Pregunta
upstudy study bank question image url

Which of the following options best fits the definition of a "covenant marriage"? A marriage where both spouses agree to prioritize God A marriage where both spouses agree to restrictions about how quickly + how soon they can get divorced A marriage where only one of the spouses can ask for a divorce A marriage where both spouses agree to completely abolish the chance for a divorce

Ask by Bartlett Franklin. in the United States
Jan 26,2025

Solución de inteligencia artificial de Upstudy

Respuesta verificada por el tutor

Responder

A covenant marriage is where both spouses agree to restrictions on how quickly and easily they can get divorced.

Solución

The option that best fits the definition of a **"covenant marriage"** is: **B. A marriage where both spouses agree to restrictions about how quickly + how soon they can get divorced** **Explanation:** A **covenant marriage** is a legally recognized type of marriage that typically includes more stringent requirements and limitations regarding divorce compared to standard marriages. Couples entering into a covenant marriage usually undergo mandatory pre-marital counseling and agree to specific terms that make obtaining a divorce more challenging. This might include: - **Restricting the reasons for divorce:** Divorces may only be granted under certain conditions, such as adultery, abuse, or other severe issues. - **Extended waiting periods:** There may be longer periods that couples must remain married before they can legally separate. - **Additional counseling requirements:** Couples might need to attend counseling during the divorce process to explore reconciliation options. These measures are designed to encourage stability and commitment in the marriage, reflecting the "covenant" aspect of the relationship. The other options do not fully capture the legal and contractual nature of covenant marriages: - **A.** Prioritizing God may be a feature in some marriages but is not specific to covenant marriages. - **C.** Only one spouse being able to ask for a divorce introduces asymmetry, which is not characteristic of covenant marriages. - **D.** Completely abolishing the chance for divorce is not legally feasible and does not accurately describe covenant marriages. **Answer:** B. A marriage where both spouses agree to restrictions about how quickly + how soon they can get divorced

Respondido por UpStudy AI y revisado por un tutor profesional

error msg
Explicar
Simplifique esta solución

Extra Insights

Covenant marriage is a unique approach to marriage that emphasizes a commitment that goes beyond traditional legal bounds. In states that recognize covenant marriages, couples must undergo pre-marital counseling and agree to specific conditions regarding divorce, making it more challenging to dissolve the marriage compared to standard marriages. They must adhere to certain restrictions about how quickly and under what circumstances they can seek a divorce, reinforcing the idea that marriage is a lifelong commitment. Interestingly, covenant marriages were first introduced in Louisiana in the late 1990s as a response to rising divorce rates. The aim was to promote lasting unions based on mutual respect and commitment to each other and their families. This concept quickly gained traction, leading to other states, such as Arizona and Arkansas, adopting similar legislation. In those states, couples can choose between a traditional civil marriage and a covenant marriage, making a statement about their values and commitment to working through challenges together.

preguntas relacionadas

PASSAGE II SOCIAL SCIENCE: Defining the Poverty Line: A Political Question Poverty is an enduring problem that must be addressed by all modern societies. In fact, some ethicists say a civilization can be judged by how well it treats its least fortunate. By this measure, the United 5 States has much to be proud of. On a national level, the United States has done remarkable work to decrease the suffering of the poor by subsidizing food, housing, and education, and even by giving money directly to those who need it the most. Still, even in the public sector, 10 projects have to be evaluated to see if they are effective. No one can measure the benefits of aid without defining what poverty is, and when someone has been lifted out of it. This leads to one very political question: How exactly should poverty be measured? 15 The question of poverty is extremely complex. Should it be considered absolute-as a simple matter of the availability of food and shelter-or should it be relative to the goods and services enjoyed by the society as a whole? In other words, if a person can 20 afford a DVD player but not to live in a safe neighborhood, is that person poor? Certainly something as fluid as the economy can affect any number of forces to cause financial suffering-sometimes quite suddenly. Still, according to our federal government, there is 25 a specific measure, the "poverty line," that answers the question. Such a measure was devised in 1963 by government economist Mollie Orshansky, then working for the Social Security Administration under the jurisdiction of the Office of Management and Budget. 30 Orshansky's statistical measurement was one small part of the federal government's plan to attack the difficult national economic conditions that were hurting millions of Americans in the early 1960s. President Lyndon Johnson labeled the plan the government's 35 "War on Poverty," and it led to such national programs as Head Start, VISTA, and the Jobs Corps. Orshansky developed her poverty threshold from a Department of Agriculture study outlining the cost of nutritionally adequate meals. 40 From the Agriculture study, Orshansky took the most economic and healthy meal design she could find. She then estimated statistically that the average American family in the 1950s spent approximately onethird of its household income on food; from there, she 45 multiplied by three the cost of the most economically efficient, nutritional diet. This multiplier effect, in theory, produced the level of pre-tax household income at or below which a family should be considered poor. Orshansky's calculation was distributed for use across 50 the government, and the measure came to be known as the poverty line. It has been scaled every year for inflation, and it is adjustable to household size. Given the decades-old origins of this measure and the limited data available to Orshansky at the time, it is 55 fair to wonder if her standard is still accurate. Studies show that it is not. While families today spend about 12 percent of their income on food-nowhere near the 33 percent assumed in the 1950 s-the cost of important budget items, such as housing, transportation, and 60 health care, has increased dramatically. Orshansky's poverty measure, which only takes into account the ability of a household to provide itself with food, is missing several essential components to be accurate in modern society. With over \( \$ 60 \) billion in federal aid 65 tied each year to this guideline, not to mention an additional \( \$ 260 \) billion in Medicaid spending, the fact is many Americans are still falling deeper into poverty and failing to receive the aid they so desperately need and deserve. 70 ety is an obvious need, it remains to be seen why such reform has not been forthcoming. The answer lies in the very politics that caused the measure to be created in the first place. Any change in the measured poverty 75 level of a society is an indicator of economic health within that society, and no president has been willing to increase the perceived amount of poverty for a statistical recalculation, no matter how justified. Indeed, some economists say that updating the poverty measure 80 would increase the number of those considered poor, and therefore eligible for government aid, by as much as 2 percentage points. That may not seem significant, but in real terms it means an additional several million people are living below the "poverty line"-whether 85 we count them or not. 11. In the context of lines 46-51, the statement "the measure came to be known as the poverty line" (line 51) is used to support the idea that: A. poverty can be measured and defined by a single number. B. poor neighborhoods in the United States are marked off from richer neighborhoods by a metaphorical "line." C. inflation and household size are the only variables needed to define poverty. D. poor people often have to stand in line to receive government support. 12. It can be reasonably inferred from the passage that: F. being poor means not being able to afford a DVD player. G. Americans have overcome poverty in recent years. H. defining poverty is complex and difficult to do. J. lowering the poverty line would not impact the economic health of the U.S. 13. It can reasonably be inferred from the passage that Orshansky estimated that, in the 1950s, the percentage of income that the average American family spent on non-food items was: A. less than one-third. B. one-third. C. between one-third and two-thirds. D. approximately two-thirds.

Latest Social Sciences Questions

¡Prueba Premium ahora!
¡Prueba Premium y hazle a Thoth AI preguntas de matemáticas ilimitadas ahora!
Quizas mas tarde Hazte Premium
Estudiar puede ser una verdadera lucha
¿Por qué no estudiarlo en UpStudy?
Seleccione su plan a continuación
Prima

Puedes disfrutar

Empieza ahora
  • Explicaciones paso a paso
  • Tutores expertos en vivo 24/7
  • Número ilimitado de preguntas
  • Sin interrupciones
  • Acceso completo a Respuesta y Solución
  • Acceso completo al chat de PDF, al chat de UpStudy y al chat de navegación
Básico

Totalmente gratis pero limitado

  • Solución limitada
Bienvenido a ¡Estudia ahora!
Inicie sesión para continuar con el recorrido de Thoth AI Chat
Continuar con correo electrónico
O continuar con
Al hacer clic en "Iniciar sesión", acepta nuestros términos y condiciones. Términos de Uso & Política de privacidad