That's gotta be tough to swallow

[Bali Hai]

You should go back and review some of your own posts.

You have that backwards Mr. Prosecutor, the burden is on you, the accuser, to review my posts and prove your claim.

 

[single317dad]

You have that backwards Mr. Prosecutor, the burden is on you, the accuser, to review my posts and prove your claim.

Being that this is a civil matter, a preponderance of the evidence is sufficient.

 

[cbg]

And we also had the mother who beat her son to death, went to prison and the father was ordered to pay her alimony.

So, are we saying that men should pay alimony and women should not? I think that is more palatable to some and exactly what the hypocrites are saying.

I'm hearing that the law is gender neutral except or unless.....

I don't see anyone saying that. I don't see anyone saying that it was any worse for the mother in the OP's case than the father in this one. In fact, other than you, Bali, I don't see anyone in this thread suggesting that the law is not gender neutral

 

[Bali Hai]

I don't see anyone saying that. I don't see anyone saying that it was any worse for the mother in the OP's case than the father in this one. In fact, other than you, Bali, I don't see anyone in this thread suggesting that the law is not gender neutral

Well of course nobody is going to come right out and say it. Good grief!

 

[Bali Hai]

Being that this is a civil matter, a preponderance of the evidence is sufficient.

I didn't say proof beyond a reasonable doubt. YOU review my posts and find ANY proof that I have advised someone to break the law.

 

[cbg]

Why not, if they believe it? You sure don't have any trouble doing so.

But since no one (but you) is making that claim, I think it's fair to say that no one (but you) believes that the law is NOT gender neutral.

 

[Bali Hai]

Why not, if they believe it? You sure don't have any trouble doing so.

But since no one (but you) is making that claim, I think it's fair to say that no one (but you) believes that the law is NOT gender neutral.

Well then, they shouldn't have a problem with the ex-wife in that case in question paying alimony. That is the law. But that's not what I'm hearing in this thread.

They were married, she makes more money and they divorced. She pays alimony just like any gender.

Next case.

 

[Zigner]

Well then, they shouldn't have a problem with the ex-wife in that case in question paying alimony. That is the law. But that's not what I'm hearing in this thread.

They were married, she makes more money and they divorced. She pays alimony just like any gender.

Next case.

Bali -

Seriously - take your soap-box rants somewhere else.

If the genders were reversed in the situation originally shared in this thread, I can guarantee you that the responses would not have changed. (Well, except maybe for yours)

 

[Bali Hai]

Bali -

Seriously - take your soap-box rants somewhere else.

If the genders were reversed in the situation originally shared in this thread, I can guarantee you that the responses would not have changed. (Well, except maybe for yours)

If you don't like my posts, don't read them.

Of course the reponses would not have changed. Hypocrites aren't stupid.

Seems alot of people are pro-alimony, until the time comes for them to pay it. Then they think up all kinds of loopholes to get out of paying.

 

[LdiJ]

If you don't like my posts, don't read them.

Of course the reponses would not have changed. Hypocrites aren't stupid.

Seems alot of people are pro-alimony, until the time comes for them to pay it. Then they think up all kinds of loopholes to get out of paying.

Bali...its really a bit disturbing that you would equate someone of either gender having to pay alimony to someone who repeatedly raped their child, with any other person of either gender paying alimony to a non-rapist ex spouse.
You are either deliberately ignoring the actual facts in this case, or you are just that cold. Either way, its a bit disturbing.

 

[Proserpina]

Was that illegal?

Did I say it was or wasn't?

Go away, Bali.

 

[cbg]

Bali, go to your dictionary and look up the word, sarcasm.

 

[Bali Hai]

Bali...its really a bit disturbing that you would equate someone of either gender having to pay alimony to someone who repeatedly raped their child, with any other person of either gender paying alimony to a non-rapist ex spouse.
You are either deliberately ignoring the actual facts in this case, or you are just that cold. Either way, its a bit disturbing.

The court didn't ask me if my ex-wife was a good person or a bad person when I was ordered to pay alimony. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[LdiJ]

The court didn't ask me if my ex-wife was a good person or a bad person when I was ordered to pay alimony. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Ok...now I am really disturbed.

 

[Zigner]

The court didn't ask me if my ex-wife was a good person or a bad person when I was ordered to pay alimony. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

It's not the COURT'S job to bring that sort of matter up. Sounds like you had some really ineffective counsel. That's YOUR fault.

Seriously - your soapboxing is tiring to everyone (you included, I'm sure.) The only reason I haven't reported it is because this thread isn't about somebody looking for help, so your irrelevant gripes aren't really hurting anything/anyone here.