Remember, our Lord promised us this. He promised us that the world would hate us if we were true to Him.

San Francisco Archbishop, Salvatore Cordelione, speaking at the 2023 issues, etc., making the case conference.

He gave us the last viaditude, both the Matthews version and Luke's version, that were to rejoice when they ridicule us and utter evil against us unjustly, were to rejoice.

The apostles and the Acts, they rejoiced, that they were able to suffer dishonor for the sake of the name.

So, it's up to us to keep the flame of faith and true alive in the darkness. The truth cannot be suppressed. Let us be witnesses of that.

You can watch and listen to Archbishop Cordelione's presentation, making the case for speaking the truth to power and all of the teachings from this year's conference for a donation of $300 by Labor Day.

It's available via on-demand video streaming or podcast. Learn more at issuesetc.org, or by giving us a call, 618-223-8385.

Fewer and fewer of us can remember a time in the United States when there wasn't no fault to divorce, where one person could simply say, I'm done.

There used to be a time when you actually had to take that to court and you had to show some kind of fault to get a divorce.

So, how has our view of marriage changed with no fault divorce? How has it been in some ways a financial boon to women and to men, but men end up much less happy after a no fault divorce?

Welcome back to issuesetc.org, I'm Todd Wilken on this Friday, August the 4th. Dr. Scott Yenner joins us to talk about no fault divorce, he's professor of political science at Boise State University, senior director of state coalitions at the Claremont Institute Center for the American Way of Life.

He's author of the book The Recovery of Family Life Exposing the Limits of Modern Ideologies and a recent column for the Institute for Family Studies titled Challenging the No-Fault Divorce Regime.

Dr. Yenner, welcome back. Thanks for having me on. What is no fault divorce?

No fault divorce is at will one party divorce. What that means is that one party the husband or wife can at any time for no reason or for any reason simply leave the marriage and call it a divorce with the blessing of public authorities.

This is understood in contradiction to what you would call fault divorce, which means that if a couple is going to be divorced, one, let's say a husband must prove that his wife has committed some sort of fault that makes it legitimate to break the contract.

A fault such as adultery or abandonment or drug abuse or some sort of fatal lie that was made at the beginning of the marriage.

And what has happened over the course of American history is that America until 1969 about at a fault based conception of divorce so that courts would have to validate that one party was at fault.

And therefore the divorce could be granted. But since then we've had the no fault divorce regime where courts don't necessarily have to get involved, but one party can just leave for whatever reason that party chooses.

So what is the relationship between at least the perceived strength of marriage and the ease of the doors?

All great civilizational founders, all great religious founders have had a conception of marriage.

And one of the ways they buckle marriage together, that is they buckle the husband and a wife together, is they put forward rules about how marriage ends.

And the harder it is to get out of marriage that piter and the more long lasting the marriage would be thought to be.

...