Chang notes that what is seen as unacceptable in the civil or societal view is the idea of forcing a person to remain in a marriage when they want out.
Chang (2004) notes that critics of the no-fault divorce laws state that the laws make it far too easy to end a marriage and, as a result, leads to the breakdown of one the main institutions of society. However, Chang also points out that no fault divorce has, in some states, been associated with a general improvement in women's mental health.
Some states have an irreconcilable difference law (Mercer & Pruitt, 2001). For example, in California divorce is allowed based upon irreconcilable differences and incurable insanity. Irreconcilable differences are statutorily defined as those differences determined by the court to be substantial reasons for not continuing the marriage and which make it appear that the marriage should be dissolved. Commonly, grounds considered to be substantial are: cruelty (inflicting unnecessary emotional or physical pain); adultery; desertion for a specified length of time; confinement in prison for a set number of years; and physical inability to engage in sexual intercourse, if it was not disclosed before marriage. For a decree of dissolution of marriage to be granted based upon incurable insanity, proof must be presented to the court that at the time the petition was filed, the insane spouse was, and still is, incurably insane (ACC 2310).
What should be easy to see from the foregoing is that the idea of dissolving a marriage is quite socially acceptable and, in almost every state, satisfying the grounds for divorce is minimal. This differs from the biblical view as to when divorce is acceptable. According to Jackson (June 28, 1999), writing for the Christian Courier, the biblical view of divorce is one in which divorce is prohibited except when certain circumstances or situations obtain.
Jackson (1999) notes that in Malachi (2:17, NASB), ...