For example, see Matthew 19:9:

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Remarriage sounds a risky proposition under this scripture.

she better be dang hot or dang rich or both.

if you’ve ever had experience with the single adult program, well, it reminds me of the famous words of yoda to luke after he said he wasn’t afraid, “oh…you will be…you will be.

hey i heard a great story i bet you’d like at a conference once that was told by the bishop of the single’s ward.

to make a long story short(as close as i remember the details):

missionaries were teaching a spanish speaking couple and challenged them to be baptized. they accepted so the missionaries told them they’d have to get married first. the missionaries couldn’t follow the heated discussion that erruped between the two in front of them which ended in them agreeing to the marriage. a year later the missionaries were invited back to their temple marriage when they found out that they weren’t a couple at all. they didn’t even really know each other. they just happened to be living in the same complex and were there to just take the lessons at the same time.

Those who haven’t had close contact with the Jeckyl/Hyde types often can’t fathom how the super-nice person becomes a monster within the four walls of their house.

Exactly.

amaiden-
So…unless I go through a divorce, I’m not allowed to create analogies that make sense to me? Of course divorce is more complex than that. But to me, it was the simplest analogy that made sense. And no, I’m not divorced. But I deal with the divorce of a family member every single day.

And once again, my point has been made (by those that would argue with me). Yes, Divorce is amazingly complex and affects EVERYONE it touches. Friends, children, grandchildren, siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, in-laws, colleagues, future spouses, future children, future in-laws, future friends, etc. And it can affect them in positive ways (such as getting out of an abusive situation) or extremely negative ways (backbiting, choosing sides, putting the children in the “middle”, lying, cheating, drawing out court issues, etc.).

Why is it so wrong to be nervous about marrying a divorced person based on the explanations I’ve given? Because it sounds judgemental? If anything needs more sound judgement than choosing an eternal partner, I don’t know what it would be —and if that potential partner was already married before, wouldn’t that add to the worry?

Your analogy falls flat. Comparing being sued and being fired to being divorced shows a lack of understanding of what a divorce is like and what it feels like to go through one. It is infinitely more complex than that. And just so you know: all of your doctors have been sued before.

Seasoned observers can sometimes identify the “markers” in public behavior, both in the abuser and in the victim, which indicate different behavior in private.

Those who haven’t had close contact with the Jeckyl/Hyde types often can’t fathom how the super-nice person becomes a monster within the four walls of their house.

Oh, the stories.

“Oh, we agreed to part. It was a no-fault divorce” says the cheating husband.

“My husband and I just didn’t see eye to eye” says the woman who runs away.

Yes, we should be wary about anyone when building a relatinship. But let’s look at it this way. If I was to send my child to pre-school and then found out that the pre-school teacher had been fired at her last teaching job, I’m gonna be very, very concerned. Let’s say I find out that my new doctor had been sued before. Both situations may be completely innocent (teacher got fired because she stood up for a student/parent; doctor was sued by a greedy person calling “wolf”) but I would be a fool not to investigate further. So, there we go. If I was to start building a relationship towards marriage with someone that had previously failed at “marriage”, I would want to know why. And sometimes, the truth can be easily hidden (“he said, she said!”).

No-fault divorce is, in many ways, a great blessing. Do we really want a woman whose husband has been cheating on her to have to hire private detectives to trail him and get evidence for a nasty, protracted court battle? Should a man whose wife takes off and leaves him with the kids have to spend time and money proving that she left deliberately and wasn’t kidnapped? “No-fault” divorce sounds bad, because it sounds like we’re exonerating the parties involved, but as a legal construct, it’s really far superior to the alternatives.