Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Gregory Forman on Law and the Sexless Marriage

Posted by Will Moredock on Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:32 PM

Here is another blog from my favorite family law attorney.


If adultery's bar to alimony is unjust towards women (which I believe it is)
then the fact that we punish a husband's adultery so harshly in awarding alimony
while treating a wife's loss of interest in sex as a non factor in marital fault
is equally unjust. Thus, the inspiration for this early blog:
http://www.gregoryforman.com/blog/2009/06/the-sexless-marriage/

Early in my career I handled an appeal in which the Court of Appeals affirmed,
in an unpublished opinion, the family court's order denying a wife alimony in
part due to her "lack of marital intimacies" towards my client. The Court of
Appeals cited no authority justifying a denial of alimony for a denial of
marital intimacies and I have found no published authority justifying such a
decision. However, I believe if we rightfully punish spouses who commit
adultery, we should equally punish spouses who demand celibacy.

What do you think?

Tags:

  |  

Comments (11)

Showing 1-11 of 11

Add a comment

Wouldn't do him any good, according to that particular mythology, he would have to be dead first.
Now Mormons, on the other hand...

report   
Posted by FCB on August 19, 2010 at 8:03 AM

Did you hear about the husband who went to the doctor for his annual physical? The doc asked if he had had sex within the past seven days. The husband said "no, my birthday is in January".

report 1 of 1 people like this.   
Posted by Guy on August 19, 2010 at 10:20 AM

first of all How can someone have 72 virgins as in fastchecker statement?Did the first one tell the rest Hey,marry this guy he has money but doesn't know anything about sex,as I am still a virgin after 20 years.

report   
Posted by bjec22 on August 19, 2010 at 12:01 PM

Bjec22 your questions can all be answered with one thing: the afterlife. A world of never-ending happiness; you can always see the sun. Day... or night.

Also, some translations of the ancient text suggest that the reward will instead be "72 raisins," aka a lot of sweet things. I like raisins, dates, dried apricots, you name it... but there's got to be quite a sales pitch between Sun-Maid and Bomb-Vest.

report   
Posted by factoryconnection on August 19, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Good way to stay a virgin is to look like a raisin.
I've seen a few like that, they usually answer to "Mother Superior".

report   
Posted by FCB on August 19, 2010 at 1:33 PM

so that would be Heaven?72 virgins?or raisins?Let me think about this a minute,If I die and go to Heaven I will be rewarded 72 virgins or raisins hmmmmm.The virgins died as virgins so it must mean they were really ugly or something where a man never wanted them ,right?The raisins meaning plenty of sweets to eat,I think I'll take the raisins as in the ancient text they know what they were talking about.

report   
Posted by bjec22 on August 19, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Intriguing thought, Factory. I'm gonna look for Luxenberg's Koran book at the UNC library. I have always wondered how 72 virgins could be maintained in that state: re-seal or replace daily? I like raisins and know they are good for us. I can't remember anything about virgins but think they might be intimidating. O well, I don't have the makings of a martyr anyway.

report   
Posted by pugnax on August 20, 2010 at 10:44 AM

To all you virgins out there,
Thanks for nothing

report   
Posted by bjec22 on August 20, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Quote: "I believe if we rightfully punish spouses who commit adultery, we should equally punish spouses who demand celibacy."

While I sympathize with someone whose spouse demands celibacy, that is an almost impossible standard to judge. Adultery tends to be black-or-white, whereas "celibacy" can get notoriously hard to pin down. What if a spouse refuses only certain kinds of sex, not sex altogether? What if one spouse says they need sex at least 6 out of 7 days a week, and the other person doesn't feel up to it? Is it the same as "demanding celibacy" for purposes of determining alimony?

I say it's better for family courts to avoid these questions altogether and force people to choose their mates more wisely. Adultery, sure, punish it. But that's much easier to define than celibacy.

report   
Posted by Jason Usry on August 20, 2010 at 1:31 PM

Celibacy sucks. OOps, no that's not right.

report   
Posted by pugnax on August 20, 2010 at 1:54 PM

I just read the actual blog, and I can't help but think that "no sex, infrequent sex, or unenthusiastic sex" is too broad. Unenthusiastic sex? Who gets to decide that? A judge?

Also, keep in mind what constitutes "adultery". According to the S.C. Code of Laws Section 16-15-70:

"'Adultery' is the living together and carnal intercourse with each other or habitual carnal intercourse with each other without living together of a man and woman when either is lawfully married to some other person."

So a court could find a person guilty of adultery regardless of whether the act was infrequent or unenthusiastic. If that's the standard for adultery, it would follow that one act of sex, regardless of whether it was infrequent or unenthusiastic, would also invalidate a celibacy claim.

I'm not a lawyer, but I can't help but think that every unfaithful spouse would claim that their adultery was due to "unenthusiastic sex" if that were a basis for a counter claim!

report   
Posted by Jason Usry on August 20, 2010 at 4:07 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
By Email
With RSS
Showing 1-11 of 11

Add a comment

Classified Listings
{ more } Recent Comments
{ more } Reader Reviews

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2012, Charleston City Paper   RSS