[chongli]

Should we allow the individual to have every one of its desires in reach of fulfillment?

Our modern society is founded on the supreme principle of individual rights. If you want to live in a collectivist society with arranged marriages and a general distrust for individual freedoms, you can choose to do so. There are several available to choose from.

Otherwise you're going to have a hard time making the argument here. Too many people enjoy individual rights so much they are willing to leave their lives and livelihoods behind in order to come here. At the very minimum it's encumbant upon us to continue to preserve these rights for everyone.

[AvenueIngres]

I was not trying to argue whether that's the case or not. As you said so well, it is clearly the case. Rather, I am trying to wage whether that's a good thing or not. Is there a balance to strike?

>If you want to live in a collectivist society with arranged marriages and a general distrust for individual freedoms, you can choose to do so. There are several available to choose from.

I think you're putting words in my mouth. Words that you would like me to say perhaps.

[chongli]

The balance point will always be a matter for debate. I think it's pretty clear, however, that no fault divorce is absolutely the right thing to do. Keeping individuals out of toxic, unhappy, even abusive marriages is far more important than maintaining a low divorce statistic. I'd even go so far as to say preserving the individual happiness of all people is more important than any statistic.

I think you're putting words in my mouth

That comment was half in reference to the article, which is focused on India.