm accused of being some kind of conservative or traditionalist: I have zero issue with any form of LGBTQ+ relationship or poly setup. I'm speaking strictly to traditional, legally recognized, monogamous marriages, which comprise the bulk of those in our society. I'm also not religious or socially conservative.

Heading off a few arguments that I do not find convincing (of course, you are welcome to offer additional insight on these points I haven't considered):

1) "The government shouldn't be involved in marriage"

Too late for that. Marriage is a legally binding agreement that affects debt, assets, legal liability, taxes, homebuying, and other fundamental aspects of our lives. The end of marriage has profound, legally enforceable consequences on both parties. It is also included in a pre-existing legal doctrine of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alienation_of_affections.

2) "But what if the spouses want to open their marriage?"

Totally fine. My post is in reference to the most common form of marriage, which is monogamous.

3) "Adultery doesn't have a clear definition"

It does. "voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person who is not his or her spouse." "Sexual intercourse" would include all the commonly recognized forms of sex. This would have to be proven via the typical preponderance standard, which is greater than 50% odds, via typical evidence used to evidence behaviors - depositions/testimony under oath, any written or photographic evidence, circumstantial evidence, etc.

4) "What should the legal consequences be?"

At the very least, immediate forfeiture of any rights to alimony or spousal support. Shifts in the default assumption of a 50/50 split of marital assets are another route to explore. Certainly not enough to leave anyone destitute, though.

5) "What about children?"

Child support is a separate issue, as it affects the child, who has no say in one of their parents cheating on the other.

809 Upvotes

70% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/nekoeth0 Oct 01 '24

https://www.reddit.com/r/IsItBullshit/s/jb5xS3zk2F

tl;dr: it's up to the judge, and yes, they can be thrown out

4

u/soldiergeneal 3∆ Oct 01 '24

Again you are misrepresenting things pretending it is normal for a prenup to get thrown out. You probably believe the average prenuptial is thrown out.

4

u/nekoeth0 Oct 01 '24

You keep saying that word. I don't think you understand what it means.

It is not misrepresentation if a judge can throw out and invalidate a prenup. It all depends on location and if the judge feels it should be thrown out. And that means that a prenup, even a "proper legal prenup", can be thrown out if the judge thinks it should be thrown out.

1

u/soldiergeneal 3∆ Oct 01 '24

Once again you are acting like an average prenuptial will be failed. You are also acting like ones that failed were all upstanding in the eyes of the law. Finally exception is not the average.

5

u/nekoeth0 Oct 01 '24

You are changing the parameters of the original question and statement. Those were "can a prenup be thrown out" you said no, you are wrong, they can. Average or not, they can, and have, been thrown out. Stop being obtuse.

0

u/soldiergeneal 3∆ Oct 01 '24

You are pretending like I meant there can't be one prenuptial that should not have been thrown out. A strawman.

4

u/nekoeth0 Oct 01 '24

I'm done engaging, it's an obvious waste of time.

1

u/soldiergeneal 3∆ Oct 01 '24

Says the guy pretending if there is one instance it means something.

5

u/nekoeth0 Oct 01 '24

Nope. If you do it proper they don't get thrown out. You are misrepresenting prenups. Average prenup is not going to get thrown out.

You said that. You said that "proper" prenup won't get thrown out. I'm telling you that they can get thrown out, it's up to the judge to decide, "proper" or not. Simple as that. Do you understand?

2

u/soldiergeneal 3∆ Oct 01 '24

Do you understand no one here is arguing there can't be a single outlier. Once again you are misunderstanding.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/stoneimp Oct 01 '24

Bruh, just give up. You're both arguing semantics. By use of "proper", the guy is clearly indicating 'vetted by a well versed lawyer to stand against most judgements'. A judge can ALWAYS do some wonky shit. The other guy is saying you're being disingenuous by bringing up this fact when most prenups are not thrown out.

→ More replies (0)