A recent Washington Post story explored Cuccinelli’s relationship with the fathers’ rights movement, which seeks to influence state and federal laws to give men a better position in divorce and custody cases. Many fathers’ rights groups have pushed to end or reform no-fault divorce laws, and Cuccinelli did the same during his time in the state Senate.
“2008. Ken Cuccinelli writes a bill to give Virginia among the most extreme divorce laws in America,” says the announcer in McAuliffe’s (D) new ad. “If Cuccinelli had it his way, a mom trying to get out of a bad marriage, over her husband’s objections, could only get divorced if she could prove adultery or physical abuse or her spouse had abandoned her or was sentenced to jail. Why is Ken Cuccinelli interfering in our private lives? He’s focused on his own agenda. Not us.”
Cuccinelli spokeswoman Anna Nix said her boss was proud of his record.
“Terry McAuliffe’s campaign strategy is simple: focus on false attacks that divide Virginians,” Nix said. “Ken Cuccinelli believes that children are best served having both their mother and father in their lives and he will not apologize for his efforts to encourage strong Virginia families.”
The spot refers to a measure Cuccinelli introduced in 2008 that would prevent couples with children from getting a no-fault divorce if one member of the marriage objects. (Divorces would still have been permitted in cases of adultery or abuse.) The bill never made it out of committee.
Three years earlier, Cuccinelli offered a different bill on the same topic, which would have made it so a person initiating a no-fault divorce could have that fact used against them when determining custody of the couple’s children.
That’s nothing to be proud of. It’s just more of the same War on Women and thinking “Daddy Ken knows Best” about what’s right for us wimmin folk. Divorced women have a hard enough time making ends meet. Any legislation that prevents women from getting the amount of child support entitled to them is simply wrong.
As for grounds for divorce, who on earth is Cuccinelli to be determining why couples get divorced? I think we all would agree that in ideal circumstances, in a perfect world, children thrive in a home with two loving parents. Unfortunately, not all homes offer this ideal type of nurturing. There are times when people feel they have to get out. For whatever reason, targeting women is simply not the decent thing to do. Nor is using no-fault divorce against any parent in a custody battle the decent thing to do.
Once again, Cuccinelli uses what is obviously his religious background to attempt to legislate his version of morality. He needs to go back to private practice. It sounds like Terry McAuliffe nailed his position head on. You would think Cuccinelli would have at least attempted to deny his far right religious stance on divorce. Its fine that he has those personal feelings. Good on him that he is a good family man. however, he needs to take off the rose colored glasses and realize that much of the world isn’t a storybook with a happy ending.
Hopefully he’s submitted equally enthusiastic legislation regarding non-payment of child support.
Many people are under the mistaken opinion that the Catholic Church is against divorce. While its not encouraged, the church recognizes the practicality of legal “settlements” if a a married couple separates. Divorce is not a religious issue. Re-marriage is the issue. Marriage is, in the eyes of the church, a religious issue – a sacrament. It’s a common misconception –
Common misconception among many Catholics I might add. I don’t think my mother in law ever thought I was really legally married to her son.
All the more reason for politicians to stay out of it. It should probably be harder to get married than to get divorced.
Cuccinelli lives in PWC but home schools his children. Who do you think will benefit from some of his educational plans for Virginia?
There seems to be little logic in the rush to return to the Fifties and plenty of paternalism. (Sure, the costume jewelry and cars were flashy and colorful and gas was cheap but being a kept woman wasn’t all fun, fun, fun.) Children don’t benefit from living under the same roof with parents who have grown to despise each other. Spouses don’t enjoy looking the other way when their partner comes home drunk repeatedly or doesn’t come home very often.
The fathers’ rights movement appears to have the same male anger that the tea party and other far-right groups have. I imagine a large percentage of its members are mad – as is often in the case of divorce – and bent more on revenge than an equal sharing of parental duties and pleasures. A divorcing couple who are agreeable should be able to work out joint custody to the advantage of their children. And most couple are more agreeable when they have the option of a no-fault divorce as opposed to having to point out the other’s peccadilloes, drunkenness, philanderings, neglect, or abuse.
I know of a few marriages that would do well with a divorce. Just because people divorce does not mean that there is a broken home for the kids – the broken home is often a result of the fighting parents not parenting the children together and pitting the children against the other spouse. He just loves getting into people’s personal lives and dictating to them how they should live. His motives and ethics really need to be questioned – how could a sitting AG purchase stock in a small company that the AG’s office itself was investigating? How could a sitting AG accept gifts from a small company that the AG’s office is investigating? How could a sitting AG just happen to forget to report gifts from said company – it really calls in his ethics. As a member of the Bar he is held to a higher standard. I find it quite odd that both McDonnell and Cooch both conveniently failed to report these gifts in a timely manner and then were both able to retroactively file the disclosure forms. I wonder how many more gifts were forgotten about.
Cuccinelli is going to get his butt handed to him come November. We will be done with hin!
I doubt that a loss will put KC out of the public forum, Starry. This is a guy whose profession is running for office. He’ll take a breather and find some paying job on FOX or in a think tank and then be back in the lists in the next statewide go-round. He really doesn’t have any choice.
He would be great on Faux News! Ken for Faux