₦airaland Forum

Efuaye:
A relationship that went through due process did not end up simple with a 21-day wedding notice at the registry, as the OP suggests above.
No one should go into marriage with divorce as an exit plan, but shit happens sometimes.

This is where you see that based on the case up, it is not good to force a person into marriage if not exit plans must be made

JoeEeL:
Hope Nigerian ladies have all found their Mr Chike or was it just a social media trend?

Women always have Chikes for one side. If no be say dat guy open Edohor mess we for know?

QuinQQ:
So how will divorce lawyers make money? Will you feed their families?

My brother they would still make money as the couple still need to go to court to settle rights and liabilities and ownership of property disputes.

ohosi4real:
Me i see divorce as normal thing when the partner don't understand each other for years then they should separate marriage is not by force

In legal marriages they said you would wait for 2years before you start divorce process

b0rn2fuck:
Marriage should have expired date of 5 years and in which couple can renew it if they wanted for another 5 years and should be make permanent certificates once it get to 20 years

Permanent after 20yrs? Aaah!!

chidiokay:
i think govt must enforce LAW people must think before they talk

this era of elon musk money, people just say anything just for tariffic, likes n shares is becomig naesuating

Can two lefgally married divorce without Court present, every court dissolution goes into registr justbas every customary union goes into a registry

before the law there is witness to either union or dissolution .. so what is OPnlooking for agin

I don't think you know what you are taking about! Let me ask you this when you say people are legally married do you imagine that they went to a court somewhere to marry eg ikeja high court or sagamu magistrate court?

Expanse2020:
Mara
Go away jare 🤣🤣

🤣🤣🤣

wirinet:
Marriage is relatively easy. At its core, it is a formal recognition by families, the community, and society that a man and a woman have entered into a committed relationship with shared rights and responsibilities.

Divorce, on the other hand, is far more complex. By the time a marriage ends, children may be involved, assets may have been acquired jointly, and both spouses may have made significant financial and non-financial contributions to each other's success. Untangling all of this is rarely straightforward, especially in long-term marriages.

For example, one spouse may have used their income or savings to establish a business for the other. Years later, that business may have grown into a highly successful enterprise. In the event of a divorce, should the contributing spouse have no claim to that success? At the very least, should they not recover the money they invested? These are not questions that can be answered quickly or superficially.

Then there is the equally difficult issue of children. Decisions must be made regarding custody, financial support, education, healthcare, and the overall welfare of the children. These responsibilities continue long after the marriage itself has ended.

For couples who have been married for more than a decade, divorce often involves years of intertwined finances, shared achievements, and family obligations. Determining each person's contributions, entitlements, and ongoing responsibilities is a complicated process that cannot realistically be resolved in just a few months.

Actually, divorce is easy.

Its a case of "do you want to divorce this woman/man who you once married and called your wife/husband this day? "

Answer: Spouse 1: i do
Spouse 2: i do

So the minister now says, "by the authority vested in me i now declare you spouse 1/spouse 2 demarried and divorced from each other. And from today henceforth, ye shall no longer be husband and wife but are now single and unmarried persons"!

Things that have to do with the personal and joint rights of the couple, children, assets are things that can now go to court.

JuanDeDios:
That's in America. And that's how it should be everywhere. But that of Britain is still ok compared to Nigeria's.

In Britain they recently changed the law to allow you to file for a divorce without reason shortly after marriage. In Nigeria, you still have to wait two years after getting married before you can file.

Oh! They have done so?

It is this 2yrs that made me create the post for i nearly went kpoof when I read the couples predicament and that they cannot get out for 2 years. Men, that is hel

TenQ:
God says:
I hate divorce BUT you promote it and actually advocate for ease of divorce!
SMH!

Every reasonable person knows that God hates divorce but that in most cases of divorce, all the things God hates in the Bible are all in it and He would therefore endorse divorce as Moses had to judge.

Surely, it is not the will of God that couples should be in an evil marriage after all His Commandment is that you must love each other. But if people disobey God and hate each other, then divorce must be done to prevent further evils

Expanse2020:
Abeg remove me from this your nonsense oo

But you be good example na? Okay, you no want to be mentioned for good thing. No wahala

JuanDeDios:
Don't mind them. Oyibos that gave us stringent divorce laws and proceedings have since changed things to simplify things for themselves. Na we dey carry long proceedings for head.

For movie dey make am seem say na sharp sharp but from my brief check Britain where we get our laws from still takes about 8months. So, this 21days go beat their own.

Then, i heard Muslim own is even the fastest even though their own is one sided.

Fiscus105:
In other words, executive arms of govt should take over role of judiciary?


In marriage, the 3 arms of govt involved in it, legislator(local level) makes laws governing coming together as wife and duties of couples and also the kind of people you can marry as wife or husband.

Executive involved in joining them together as couples

Judiciary involved in dissolution of marriage.


If two people want to end their union, you take it to people who dispense justices, in other to end it in such a way,the outcome won't shift too much on this side or that side.

At least you appreciate that It is not the judiciary that put the couple together. So, therefore, it stands to reason that since they did not join together, then they have no right to put asunder. It is even a law.that is he who hires, who fires. UBA cannot be the one to hire me, then GtB will now be the one to fire me. No. Its not correct.

The same marriage registry should be the same divorce registry under the same provision of law for marriage exactly how it is under natural and native law. The divorce proceedings is done in the place and person who did the marriage that is the parents of the couple. So, should it be in the marriage registry in 21days just like the marriage process.

All other things in dispute like asset splitting or sharing, children, debts etc are things that should go to court (the judiciary) like every other dispute.

Imagine the 2 misery full couple in the case up waiting for 2yrs instead of 21days before they can divorce. Many crimes would definitely take place.

AccidentedCars:
People confuse this with "women are materialistic."

No.

I'm telling you that YOU as a man won't be able to function in a relationship the way you want to without baseline financial capacity.

It's not about her demands. It's about YOUR standard.

I couldn't watch my partner prepare for the most important interview of her year while stressing about how she'd get there, where she'd sleep, and whether she'd look presentable. That wasn't possible for me. My brain doesn't work that way.

So the bus ticket, the hotel room, the blouse – those weren't gifts to her.

They were the minimum I could offer someone I claimed to love in a moment that mattered.

If you can't afford that minimum, the relationship doesn't die because she leaves. It dies because YOU start resenting yourself.

And that resentment eats everything.

Na lie! The guy dies because he knows that she MUST leave hiim.

Where is Namaster and spencerforbes?

elevated2:
Hehehe. Are the women want to give it back double?

Dem don give men already wotowoto.. see how men are wailing about women na

silibaba:
Sex is not your thing and you already have three kids (abi you be virgin mary)

The way women deceive themselves these days baffles me.

I hate women that pretends when it comes to sex.except you have infections that makes you not to enjoy sex, then I will reason with you.

It is actually men she is deceiving. There is a very bad and evil reason why she is saying this.

Men really need to understand that when women speak, they are doing something else that always affect men negatively.

Men should pay attention that when women speak, they are speaking in codes. If you understood their codes you would have seen that she is lying

Parachoko:
They are overstretch and not performing up to expectation

That's why the FG, Lawmakers and State Governors have all agreed to create state police.


If you go to Borno, we have Civilians fighting alongside the NPF and Militaries against Boko Haram

Don't know much about the north save what the news says but In the south they are idle and overstretched in pursuing "where are your papers?"

TenQ:
Sorry!

Any Doctrine that cannot answer questions with regards to its position and claims is FAKE and not worth anything.

Have you EVER in your life seen a NORMAL debate where ONLY one side has the monopoly of asking his opponent questions but this same side is avoiding answering questions from the opposition?

Your position has a name in debate circles
It is called a bad-faith debate or bad-faith argumentation or one-sided cross-examination. More precisely, it can be described as interrogation, deflection, or a double standard, especially when one side keeps questioning but refuses to answer in return

Sorry, it doesn't work with me!

You are just repeating yourself for i have already answered you saying that all doctrines are subject to the laws of debates and fallacies.

And the laws of debates has placed the burden on you to prove until reasonable doubt is cleared your doctrine that polygamy is not a sin. And you have not finished proving beyond reasonable doubt because every time you answer, i always have a new doubt and query to ask, so the burden of proof remains on you.

Thus, you are the one acting in bad faith for you refuse to abide with the law of debate which says that you should proof beyond reasonable doubt but meanwhile you are committing the fallacy of reversing the burden of proof and refusing to correct yourself even though you have been called out on it about 9 times.

Muslims and atheist abide by this laws and you who claims to be a Christian has thrown away all righteousness because of this polygamy debate where you are even refusing to obey the laws of debates. Guy, you are not a Christian at all and you do not believe in Righteousness. Even Muslims antichrist and expanse2020 have proven themselves more righteouser than you. So guy because of this falls belief, you choose to go to hel? I fear you pass these Muslims oo.

TenQ:
I answered your question, so answer my THREE Questions otherwise
Since you cannot engage with my questions, you cannot get any more from me.

Have a nice day!

And your answer only led to more questions which you have to answer. That is the effect of burden of proof. And it is wrong and invalid for you to reverse the burden of proof.

So, righteousness and the rules of debate dictate that you have to answer my query first and properly discharge the burden of proof on you.

So if truly you are a Christian and you love righteousness, then obey the law of debates and answer the question the question
explain how you "admit and agree that cheating is adultery, but you do not think that a married person who now marries another person (polygamy) is guilty of cheating?

And therefore, i gave you the case of this guy below to explain how he is not guilty of cheating (adultery) because he wants to marry his co-adulterer?

Trustedapparel:
i am a married man with 2kids but their is one big lady that I met she loves me very much .... since I Bleep that lady [/b]I can't get my eyes of her ....I have been thinking about her since after the marathon sex we hard last month... [b]honestly I want to make her my second wife...

Parachoko:
Well, you have a right to your opinion

But State Police has more advantage than disadvantages.

Insecurity has gotten out of hand and the NPF and The Military are overstretch

Are they responding talkless of being overstretched? Anyway, we shall see.

Parachoko:
Though he has a point, but State Police will lead to insecurity reducing.

No it won't. Rather you would have more insecurity. An insecurity of different type will start and add to the one on ground. Now an ibo man travelling through oyo will be insecure because he is not Yoruba

TenQ:
Start from where you violated the rules of engagement


Here was the snippet of your response

For the last time, go back to where you derailed, answer the questions I posted one by one to engage. Then ASK any questions after. Otherwise, its just PURE emotionalism from your side.

Any Doctrine that cannot answer questions with regards to its position and claims is FAKE and not worth anything.

Have you EVER in your life seen a NORMAL debate where ONLY one side has the monopoly of asking his opponent questions but this same side is avoiding answering questions from the opposition?

Your position has a name in debate circles
It is called a bad-faith debate or bad-faith argumentation or one-sided cross-examination. More precisely, it can be described as interrogation, deflection, or a double standard, especially when one side keeps questioning but refuses to answer in return


Sorry, it doesn't work!

I told you from the beginning that you are committing the fallacy of reversal of the burden of proof is why I have not yet answered your questions.

For you are the one trying to prove that polygamy is not a sin, so the burden is on you to prove beyond reasonable doubt and you have not finished proving beyond reasonable doubt because every time you answer, i always have a new doubt and query to ask.

That is why you are feeling burdened that it is one sided for it actually means that your belief in polygamy is baseless and groundless.

But, if you think that it is grounded, then you have got to answer my queries till we get to its ground of Solid Undisputable Truth That is why it is said "There is no valid argument against the Truth" for there would be no reasonable question to ask nor argument to make.

So, you are going to answer my questions until you hit the Solid Rock of Truth.

Unless you want to give up and throw in the toilet and therefore agree that your doctrine on polygamy is baseless and therefore a lie. Then you can put the burden of proof on me and do the same thing i have done to you.

TenQ:
FOLLOW UP TO HELP YOUR MEMORY
Go back here Mr Dtruthspeaker

You made TWO claims and a question
Claim 1:[ God will never uphold wickedness AND Adultery is a Sin
[My response: agreed with you and I gave supporting bible verses[/i]

Claim 2: So, how can a person who does not just cheat on his wife (adultery) but even now goes as far as marrying his co-adulterer, be sinless?
My response:[/b] Your question assume that Polygamy is a Sin of Adultery making your questions presumptuous.

Even based on your presumption, I answered your Question

Your question highlighted in YELLOW was answered!
You said:[/b]
So, how can a person who does not just cheat on his wife (adultery) but even now goes as far as marrying his co-adulterer, be sinless?
Is such a person sinless?i

ANDI asked my follow-up questions to address where your presumption was clearly WRONG (THREE Questions) which till now you have not answered.

1. Did Abraham cheat on Sarah?
2. If Polygamy is a SIN, do you admit that
i. David died in sin
ii. Israel (Jacob) died in sin
iii. Abraham died in sin (he even had a concubine)
[b]It is a YES or NO answer!
3. Kindly show me where Polygamy is classed as Adultery anywhere in the Bible?[/b]
Again : go back to https://www.nairaland.com/8690508/does-god-permit-polygamy-new/3#139795316

This is not right!

I have only one claim which is polygamy is a sin and that God never ever condoned it. That is my claim and every other statement made is made towards proving my claim and that is where all the statements you highlight fall under. So they are not claims only statements made in support of claim.

Same thing applies to you, your claim is that it is not a SIN if a man has more than one wife'. And everything you have been saying is geared towards proving it.

And by the balance of the rules of debate, the burden of proof fell on you to explain how you "admit and agree that cheating is adultery, but you do not think that a married person who now marries another person (polygamy) is guilty of cheating?

And therefore, i gave you the case of this guy below to explain how he is not guilty of cheating (adultery) because he wants to marry his co-adulterer?

Trustedapparel:
i am a married man with 2kids but their is one big lady that I met she loves me very much .... since I Bleep that lady [/b]I can't get my eyes of her ....I have been thinking about her since after the marathon sex we hard last month... [b]honestly I want to make her my second wife ...

Your "follow up question" in bold, in response to my question "how you "admit and agree that cheating is adultery[/b], but you do not think that a married ... Is what is the fallacy of reversing the burden of proof

So, righteousness and the rules of debate dictate that you have to answer my query first and properly discharge the burden of proof on you. And it is from this law that we say you can't answer a question with a question.

All those statements highlighted merely show the trail and paths of the arguments made.

So, the spot that needs resolution is you rightfully and Truthfully answering the question explain how you "admit and agree that cheating is adultery, but you do not think that a married person who now marries another person (polygamy) is guilty of cheating?

And therefore, i gave you the case of this guy below to explain how he is not guilty of cheating (adultery) because he wants to marry his co-adulterer?

Trustedapparel:
i am a married man with 2kids but their is one big lady that I met she loves me very much .... since I Bleep that lady [/b]I can't get my eyes of her ....I have been thinking about her since after the marathon sex we hard last month... [b]honestly I want to make her my second wife...

Now when a governor says you can't enter his state, na cofin wait you if you try am. And technically you will need visas to enter states.

elevated2:
The women didn't expect too much from men and could also share the little they had with men. That is the summary. Standards were different though, no human hair and stuffs, so getting a babe a snacks or food (no need to take out) was good enough.

That was in the good old days and men called women mum_ for it and used and dumped them. So now the woman are wise and now men are the m_m_

Omo, see how men still don't know that women know to give but that they are just keeping it like a secret weapon. Namaster, come and tell them.

LordIsaac:
The conversation isn't from a man to a man; be accountable!

Woman no go answer am and if they answer it, expect a Lie.

I wonder when men would notice that women always hide their minds from them

Expanse2020:
🤣🤣🤣🤣
I Sabi you
Janu bi ejo
You whey I finished you started repeating the same thing..
Irọ pọ

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Omo mi. Ma sọ purọ́!
Whilst you can lie, the thread cannot!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

otipoju:
Things like alimony, child custody, child support, joint assets and liabilities never enter before marriage. That is why that process is simple. After that it is not that simple and each circumstance is not exactly the same.

Although if there is no contest...that dissolution can be done quickly as you suggested.

Separation and Dissolution of marriage aka divorce is different and should be different from determination of the rights and liabilities of the parties arising from the effects of marriage. That is the part that should go to court like every other matter.

But divorce as presently constituted that is registry marriage (marriage under the Act) is evil to a spouse who needs to run away from a marriage they no longer want. Imagine that oga and the wife in this case up here have to wait 2yrs before they can initiate divorce proceedings. The law did not even provide for an exception eg that if they both consent to it. They just have to suffer for 2yrs in this mess which we know that GBV will take place, marital rape and a whole lot of evils.

Exiting a marriage should be free and easy as it might be life saving.

Expanse2020:
Na so your brother they do ....
When hammered with a truth he will quickly divert to another thing...

Na the same traits in all of una

Me, i never see am do am before. However, normal, normal when people no fit answer na divert or abuse dem go do,. You sef do am but when I correct you, you stay your lane dat na why I remember you.

And Christian no get right to do am and na here many disappoint me. And me i no expect an from TenQ.

This case
https://www.nairaland.com/8622429/church-expels-new-bride-refusing/4#139829474

Just gave me this idea.

You see, marriage is a simple thing so divorce too should be simple for both of them are based on the Rights and Consents of the couple, primarily.

So if i. 21 days (if my memory serves me right) a couple can become husband and wife in the marriage registry then it should be that in 21 days the couple can become decoupled and single again.

The marriage registry should also be the divorce registry.

And all it takes is for the couple to go through the same process they used for marrying only this time the notice would be stating "divorce". And in the end they would be given a certificate of divorce. Shikena.

No need for lengthy costly divorce proceedings.

Court cases should be for issues that arose in the marriage.

And with this people trapped into marriage can quickly and easily run out. Marriage should never be by force and the parties should always be free to exit when they need to.

Besides maybe marital domestic violence would reduce and maybe people will be more cautious when they get married.

How una see am?

Expelling her is still not divorce.

This is why marriage registry should also be divorce registry.and the divorce should be easy like the same thing they did when they were marry. But in this case they should just do the opposite. And in 21days, the couples are single again. Shikena. Problem solved