Before no-fault divorce laws, the courts considered sex something that was exclusive to marriage. A wife was protected from the negative consequences of adultery by criminal law, specific divorce laws that addressed adultery, and, in some cases, alienation of affection laws.
With the introduction of no-fault divorce laws, the courts, for some reason, decided they had no business being involved in the issue of whether or not a husband was faithful, or the right of a wife to be compensated for a husband's cheating ways.
But why, if the state considers marriage a legal contract, does it act as though that contract is less important, and less binding, than any other? If you entered into a business contract and your partner's behavior made you lose any emotional and financial investment you had in the business, the state would surely hold that:
• You had been injured and had a right to compensation
• The courts had authority over the matter, and are willing to help you recoup any losses
More Juicy Content From YourTango:
• 10 Signs That Your Husband Is Cheating [EXPERT]
• Does Cheat On My Husband Make Me A Bad Person? [VIDEO]
• Prevent Your Man From Cheating: 7 Fool-Proof Tips [EXPERT]