關(guān)于婚姻法的解釋.docx

Whoever paid the down payment is whoever the house should belong to following a divorce”, “The other party has shall have no right to divide up a house purchased and given by ones parents following marriage” The publishing of the Supreme Peoples Courts judicial interpretation of the latest Marriage Law immediately ignited fierce arguments between men and women online. Many netizens believe the new Marriage law is “good news” for men, protecting their advantageous position in a marriage, and damaging the interests of the weaker party.The new Marriage Law that “encourages completely going Dutch” has also been made fun as “delighting real estate developers and pissing off mother-in-laws”. However, there are also netizens who believe that the new interpretation of the Marriage Law may change young peoples ideas on how to choose partners, going from preferring “wealthy second generation” children of wealthy parents to preferring mutually compatible “people with future potential”.Oppose:“Favors” men, protects the more powerful party“How can the new Marriage Law be this harsh towards women? The male chauvinism is too serious!” Netizen Chen Di expressed her view through her microblog, and the number of netizens who shared her opinion were not the minority, with many female netizens believing “this sweeps aside the last obstacle against men being unfaithful” and “will cause the divorce rate to go up”. Netizen “Ling Mei” says: “Ive always believe that there are more unfaithful men than women who cheat men out of their assets, and women devote more than men in the family. (The new Marriage Law) might as well add another article: Whoever the house belongs to is whoever should clean it!” Netizen “寞 香” was even more realistic and blunt: “What woman who doesnt already have a house will now dare to give birth to a child? After giving birth, if the man cheats on her, wouldnt she end up sleeping in the streets with her child!” The new Marriage Law has not only enraged women, some male netizens have also expressed “a lot of pressure”. Netizen Yuan Datuo believes: The new Marriage Law may actually lead to if the house isnt put under the womans name, the woman will refuse to get married, and as a result the man must pay an even higher price for marriage. “If you look at it from the other side, if the parents-in-law buy a house, then the son-in-law also wont have a stake/claim, right?”Approve:Fights marriages by fraud deceiving someone into marriage, encourages independenceIn comparison to the swelling voices of condemnation, some supporting viewpoints believe the new Marriage Law strongly combats the phenomenon of “deceiving someone into marriage” for their assets, and at the same time also gives the young men of ordinary families a chance to compete with the “wealthy second generation” children of rich parents. Netizen LuvJen expressed: “Isnt the new Marriage Law a good thing? The man paying money to buy the house while the woman gets to marry and then sit idly enjoying the fruits of his labors was always unfair. Is marriage just for obtaining a house?” Netizen “小之與麥田” was very satisfied: For those of us poor and blank youth, this is a good policy. “索男型birt號(hào)” says: “If the New Marriage Law can curb the twisted finding a sugar daddy/gold-digging view of love, I think its good!” There were also female netizens who expressed that the new Marriage Law lets women see clearly that “men are unreliable, one can only rely on oneself”, and “Women of the new age definitely should be able to buy houses by themselves, buy cars by themselves, and become more and more independent and strong.Jokes:Delights real estate developers, pisses off mother-in-lawsSome more neutral netizens seemed to be rather pessimistic/cynical, believing that men and women dont mind believing the worst of each other in fights these days.“When people are so calculating both before and after marriage, is there still any point to marriage at all?” This reporter discovered that most of the dispute over the new Marriage Law still revolved around “the house” and, because of this, many people believe this is good news for real estate developers, as there will be even more single people willing to buy houses. One female netizen sighed that shes pregnant and now no matter whether she gives birth to a boy or a girl, they as parents will still have to prepare to buy another house for their child.”The house dad and mom buy their son, the daughter-in-law has no part (claim to).Comments from Tianya:馬甲青青百合:Thats why I say the balance has been upset. For thousands of years, the men contribute more financially while the women have children who take the fathers surname.Now the law uses the attitude of upholding justice to announce the women that the man doesnt have to contribute more financially and even what he does will always remain his. What more, all of the rights to the house are always given to the man (Im talking about ordinary circumstances, so dont tell me how women can also make money and buy houses).Which is to say, what men were originally supposed to provide in a marriage they can now perfectly legitimately not provide.But the contributions of women must be contributed as before. You want to change that Then you go work hard on your own, go consult on your own, because the law is definitely not going to put women first. The discrimination is too obvious.Let me reiterate, if the finances/assets are split too clearly, it will only upset the balance. No one is stupid, no one is willing to contribute to a marriage for nothing.那一抹陌上的塵:Feelings are the most important factor in a marriage, not a house or anything else蝶舞仙草20070731:This new judicial interpretation is what those brainless old government officials do when they have so much time on their hands that their balls ache to dick with the rabble. Are you guys the ones who have nothing better to do every day than to keep your eyes on them? So now they throw this kind of 2B regulation at you guys. Go ahead and argue against each other Whoever believes is also a 2B馬甲青青百合:Just looking at the number of women in Chinas highest levels of governmentyou will now that things can never be equal. It government is a mans game.It would be ridiculous to expect the things drafted by men to be equal/fair, were there any women in the drafting process for this marriage law?In all my years, I know I have the citizens right to vote, but do I have the opportunity to vote?Dont talk to me about whatever “peoples representative”, have I ever agreed to have him represent me?The countrys government is all appointed, not elected. They make the rules of the game for themselves to play, without being embarrassed at all.丁超1998:So just why are we getting married for?張打醋1:The new Marriage Law is simply taking another step towards realizing the basic concepts of “male and female equality” and private property, and the poor Chinese women who have gotten used to depending on men are already unable to bear it thus complaining.abc1235188:Why is this policy being issued now? Of those who made this law, which one of them doesnt have several houses? They are simply protecting their own assets from being split away by outsiders (daughters-in-law and sons-in-law) and this is the simple truth.飯煮糊了:It really isnt necessary to argue back and forth like this, so tiring.If women dont like it, you really can just not get married. Instead, make a living, buy a house, and buy a car by yourselves. When you want to have children, you can even use donated sperm, have the child and have it take your own surname with no arguments. Why do you have to get married? If you have feelings, cant you just cohabitate? After marriage, women have to take on a lot of duties, such as supporting her husband, raising her children, and being filial to her parents-in-law. All you get is the title of being Mrs. So and So.The women who willingly devote themselves to their families, willingly give up and invest themselves into their families, if you find yourselves homeless on the streets later, it too isnt forced upon you by men, okay? It was your own choice, you cant blame men.So, the law has its regulations, and women have their choice.第三賬號(hào):Whats wrong with Chinas women, where even having a child is a bargaining chip in the transaction with men. Truly very sad.yzsss2010:Hahahathe more I think about it, the more ridiculous this is Truly a national jokeIn my opinion, hard times are upon men. Have children but cant watch them go uncared for, so go take care of them yourselves. Housework must have someone to do them, so go learn how to do them yourselves. What is even more frightening is that ones parents have to have someone to take care of them in their old age, so go take care of them yourselvesbecause it is difficult enough for women to survive in an environment where they have neither guarantees nor sense of security. Freely accommodating you by giving you a child is enough of a contribution, theres no reason to force her to bear the these other burdens, right?It looks like a law protecting male citizens, but actually it is pushing us male comrades into the abyss. Truly it is too damaging and sinisterThe age of the national joke is upon ustruly TM something a bunch of pig-brains thought up./ o o /( (oo) ) Idea! 裝死的小強(qiáng):If you guys truly love each other, would you really be afraid of the Marriage Law not being fair? Would you still care about what surname the child takes or who contributes more? If your feelings arent deep enough, why are you getting married at all? Isnt that just being irresponsible to yourself?Man: The house is something my old mother gave me, theres nothing I can do either. Woman: Without my name on the home ownership certificate, whether I should marry you or not is something that is very difficult for me to decide.From Liba:With the release of the new Marriage Law, I want to get married even less. On what basis are women supposed to provide children for men? On what basis? On what basis?!Right now it isnt even really about the house. After all, who doesnt have a house these days anyway? My own family cant even keep up with all the rent we collect from our house. Still, Im angry. So women can have children for men and when the men dont want them anymore, they still have the right to visit them and in fact I cant even refuse to let them visit, but on what basis for what reason is the divorced woman not entitled to splitting up the house? So women are supposed to endure 10 months of hardship, are supposed to be dumped by men, and are supposed to let men find xiaosan? And in the end when hes old, has had enough fun with women, and now wants a child, the child I worked hard to raise up has no choice but to acknowledge him as father, has no choice but to be filial to him? Id have to be insane/stupid! I genuinely dont want to get married anymore, nor do I want to have childrenComments from Liba:oliver1121:If it is a woman who doesnt have a house and has been married 10 years and more, then it is indeed too unfair.Especially if the man is unfaithful and is the party at fault.Although the woman doesnt put in any money when buying the house,she has provided the family with her her youth.If 10 years later the man has an affairand like that no longer wants the womancausing her to lose both her youth and money lose everything,thats really bleak for her.saka:Resign yourselves to it. If a man is good to you, hell think of a way to give you security.nickel2004:If you dont want to have a child, then dont. Making it out as if having a child is only for othersIf it really gets to the point of divorce, just how much security is half a house going to provide anyway?Its not like in really rich households, why make such a big deal over small ordinary households, this is too much to bearlazycat625:Why is marriage in so many peoples eyes like a transaction, whether they are losing out, whether it is worth it, whether there is security/a guarantee?Is the foundation of marriage not the feelings between two people? I really dont understand it8888lulu:I wonder if the person who wrote this law is an idiot.They obviously did not consider at all that women generally give more of their blood and sweat in a marriage than men, what with there not being any regulations for compensating the women in the event of divorce.What is even more deplorable is that there are even some women who support it. CN. Theres nothing for me to say anymore. Everyone remember, it isnt enough to have your eyes open clear before getting married. People change. If we dont depend on the law and only depend on morality, just how many people are actually that dependable!?abcd_dcba:LZ, dont be so worked up, this just shows that people have to be a little more careful and a little more sensible before getting married in the future. If you really have no confidence in the other person, then dont get married and dont have children. Besides, there are plenty of independent women and DINKs Double Income No Kids these days. everyone has their own way of living.msp:The marriage laws in other countries all protect the women, where the majority of the assets are given to the women in divorces.I dont know what logic Chinas marriage law is