zeb: The so called 'Family Law Act' has been an unmitigated disaster inflicted on the Australian people by a former Labor Govt. They were warned what it would lead to but the 'feminist'/ new age lobby were too influential to prevent any amendment along the way.
and
The Sydney Branch office of the WT was also warned about the family law act and what it would mean when immature people got married and then wanted out but as we have seen at the ARC the elders of the Branch office were living in fairy land and believed they had no need or responsibility to look into anything not given them by the gb.
I'm rather curious about these statements, so I thought to ask you, if you would care to expand? What is it precisely that you find objectionable?
-------
I've had little to do with the Family Court, except of course, in my own divorce, initiated by my former wife (justified within JW-land on the grounds that I placed her in spiritual jeopardy.).
Essentially, I recall that because it was 'no fault' (not sure if that term is used in Australia) and uncontested, it went through the court with any 'dirty washing' being necessary without adding to the bitterness and name-calling that goes along with leaving JW-land.
---------
Under the prior marriage laws (Before Lionel Murphy's Act) immorality was just about the only grounds for a divorce, and the result was a large number of people continuing to live together with bitterness, or separating without divorce and if entering a new relationship, forced to live together in a de facto arrangement without the 'privileges(?)' associated with the legality (for the relationship) granted by legalised marriage.
In your second post, you seem to suggest that the Aust. Branch Office should have done 'something' about that then new Family laws. I'm not sure, given JW dogma, what they should have/could have done? You posted, "immature people got married and then wanted out" - from my perspective, immature people have always gotten married, and then sought to get out. It's not as if Australia suddenly became unique in this regard.
(Matthew ch. 19 seems to expressly forbid divorce for Christians, however it is unlikely that the text reflects any law-making by Jesus, but is more likely to reflect ongoing changes in the customs of Mediterranean peoples caused by the Emperor Augustus's marriage laws, introduced long before Jesus' public ministry or the writing of the Matthew gospel)