npaf Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
2	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. Well we can both agree that is just hooey! (Is that how you spell hooey? Is there a correct way to spell hooey because I am trying to sound it out right now...)	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 03:06 AM
-1	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. I propose we agree to disagree. I respect your opinion. I believe that you go from 'mine' and 'yours' as a single people to 'ours' in a marriage. That makes it difficult to split when a divorce comes around. If you truly do not want problems, have a solid prenup and there will be no problems!	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 02:52 AM
2	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. What if the parents could not afford to pay for daycare or someone to watch the child? If that was the reason one parent stayed home and the other continued to work.. How does it work then?	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 02:45 AM
2	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. Applying for assistance would mean having money as 'income' which he or she could hopefully live off of. I meant to state that as long as a person is able, they should get some training and go back supporting themselves. If they are not able to support themselves, they need to find a way to do that which might take longer than a person who is able.	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 02:12 AM
3	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. But the two partners came to the agreement that one would stay home. One accepted the role as 'worker' and the other as 'child raiser'. Both parties agreed to this. Money was earned to the family by the working person, children raised by the other. You share all of that even after a divorce. What about applying it to a different job situation. You work for 10 years at a company. They decide to fire you. You receive a severance to help you for a short time while you find a new job.	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 02:09 AM
-2	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. You must have misunderstood me and taken it out of context. I will clarify my statement. What I meant was: 13 years of payment (alimony) is not fair if she was fully able TO WORK and she was just not making an effort to educate herself or learn skill to find a job.	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 02:05 AM
1	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. I think you might be misinterpreting feminists with bad people	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 12:39 AM
2	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. I appreciate your concern. I don't feel poisoned or poisonous to others. :)	/r/MensRights	24/02/15 12:23 AM
12	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. Based on that assumption, I agree with you. 13 years of payment is not fair if she was fully able to work and not making a serious effort to educate herself or learn skill to find a job.	/r/MensRights	23/02/15 11:55 PM
2	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. That would make sense that when both people were making enough money to survive and the alimony would stop. I definitely agree that there are a lot of people out there who would be content being taken care of for life. Men and women. I do not agree with it but I respect their choice. It is definitely an interesting debate. I feel that alimony laws are changing (albeit slowly) to become more equal for everyone.	/r/MensRights	23/02/15 11:45 PM
-1	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. I don't see where it says that?	/r/MensRights	23/02/15 09:51 PM
1	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. If they both continue to work or both stop working I would think they would share the joint funds 50/50 (house, car, accounts, etc) except anything in a prenup. If one wants a nanny and one does not, that's just a normal family concern. You both make a decision and move forward with it. Then it goes back to the first part!	/r/MensRights	23/02/15 09:47 PM
169	'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case. I identify as a feminist - but I agree (and like) this ruling. I think it was incredibly fair. I believe that if a parent male, female or otherwise stays home to raise the child/children they are entitled to enough money so they can get back on their feet, educate themselves on something and get a job. This woman has enough money in this settlement to do that. No one should be supported indefinitely by an ex-partner - that is just being lazy	/r/MensRights	23/02/15 05:47 PM