It takes a lot for a victim of domestic abuse to leave their abuser to begin with. Add more hurdles of having to go to court and hire an experienced divorce attorney on top of things. JFC
Last edited:
GOP Ramps Up Push To End No-Fault Divorce
- Thread starter NoleATL
- Start date
I bet you yell at people to get off your lawn. It's not the government's business to determine fault. What's amusing is that none of you are getting it. This is an attempt to make divorce harder or force people to stay with each other who shouldn't. We might as well go back to having women have to get permission to get a business loan.
Some of you are way out of touch. I am guessing you live in a small town in Iowa.
Only a moron would marry a financial dependent w/out a prenup in this legal climate. My wife and I agreed to live in a state of mutually assured destruction. Attempted murder is my threshold for divorcing her.
Oh come on...
The government determines fault in many aspects of life.
And it wouldn't make divorce harder at all. It would just simply allow a deciding official to assess fault if appropriate.
That’s why you punch them in the gut, amirite?
We are the party of absolute freedom!!
For men.
For men.
That's funny because to me you're looking at it like it's 1952 where the man should be in control and the women should be follow and not have any rights.
I don't really care what people do. I'm not here to be the marriage police and tell people how to live their lives.
As a women it has to be hard to be a republican with all the new anti-women views taking over the party. I'm not trying to be critical of you but I do wonder if you struggle with deciding which party is on your side?
it doesn't matter who's fault it is in a divorce, the assets need to be split 50/50.
Please enlighten up how someone would decide the the percentage. What if the guy has ED and his dick becomes the size of a cocktail frank. Does he get a smaller percentage because he can't produce.
Divorced guy posts what?
The 1950s weren't exactly great for marriage, by the way. People were trapped in terrible, sometimes abusive marriages. But, you probably know that. Dissolve them and allow people to move along.
Why do you think he's against no fault divorce? A woman needs to know her place, and learn how to take a punch.
Im not sure how anyone with even the slightest respect for women can vote for the current GOP and their naked socially regressive goals. Next they'll be floating a return to a time when raping your wife was impossible.
Last edited:
Donald raped Ivana. Whatever it takes to normalize aggression against women is fine in today’s GOP.
Marriage is a partnership. He should have picked a better partner. I’ve worked on a 1000 plus family law cases. Marriage is not something to jump into without a knowing you have a good partner.
Prenuptial agreements are a great idea. Anyone entering a second marriage should definitely have one. Not a bad idea for first marriages.
That's all very nice. They were married almost 20 years. This was a deeply seated mental issue caused by an emotionally abusive mother (her mother). She had us all fooled for nearly 20 years... Are you familiar with cluster B personality disorders? Parental alienation? That's what's happening here and it's way more complex than almost all "family law cases." One thing we've learned is that run of the mill family lawyers are way over their head on the emotional abuse stuff.
Sure. I have seen mothers have their kids fake sexual abuse charges against their father and get DHS involved and criminal investigations to take it a step further. There are ways to deal with that sort of crap.
Last edited:
You are simply wrong. Prior to no-fault divorce couples had to claim a reason before they could get a divorce.
I have no issue with granting no fault divorce. But I think asset distribution should require one to have a judge decide based on merits.
Basically, no one would be forced to show cause to get the divorce. They would have to show cause to get half the assets.
Too many times it seems that the main breadwinner is getting screwed over.
I can't understand why I should have to share custody of my kids nor share my income if I have honors the terms of my marriage and my spouse has not.
Aside from honor and commitment, what's to stop a homemaker wife of a rich business man from banging the pool boy, getting caught then asking for half his stuff?
Look at all the high value men out there as a guide. Actors. Bezos. Costner. On and on. If these rich and famous dudes can't keep a chick (and there are thousands of women that would fall over themselves to marry these guys) then how the hell is the Average guy supposed to? There is zero disincentive the days for the low earning spouse not to cheat if they aren't a good person in love with their spouse. Not to mention the fact that the process is deviastating to the kids.
These days, with the ubiquitous access to cameras, phones and hidden ones, it wouldn't take much effort at all to prove abuse. This isn't 1970. I am not persuaded by that argument.
Basically, no one would be forced to show cause to get the divorce. They would have to show cause to get half the assets.
Too many times it seems that the main breadwinner is getting screwed over.
I can't understand why I should have to share custody of my kids nor share my income if I have honors the terms of my marriage and my spouse has not.
Aside from honor and commitment, what's to stop a homemaker wife of a rich business man from banging the pool boy, getting caught then asking for half his stuff?
Look at all the high value men out there as a guide. Actors. Bezos. Costner. On and on. If these rich and famous dudes can't keep a chick (and there are thousands of women that would fall over themselves to marry these guys) then how the hell is the Average guy supposed to? There is zero disincentive the days for the low earning spouse not to cheat if they aren't a good person in love with their spouse. Not to mention the fact that the process is deviastating to the kids.
These days, with the ubiquitous access to cameras, phones and hidden ones, it wouldn't take much effort at all to prove abuse. This isn't 1970. I am not persuaded by that argument.
They were called something different in the early days but the marriage “pacts” of old involved a dowry and an agreement between families. Arranged marriages were more common and in fact are still common in other non-western cultures. Inheritance rights were set out by law in England passing down titles and estates which affected the family, and divorce was not allowed by Catholics or Anglicans.
50% of marriages in America today end in divorce. Half of the Royal family have been divorced which would have been unheard of prior to the Queen’s own children breaking the taboos, with three of the four divorcing.
I wonder if it wouldn’t be a good thing to consider making the procedure of divorce uniform in all 50 states and establishing prenup guidelines and requirements for child support also a nationally binding law.
Last edited:
There is a reason why “no fault” divorce became the law Northern. Back in the day… before the 70’s when “no fault” came into vogue, attorneys used to scoff at the lying testimony that was being given by the aggrieved parties in divorce cases. It will resort to that in a heartbeat… abd honestly our Courts have more important and productive duties to perform than to listen to bullshit and lies from husbands, wives and families trying to disassociate themselves from each other.
“No fault” is a lot cleaner than the old system you seem to pine for. There is a reason why “no fault” became the way of the law.
To start with, don't worry about the rich guys, they should and do have prenups. if the average person goes into a marriage with "stuff" they want to keep, then they need a prenup. That's on the person, not the government to decide.
Why should the government be responsible for punishing a spouse that cheats. Put that in your prenup.
People need to take responsibility or the government should split 50/50.
Here is an idea. If you're going to make it hard to get a divorce, might be a good idea to make it hard to get married in the first place. It isn't.
I’ve been on a hundred calls where a married couple has been beating on each other. When there are serious injuries, it’s always the wife as a victim. But in most cases, there’s abuse both ways. The couple just freakin beat each other. Two weekends ago the wife got drunk while the husband was asleep. She jumped in the bed and got about four really good punches in before he woke up and beat the shit out of her.
No shit. You can legally marry someone you don’t know in minutes and in some of these states, you might have to go through a year of waiting a while separated to get divorced, even if that marriage only lasts a few months.
Zero disincentive for the high-earning spouse, as well.
Bezos and Costner are both adulterers (Costner a serial adulterer).
Similar threads
