A co-worker just asked me if I thought the Legislature might now pass a Covenant Marriage Act after today's SCOTUS ruling. He thought it was coming, but wanted it revised from its previous incarnation. Apparently the bill stated the only two reasons for immediate divorce without counseling were adultery and one party committing a serious felony.
This friend felt the second valid reason shouldn't be valid at all. It seems a local woman had divorced a friend of his, took his son, and married a rich man so she wouldn't have to work. Why? Because he was in prison. This was over 30 years ago, but the friend still feels betrayed and tells his story to any and all.
I had not thought of this aspect of the bill. Should the second "opt out" clause be eliminated? Should the bill be brought back up at all?