Active Users:1083 Time:22/11/2024 05:58:00 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
You can argue almost any position but that doesn’t make it right random thoughts Send a noteboard - 30/09/2010 08:17:03 PM
They need to do away with it all together except in extreme cases. It is 2010, women can support themselves even it may not be in the style they had grown accustomed to. In most the case I have seen the guy sure isn't living the same life style he was before the divorce. Family courts should not be used for extortion.

If the law was even handed and eliminated alimony all together, or in all cases of infidelity, sure that would be fine, but it didn't do that. It specifically called out women.


I agree the law should not say it is only for women. Did he oppose haveing it include men or was he only discussing the exisiting law?

That said, if you're divorcing and suing for half of your joint possessions, you could make a strong argument that the years of support you gave your spouse entitles you to a portion of their income until you marry again because without you and your support they would not have been able to achieve as much, especially if you became a stay-at-home spouse or parent to allow them to work.


Except in unusual circumstance you should be able to continue to get your ex-husband’s money if you get divorced and even then it should be for a limited amount of time. You have a right to half of what was earned during the marriage but nothing afterwards. Women are not children and they need child support. They can go out and get jobs and support themselves. Courts should not be in position of compensating for people’s poor life choices.
Reply to message
Scuzziest politcal ad of the season... so far Isaac - 29/09/2010 08:06:19 PM 1046 Views
Wow...that reminds me of Homer Simpson looking for that "sweet, sweet can". Tom - 29/09/2010 08:31:35 PM 717 Views
You think that's worse than Renee Elmer's one in North Carolina? Napoleon62 - 29/09/2010 08:38:30 PM 1039 Views
you may not like her position but it isn't a blatant lie random thoughts - 29/09/2010 08:47:44 PM 697 Views
Yes, much Isaac - 29/09/2010 08:55:38 PM 701 Views
The ad didn't make me cringe, but the interview afterward certainly did BlackAdder - 29/09/2010 09:07:06 PM 674 Views
Yeah... oh dear, this is painful. Legolas - 29/09/2010 09:37:26 PM 661 Views
I'm with the other people responding. Tom - 29/09/2010 09:18:50 PM 713 Views
I despise them both. In their own way they are both disgusting, manipulative, ignorant tools. Tashmere - 30/09/2010 03:46:36 AM 592 Views
The bad news he will lose in November random thoughts - 29/09/2010 08:42:22 PM 650 Views
His name is Daniel Webster. That is awesome *NM* BlackAdder - 29/09/2010 09:02:15 PM 329 Views
To be fair... Phelix - 29/09/2010 11:59:33 PM 759 Views
What little I found in the time I had... Tashmere - 30/09/2010 04:02:51 AM 778 Views
Why should a woman get alimony for cheating on her husband? random thoughts - 30/09/2010 05:23:03 AM 675 Views
Because the law in question only eliminated it for women. Phelix - 30/09/2010 05:27:12 AM 929 Views
What law? Isaac - 30/09/2010 07:49:59 PM 761 Views
Shedding a little light on the "Law" in question. Tashmere - 01/10/2010 12:40:00 AM 796 Views
You can argue almost any position but that doesn’t make it right random thoughts - 30/09/2010 08:17:03 PM 779 Views
Poor life choices? Legolas - 30/09/2010 09:46:14 PM 747 Views
I did say in rare case they deserve limited alimony random thoughts - 30/09/2010 10:47:39 PM 764 Views
I'm not saying that alimony should be very high, of course. Legolas - 30/09/2010 11:27:08 PM 679 Views
This is why I hate politics. *NM* Darth_Katie - 30/09/2010 12:11:08 AM 320 Views
Pathetic. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 30/09/2010 12:25:52 AM 329 Views
I like how he disabled comments for the video. Pussy. *NM* everynametaken - 30/09/2010 06:40:57 AM 328 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes