Active Users:767 Time:16/02/2026 08:41:01 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Because the law in question only eliminated it for women. Phelix Send a noteboard - 30/09/2010 05:27:12 AM
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.

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.
I was Phelix on wotmania, I will always be Phelix in the "real" world, and now I am Phelix on RAFO.

You will make all kinds of mistakes; but as long as you are generous and true and also fierce you cannot hurt the world or even seriously distress her.- Churchill

*MySmiley*
Reply to message
Scuzziest politcal ad of the season... so far Isaac - 29/09/2010 08:06:19 PM 1307 Views
Wow...that reminds me of Homer Simpson looking for that "sweet, sweet can". Tom - 29/09/2010 08:31:35 PM 955 Views
You think that's worse than Renee Elmer's one in North Carolina? Napoleon62 - 29/09/2010 08:38:30 PM 1285 Views
you may not like her position but it isn't a blatant lie random thoughts - 29/09/2010 08:47:44 PM 947 Views
Yes, much Isaac - 29/09/2010 08:55:38 PM 943 Views
The ad didn't make me cringe, but the interview afterward certainly did BlackAdder - 29/09/2010 09:07:06 PM 888 Views
Yeah... oh dear, this is painful. Legolas - 29/09/2010 09:37:26 PM 883 Views
I'm with the other people responding. Tom - 29/09/2010 09:18:50 PM 956 Views
I despise them both. In their own way they are both disgusting, manipulative, ignorant tools. Tashmere - 30/09/2010 03:46:36 AM 820 Views
The bad news he will lose in November random thoughts - 29/09/2010 08:42:22 PM 896 Views
His name is Daniel Webster. That is awesome *NM* BlackAdder - 29/09/2010 09:02:15 PM 440 Views
To be fair... Phelix - 29/09/2010 11:59:33 PM 997 Views
What little I found in the time I had... Tashmere - 30/09/2010 04:02:51 AM 1038 Views
Why should a woman get alimony for cheating on her husband? random thoughts - 30/09/2010 05:23:03 AM 909 Views
Because the law in question only eliminated it for women. Phelix - 30/09/2010 05:27:12 AM 1319 Views
What law? Isaac - 30/09/2010 07:49:59 PM 984 Views
Shedding a little light on the "Law" in question. Tashmere - 01/10/2010 12:40:00 AM 1040 Views
You can argue almost any position but that doesn’t make it right random thoughts - 30/09/2010 08:17:03 PM 1019 Views
Poor life choices? Legolas - 30/09/2010 09:46:14 PM 977 Views
I did say in rare case they deserve limited alimony random thoughts - 30/09/2010 10:47:39 PM 1027 Views
I'm not saying that alimony should be very high, of course. Legolas - 30/09/2010 11:27:08 PM 941 Views
This is why I hate politics. *NM* Darth_Katie - 30/09/2010 12:11:08 AM 414 Views
Pathetic. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 30/09/2010 12:25:52 AM 455 Views
I like how he disabled comments for the video. Pussy. *NM* everynametaken - 30/09/2010 06:40:57 AM 432 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes