Divorce Philippine Style

[JJReyes]

Last night, my wife and I watched a Netflix movie, "Effie Gray" starring Dakota Fanning with screenplay by Emma Thompson.  In the story, Effie remained a virgin after years of marriage and, after examination by a physician and assistance by a lawyer, she got an annulment because the marriage was never consummated.  Big Victorian era scandal.

The Philippine has no divorce, so the main recourse is an annulment.  So long as there are no children and both sides agree, I heard that male impotence is one of the best ways to petition for an annulment.  You will be amazed to learn how many male Filipinos are impotent.  

Another method is to file for divorce overseas.  Dominican Republic use to be popular.  Maybe there are now others.  The problem, if either party subsequently had children, they were considered illegitimate since the overseas divorce is not recognized by the Philippines.  Women with Dominican Republic divorce papers would go overseas to give birth, including the United States, as a way to assure the recognition of their child or children on the issue of property rights in the Philippines.  

This is very expensive farce that only a few Filipinos can afford.  Unfortunately, all legislative attempts to change the law has been opposed by the Catholic Church.  I believe there are only two predominantly Catholic countries with no divorce and the Philippines is one of them.

Edited July 21, 2023 by JJReyes

[Lee]

5 hours ago, JJReyes said:

I believe there are only two predominantly Catholic countries with no divorce and the Philippines is one of them.

The Philippines is the only country in world, bar the Vatican City, to outlaw divorce (except for Muslims).

 

 

[Old55]

Possum, I was the one who hid your message.

On review it may be allowed. Generally we want to avoid strong negative religious content even if there is some truth to it. 

Hope you understand and we do value your content..... Dan

[BrettGC]

4 hours ago, Lee said:

except for Muslims

Islam has allowed no fault divorce from its inception, even the more conservative and fundamentalist branches of both denominations.  Either party can initiate the process.  It's been allowed since the Quran was first written back in the 7th century CE and the Quran covers it quite extensively.  So a full 900 years before Martin Luther nailed his objections to a church door triggering the Christian Reformation leading to the creation of other Christian denominations that allow divorce.  Yes, it's frowned upon, but that applies to most Christian denominations/sects as well.  

Some nominally Christian countries didn't allow no fault divorce until the last 40 years or so, many still don't. 

Edited July 22, 2023 by BrettGC

[Kingpin]

On 7/21/2023 at 10:38 PM, JJReyes said:

all legislative attempts to change the law has been opposed by the Catholic Church.

Good, the US Catholics could learn a lesson by doing the same.

Also they make it such a pain in the ass to get married here, endless requirements and signatures and seminars that you'd have to be pretty dense to get it wrong.

[Possum]

Interesting personal bit of information. Years ago I was studying my family genealogy. There were excellent records going back to the mid 1700's when most of my ancestors arrived in the USA. The census records would show the family, husband, wife and children but did not show whether they were legally married. Later records in the early 20th century showed church or county records of marriage. Talking to some genealogists confirmed that many never got married in a church or court simply because it was too far to travel or too expensive. There were societal pressure to keep the family together but no legal requirement. No paper trail.

I discovered my great-great grandfather was never officially married to my great great grandmother even though they lived 40 years together. When I mentioned this discovery to my 90 year old mom her reaction was..."Marriage has never been about legal papers really, so who cares?"

[Dave Hounddriver]

On 7/21/2023 at 7:38 AM, JJReyes said:

I believe there are only two predominantly Catholic countries with no divorce and the Philippines is one of them.

If the matter is truly a religious objection, the church should read Matthew 5:32 and explain why the Bible makes an exception for adultery.  Since there are biblical exceptions to the no divorce concept, then I wonder what the real reason is.  I am going to guess its about money.  The only monetary gain I see is that neither the church nor the government want to support the divorced wives or their kids and the don't trust the ex to pay after he finds a new wife.  Again, just a guess because its usually about money.

[Freebie]

9 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

Again, just a guess because its usually about money.

Indeed.. the church here always asks people to pay for attending  ( the collection ) and yet the church here is a huge shareholder in BPI amongst others, not to mention their landholdings.

Plus the Saintly Gloria ex president  ( wanting a red carpet in the pearly gates ? ) gave the church special dispensation not  to pay ANY tax on monies collected here. DHL takes the money once a week by cargo flight to Rome.  So anyone who pays P0.50 VAT today on an items pays more than the "forever poor "church does.

If I offend catholics here with the truth, apologies.

[JJReyes]

12 hours ago, Freebie said:

If I offend catholics here with the truth, apologies.

ALL major religions are international organizations requiring huge sums for their bureaucracies.  Everyone is guilty of fund-raising tactics that should be banned.  This includes misrepresentation and coercion.  Roman Catholics are not unique.  But they have been at it longer than most.  It's up to you whether or not there is a desire to actively participate as a member of an organized religion.  I would refrain from criticizing any of them.  Nothing is achieved.  It is pointless.  

[Dave Hounddriver]

3 hours ago, JJReyes said:

ALL major religions are international organizations requiring huge sums for their bureaucracies

Quote

The Seventh Circuit Court — like other courts — has at least proffered a definition of religion that includes atheism.  https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1318/atheism#:~:text=Circuit court created legal definition,of religion that includes atheism.

It seems that atheism is a major religion.  Atheist Alliance International (AAI) is a global network of atheist and freethought groups and individuals, committed to educating its members and the public about atheism, secularism and related issues.  Thus there is an international organization.  I cannot find a source of their funding but they must get it somewhere.

So it seems you are correct.  Atheists criticizing any other major religion are like pot and kettle.  And for those who may say they are atheists and they contribute nothing to that organization, I suggest there are many who say the same of whatever faith they belong to.