Adultery

[cissycicle]

Originally Posted by rmet4nzkx

Your second post was right on the money and also why we frequently ask questions before answering them. If you notice I also answered post #1 without seeing post #3 and provided an objective answer based on the facts presented and applicible law. While you went to the trouble to google you didn't provide an objective citation and jumped to an interpretation, not based on the facts such as they were, see? You knew Adultery was grounds for divorce and interrogatories had already been issued, filing a no fault was moot, answering the interrogatories was the issue no matter which party OP was.

Yeah! So take that!

[AHA]

Originally Posted by jcarter

What is the name of your state? Tennessee

If adultery was admitted too, will he have to name whom with? What if he doesn't?

Why the "he", when you are the wife who slept around? If you want legal advice in the future, stick to telling the truth! Or are you a "he" also??

[rmet4nzkx]

Originally Posted by AHA

Why the "he", when you are the wife who slept around? If you want legal advice in the future, stick to telling the truth! Or are you a "he" also??

This is the psychological defense called "projection", it comes in handy when one is wrong and has no excuse

[AHA]

Originally Posted by rmet4nzkx

This is the psychological defense called "projection", it comes in handy when one is wrong and has no excuse

I don't get why so many OPs lie. They are anonymous on the internet!!!!!!!! That's the whole point. I, for one, couldn't care less about their real name, picture, address etc etc, but if you can't tell the truth, you should not be given any legal advice.
People and their pathetic line of thinking never ceases to amaze me. Evolution is going backwards, real fast.

[rmet4nzkx]

Originally Posted by AHA

I don't get why so many OPs lie. They are anonymous on the internet!!!!!!!! That's the whole point. I, for one, couldn't care less about their real name, picture, address etc etc, but if you can't tell the truth, you should not be given any legal advice.
People and their pathetic line of thinking never ceases to amaze me. Evolution is going backwards, real fast.

To Thine Own Self Be True

Yet here, Laertes! Aboard, aboard for shame!
The wind sits in the shoulder of your sail,
And you are stay'd for.
There ... my blessing with thee!
And these few precepts in thy memory
Look thou character. Give thy thoughts no tongue,
Nor any unproportion'd thought his act.
Be thou familiar, but by no means vulgar.
Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;
But do not dull thy palm with entertainment
Of each new-hatch'd, unfledg’d comrade. Beware
Of entrance to a quarrel but, being in,
Bear't that th' opposed may beware of thee.
Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice;
Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgement.
Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy,
But not express'd in fancy; rich, not gaudy;
For the apparel oft proclaims the man;
And they in France of the best rank and station
Are of a most select and generous chief in that.
Neither a borrower, nor a lender be;
For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Farewell; my blessing season this in thee!

-- William Shakespeare

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Silverplum

Yes, I do see the difference. But I was answering Post #1, hadn't seen Post #3, and I thought at that time it might be best to present another, more peaceful option. I also googled for OP and pointed out that no-fault was an option. That was a presentation of the law, of sorts -- a beginning of a discussion on legal possibilities. I don't regret my post/s.

Its never wrong to point out the peaceful solutions. Even in the most acrimonious of circumstances the peaceful solution often ends up making life better for everyone involved.

I don't see fault based divorces as benefiting anyone. They take longer, they cost more, and everyone ends up hating each other afterwards. If kids are involved the kids suffer the consequences even more than the adults. However people are human, and when a human being is seriously hurt they tend to want to inflict equal or greater damage to the other party. They also tend to want to blame the other woman/man and want to seriously make THEM suffer. Its understandable...its human...but in the long run it benefits no one.

However, that also doesn't mean that someone should roll over and play dead when it comes to the property settlement....or even child custody.

People who can leave their egos at the door can come up with fair/rational agreements....in all areas. Its just that many of them can't...their emotions are too much in control.

My ex and I were so lucky that both of us were prepared to be rational financially, and put our daughter's best interest first....and also that his girlfriend (with whom he cheated) was equally rational.