BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Erotic talk with a virtual partner in chatrooms on the Internet are enough grounds for a spouse to file for divorce, a legal magazine said Wednesday, citing a recent ruling in Belgium.

Belgian legal publication De Juristenkrant said the Brussels Appeals Court ruled that although transcripts of the erotic chatroom conversation do not prove adultery, they do constitute proof of "grossly insulting behavior" which is sufficient grounds to file for divorce.


so what do you think ... agree ? or not ?

I don't quite get the whole 'grounds for divorce' thing. Why must anyone list a reason? Can't the 'grounds' just be that that's what you want/need to do?

Carrie thats a very good point! I think its just yet another of those outdated laws that havent been changed yet...

I think if my husband did that it would lead to possibly irreconcilable differences, but the chat itself would not be my reason!

As for what I think of a significant other erotically chatting on the net?
Well, it kinda goes back to the old definition of cheating and what's acceptable for each couple. Everyone gets to set their own boundaries within their own relationships. And if rules aren't clearly set, than don't do anything you wouldn't want your partner to do, or you'd feel feel guilty telling your partner about.
Something like that would bother me, yes.

CarrieMpls said:

Exactly.

I think almost anything can be grounds for divorce. However I do not think that just anything SHOULD be grounds for divorce. I think Divorce should be ALOT harder to attain. Otherwise, why get married and devote your life to someone else?

I don't find this particular case a form of cheating...a form of lying, yes..but cheating and adultery...no.

Divorce is not fucking easy in England, that's for sure. It takes ages, it's bloody expensive and not any old reason will do.

renewable marriage contracts!

that way, no need for divorce. just don't renew at the end of the term..

XxAxX said:

I agree. A 5yr contract. I feel many people change and may feel the need to move on after this amount of time. Of course you can renew after 5 years.

superspaceboy said:

exactly! or two years or any other term the parties agree upon. that way no need for hurtful, messy battles at the end of term. it's all spelled out while folks are still in love and more inclined to be gentle with each other

XxAxX said:

Not to get all political in this here general forum, but then this would take care of the civil, legal contract portion of the marriage and those that want to profess 'till death do us part' in some other manner, whether religious or otherwise, can do so. Completely separates the personal vows and union under god from the legal contract.

XxAxX said:

nah, it should just have an expiration date, like milk.

CarrieMpls said:

right! it's actually an ancient custom, that of 'handfasting':
The History of Handfasting
Handfasting at one time was the only way that couples could be engaged and/or get married because the church let the civil government of the period take care of these matters. In the British Isles, Handfasting was the old pagan ritual of marriage and it remained legal in Scotland all the way up to 1939, even after Lord Harwicke’s Act of 1753 declaring that marriages in England were legal only if performed by a clergyman. After Lord Harwicke’s Act, the Scottish border town, Gretna Green became a mecca for eloping couples from England who fled there to perform their own Handfastings. In those times, the couple themselves performed the Handfasting before witnesses. It was also used in Scotland for the engagement period of a year and a day before a wedding was proved.

The very word handfasting got it's origin in the wedding custom of tying the bride and groom's hands (actually, wrists) together. In some versions, this is only done for as long as the ceremony lasts, but in others, the cord is not untied until the marriage is physically consummated.

Handfasting is the marriage rite used toady by many Heathens, neo-Pagans and Wiccans. The term itself comes from the custom of shaking hands over a contract. It is a custom steeped in old tradition.

In most Pagan traditions today it may mean a non-state registered wedding or one in which a marriage license is filed. For some it is a year and a day, renewable "so long as love shall last" and for others a commitment to be together through many lives.

There are probably as many rituals for this as there are people who have joined themselves together.

The hands are generally bound with a cord as part of the ritual.

One custom is that while facing each other, the couple placed their right hands together and then their left hands together to form an infinity symbol while a cord is tied around their hands in a knot. Another custom is that the man and woman place their right hands only together while a cord is used to tie a knot around their wrists.

The ritual itself might have been led by a respected non-church affiliate such as a Chieftain, Leader, Priest, Priestess, Shaman, or Elder of the community while the couple took turns reciting their vows of promise to be engaged for a year and a day in front of witnesses. On the last day of “the year and a day promise” they would then make a promise for infinity repeating their promise to each again. A cord is tied in a knot around their hand while the ritual takes place. This is where the term “tie the knot came from” when referring to getting engaged or married today.

In day of old, records were not kept who got engaged, married, had kids, and died. Today the Sacraments of the church has the responsibility of taking care of these things. Before the church took over these duties, these things were overseen by the whole community and therefore were set in law by their witnessing what happened between the couple making the promise.

If a handfasting was performed with the two left hands together without the tying of the knot, as was the custom of rich and influential German nobility, it meant that the woman was a mistress and would not be able to claim the name, inheritance, property, etc. of the real wife and was only in the protection of the man. But her offspring would be taken care of as legal heirs second in line to the man's legal and first wife. Having lots of children was once the only form of "Social Security" in one's old age. The previous combinations were all considered legal and binding in an engagement or marriage except for the “left hand ritual.”

The Handfasting gesture seems to have been derived from one of the ancient Indo-European images of male-female conjunction, the infinity sign, whose twin circles represented the sun (female) and the moon (male) or in some of the southern Mediterranean traditions it was sun (male) and moon (female).

Two-handed Handfasting still constituted a fully legal marriage throughout Europe whether the blessing of the church was sought or not. Clergymen, of course, recommended that newlyweds attend church as soon as possible after the signing of the contract and the Handfasting. Marriage is now one the Seven Sacraments that had been ignored by the church for centuries. Only the very wealthy and affluent could afford church marriages. Handfastings were under the jurisdiction of common law rather than canon law. In the 16th century in Switzerland, if couples were seen in public drinking together they could be considered married.

http://www.handfasting.in...thand.html

XxAxX said:

I like it.

One can now get a divorce in 1 hour in Columbia!

As far as erotic talk with someone in a chat room, if you have to do it, then you must not be getting what you need from your mate IMO. People should spend more time talking, fooling around and having fun with their partners and less time in chat rooms with people they don't even know.

i dunno about grounds for divorce...
but it's deffinitely grounds for a good asskicking.

CarrieMpls said:

I prefer the "til death do us part" creedo for my closest friends.

superspaceboy said:

what percentage of traditionally married people stay married? 30%???