Sep 14th 2009 By Jeremy Taylor

Prankster Introduces Ballot Initiative to Ban Divorce

John Marcotte, a California man with a history of pulling social pranks, is collecting signatures to get the "California Protection of Marriage Act," which would ban divorce, on the ballot.

Marcotte calls his voter initiative "the logical extension of Proposition 8," the controversial measure which last year added "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," to the state's constitution.

Marcotte has tongue firmly in cheek -- his Web site is subtitled, "Safeguarding marriage from the evils of divorce," and supporters can buy a T-shirt of a chained-together bride and groom reading "You said, 'Til death do us part.' You're not dead yet."

But his point is valid -- since many of Prop 8 supporters cited defending traditional marriage as their reason for pushing for the gay marriage ban, shouldn't they also be supportive of the "California Protection of Marriage Act," which eliminates the greatest threat to marriage that exists?

From the Web:

Divorce Cakes. (The Chive)

Rhinos On Roof Violates Homeowner Association (Burbia)

How (And Why) To Set A Drink On Fire (AskMen)

Tags: California - california protection of marriage act - CaliforniaProtectionOfMarriageAct - divorce - Gay Marriage - GayMarriage - John Marcotte - JohnMarcotte - prop 8 - Prop8 - proposition 8 - Proposition8

Email This

Comments:

Add a comment

Tuesday 15 September

By Laurel

Highest Rank

The problem isn't with religion getting into marriage. The problem is government getting into marriage. George Washingtom didn't need a license from the Colony of Virginia to marry Martha. Gays say it is unfair for them not to marry because tax laws favor married couples. Fine, eliminate the income tax - which is unfair anyway - and institute a "value added tax" like in most of Europe. Let marriage be a true cultural institution, not a government contract. Divorce could still occur but only because "vows" were broken; no more "no fault" I'm tired of you and want half your paycheck forever plus the children live with me. The breaking of vows would be grounds for compensation in civil court. Take government out of marriage and let anyone get married who can find a church that will marry them. Without the tax and government payments to spouses, most gays would have no reason to marry.

Tuesday 15 September

By Cindi

Neutral

Interesting theory...

Tuesday 15 September

By TED

Neutral

ONE WIFE
FOR LIFE

Tuesday 15 September

By Delaila Segal

Neutral

apparently there was serious religion prior to
biblical times. .

have you read "When God was a Woman"?
by Merlin Stone? (God was known to be "Mother"; Mother Nature.) . . .

fascinating.

if a male-dominating culture wants future members in its world .. that culture needs a religion which forces virgin females to become sexual property of .. a man. (the husband does not have to be "virgin" .. the baby happens only inside the female.) .. (a sperm is
not a baby..) ..

it's not that a sperm is not needed .. it's just
that .. it doesn't have to be "your" sperm ..
see?

it seems to me ..males were meant to be lovers..
NOT property owners .. of the female .. womb ..

all the rest is ..very interesting . .check it
out ..

there is no father .. until there is
a baby.. (all babies happen in females..) ..

Mother Nature .. is the source of all life..
the source of all life is "Nature" .. (Mother
Nature) ..

forced sexual violence ..to any female .. is proof of the activity's illegitimacy..

what is natural .. does not need to be
forced.. (or enforced!) ..

i do not question legitimacy of Divinity;
i question the need for violence .. against
nature ..

the forcefulness .. (forcing females to be
male property ..) .. to ensure .. male ownership .. of the mother's baby .. .

ah .. prooves .. that "father right" (based on
legitimized violence) is obviously NOT natural.. (if it were, there would be no need
for violence..) ..

making love to a woman .. does not make her
birthing .. the property of any male.

obviously .. (that's why violence was
necessary..) .. Mother Nature is NEVER property!

(if something is natural, no violence is
necessary ..) ..

Tuesday 15 September

By arlene

Neutral

I agree with the bill. I believe in "'till death do us part." However, my husband didn't. He left me when I was pregnant. Unfortunately, this probably could never really happen, bcuz then who would foot the bill for marriage counseling if a couple runs into problems? The state? Another thing, people would just leave each other and go have other relationships, they do it now. It would cause a multitude of emotional problems, legal problems, and probably murders. Yet, I think it's a good idea. Whoever asks for the divorce...well...death doth part!

Tuesday 15 September

By Ina

Neutral

Could the wording of that poll be anymore biased? Either way you vote it is in favor of Gays making a mockery out of marriage.

If you vote yes it's because anti-gay marriage people are hypocrites and if you vote no it's because you support gay marriage?

Yeah, right. I'll pass on that poll.

But I will give my opinion on this proposed bill. I think it's an excellent idea as long as there are stipulations to allow for divorce in the case of abuse or infidelity.

Tuesday 15 September

By Lady Angel

Neutral

Marriage a religion thing? Hehe. I was married to my husband wearing a black nightie, him on his knees in nothing but underwear and cuffs surrounded by friends who were nude, or wearing leather... etc. And yes, our wedding was very legal and we are very legally married. Religion in marriage? hehe.. Please.

Tuesday 15 September

By PaulSr

Neutral

I have seen how DV (domestic violence), has become a feminist's tool to control a man. Divorce is how many secure their futures without ever opening a 401K. I almost always hear, "I was young and dumb", but to that I reply, "And now you are old". At minimum DV is a contributory problem and until both parties get arrested, it will continue on. I have a son and daughter and see them fight more than I wish to admit. I love my daughter, but, even though she is younger, she starts a lot of the fights. No, I do not have a violent household and I do discourage conflict, but it still goes on because in today's world little girls are taught that they are better than little boys and must make sure to prove that to all the little boys.
Marriage is not for fun or for the heck of it; it is intended to be a commitment for life. No back doors, no cop-outs, no excuses and no quitting. I am beginning to think marriage needs to be abolished or at least redefined. Perhaps it should be like holding a public office, where you need to re-elect every 4 years. Maybe a marriage license should be like other licenses, with an expiration date.
In addition, I think alimony needs to be abolished along with child-support, as child-support is nothing more than make-shift alimony. It is not for the kids, it is for the ex-spouse. Kids are a blessed responsibility. If I have been blessed with the custody of my children, I will accept the financial responsibility for them and NOT look for the ex to pay, when she has the burden of going to bed almost every night without kissing and tucking them in. There is no larger an insult to a parent, than to take their kids away from them and then make them pay the privileged parent, who does have them. In fact, I encourage everyone stop paying support of any kind. I also encourage peaceful protest in all matters like this and any others where the government is over-regulating society.
Concerning gays and the bible, I think God threw in a “pop quiz”, to see if we were paying attention to the commandments. When all else fails, remember, "love thy neighbor as thyself". Did anyone get that one right?

Tuesday 15 September

By Stephen

Neutral

Thankfully California voters had the good sense(or moral sanity) to preserve the legal status of marriage being between a man and a woman, it is not between a man and a man or woman and woman, or two men and a woman, or three woman and a man, or a dog or cat with a man or woman etc., etc., etc., etc.

Tuesday 15 September

By hotrodqd

Neutral

this will only cause less marriages & more live in lovers who have children together who then can qualify for more state services like welfare food stamps etc. we need to reward married peoples ( families) more ...not continually handicap or punish them just because theyre normal ? banning divorce solves what ? when all they have to do is move or go into another state ? duh ! have a nice day

Tuesday 15 September

By eagle12687

Neutral

According to the Bible a man may divorce a woman if she cheats on him.

Matthew 5:31-32 "It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery."

But sodomy is never okay.
Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

Tuesday 15 September

By Glenn

Neutral

Marriage has been a curse for me. The only good thing to show up, grow up and then move away was my son. All the rest has been HELLLLLLLLLL. I would never do it again.

Tuesday 15 September

By louie sims

Neutral

You uneducated people (NEED) to take a course in grammar...so that you can learn how to spell (AND) construct a proper sentence!!!

Uneducated people like you are a "hell of a lot" of the problem with the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. You are allowed to vote and you can not read, spell or make sentences properly.

You will never learn.....

Tuesday 15 September

By Robin

Neutral

Marriage was... and is a Christian principle between a man and a woman. In both Testaments there are provisions for a Biblical divorce.
Though the sponsor of the petition apparently is doing this tongue-in-cheek, he brings up a valid point. The biggest enemy to marriage is the ease of divorce. Sad to say but many people today enter into marriage with the idea that if things don't go their way they will simply divorce.
Marriage is supposed to be a life-long commitment between a man and a woman.

Tuesday 15 September

By Archadies

Neutral

Personally, I think the whole group of religious nuts need to get a job or something. This is the 21st century. Let people be who they want to be or marry who they want to marry. I mean no disrespect but I learn long ago not to put any faith in the invisible man in the sky. Nor in that book that was writen by lonely old decrepid men between the 9th and 13th century and only made stuff up to keep their "flock" from misbehaving. This is, in my opinion, total and complete BS. Seriously. NO ONE should HAVE to stay married to another if they no longer love each other. Crap like that will only lead to a higher rate of domestic killings and suicides. Someone I know is married to a complete jacka@@ who beats her and rapes her whenever he feels like it. That kind of behavior is inexcusable and it seems those who are for the divorce ban are just nothing but power hungry maggots like my friends husband. Sure, this is America and everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions. However, if any of you were in my friends situation, wouldn't you all like for there to be a way out of it before you or your child are killed when he finally snaps? And seriously, if people want to bring up the arguement of church and state, then there should be more discussion made on the denial Bush made on the stem cell research. But that was denied because Bush is an idiot who didn't weigh the benefits better. He looked more towards his own moral beliefs and let that guide him instead of thinking "Hey, this could save millions of lives....". But no. Now all those people have to suffer. This arguement that was started it total bullsh@t. And the one who started it is a complete moron. Read the paper, idiot. Better yet, find a better hobby or maybe get laid. Move out of mamas basement.... I vote no to the ban of divorce as it is protected by the constitution of the United States of America and I believe by the Bill of Rights as well. Plain and simply, just let people do what they want to do within the limits of the law. If two men want to get married, so be it. There are better things in life to be concerned about. And if my words anger anyone, so be it. It just proves how closed minded people are.

Tuesday 15 September

By johnH

Neutral

Monday 14 September
By brittanyNeutral
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marriage wasn't created by the religious. Marriage dates back to the Mesopotamian period. The purpose for it at first was to assure the male the paternity of his children. Then it was for money and property, then and now for love. I don't know why religions claim it as their thing and try to control how the world does it whether the couple is religious or not. ========================That may be the earliest recorded marriage, but that is no reason to believe that marriage did not exist before then.

Tuesday 15 September

By CR

Neutral

Lynnia:: GOD IS FINE IF YOUR INTO HIM??? I hope you will think HELL is fine if your NOT into him. Marriage is a union between one man, and one woman people... DEAL WITH IT it's in the bible.

Tuesday 15 September

By CR

Neutral

Archadies, how can you be angry with the comments of an IDIOT, who knows no better? Bush did not deny the stem cell bill out of ignorance, it simply didn't restrict the collection of the cells as it should have. As for a MAN marrying another MAN eewwww. You need to get a clue

Tuesday 15 September

By married_woman

Neutral

I'm not sure that this is the right way to go about getting gay rights. It does make a good point though. I am a straight married woman who thinks gay and lesbian people should have the same rights as everyone else! I'm not a christian, but I was raised by them. Doesn't the bible say not to judge others?! And didn't God say all men are created equal?! Why do people feel that they need to force their beliefs onto everyone else? I don't see how people that you don't know getting married would affect you or why you would care?! Land of the Free people!!!!!

Tuesday 15 September

By jpcowboy

Neutral

I am, in this regard, completely for this law being passed. In my mind, if you think you might divorce someone in the future, don't marry that person to begin with. So many people see marriage as overrated, yet those same people divorce all the time. It seems to me that marriage is not looked into deeply enough.

Now, not to be a so-called "bigot," but doesn't the performer of marriages in church call marriage "Holy Matrimony?" Sorry, but homosexuality does not qualify in this case. That which is frowned upon by God now will always be frowned upon. I don't care what people do with their own laws, but it should remain illegal for homosexuals to get married within a church (to protect those within the church... they would be breaking God's law to even perform the ritual of marriage.) Let homosexuals get married in a courthouse, but let no church recognize it.