|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:45 PM March 14th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
"Prenuptial agreements in South Dakota cannot limit alimony because that runs counter to state public policy..."
Why would a woman be a prostitute, when a justice of the peace and a judge can get her a better deal than a pimp?
This is just one more confirmation that men have rights and women have privileges. Family law has nothing to do with justice or equality, or even rights. Our system of family law is a gender feminist institution designed to carry out the hate agenda of the misandrist and crimanlly hateful gender feminist government.
Ray
Marriage is a Social Injustice Where Men Incur all Financial Risks
Black Robes Disguise a Multitude of Feminist Prejudices
Please do not scroll up the page of the linked item(s). All the info I'm trying to convey is as the page initially comes up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 04:54 PM March 14th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
The S.D. ruling follows a trend in the interpretation of the law that continues to excuse women from having to abide by the terms of a supposedly "binding" contract.
Any feminist lawyer can stand up in court and make a weak case that the female was "victimized" and did not fully understand the terms of the contract, or, she was coerced into signing a pre-nup, or circumstances not foreseen when she agreed to the contract (i.e. that he would become wealthy through his own hard work)warrant a reinterpretation of the terms.
So my question is -- can any man today feel secure in signing a contractual agreement with a female?
Just wait until the "reckless sex" laws are passed! If you can trash a detailed pre-nup, it'll be impossible to prove/defend a trivial pre-screw agreement.
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:04 PM March 16th, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
“So my question is -- can any man today feel secure in signing a contractual agreement with a female?”
It has become more apparent through not only this court ruling but also many others that the answer would be… No.
Its seems women are increasingly been put into the same category of mere minors who if they sign a contract and then fail to live up to the terms of the contract can have that contract legally voided.
Are women capable of being adults? Or the better question would be are the courts capable of seeing women as adults?
Are women capable of making choices and then being held accountable for those choices?
Eating your cake before you even realized you wanted cake…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by LSBeene on 07:08 PM March 14th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
If the Supreme Court were to rule that all future prenups (from that day forward) were not binding that would be one thing.
I would disagree, but it makes sense.
But to RETROACTIVELY apply this law, when at the time of signing it was a valid contract is bullshit!
Steven
Guerrilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Kyo on 03:14 AM March 15th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't there something in the Constitution about ex post facto laws?
(Seriously, though, Article 7 maybe? My high school civics knowledge is failing me. How can a judge sidestep the law of the land?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:43 PM March 15th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Ex post facto means "after the fact". And it is in the Constitution somewhere.
Say smoking cigarettes was outlawed today. You can't be prosecuted for smoking a cigarette any day before today because ex post facto laws aren't allowed.
Basically, you can't be prosecuted for crimes committed before they were actually codified into laws as crimes. Your actions weren't actually crimes in the past, therefore you should not be prosecuted for them.
I don't know how this would actually apply to contracts signed before a law changed/was added. In most contracts, you can waive almost any right that you would normally have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:56 PM March 15th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
The Supreme Court ruled nearly two hundred years ago, that the prohibition on ex post facto laws does not apply to civil law.That ruling was reaffirmed more recently when a retroactive tax increase was allowed to stand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:00 PM March 14th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Some possible responses to anti-male family law:
1. Don't marry a woman unless she has a lot of money, a good job, and indicates a willingness to continue working at that job.
2. Require a large dowry up front that you put in a bank account under your own name and keep separate from marital accounts.
3. Don't get married. If you live in Canada, don't live with a woman for more than two years or the law will consider you to be married to her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by frank h on 10:53 AM March 15th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Off-topic, but related vaguely.
I listen to the country channels on XM Radio, and one of them (I think it's 16) is playing a song based on Gretchen Wilson's "Redneck Woman" called "Paycheck Woman" by Cledus T. Judd. It's hilarious. Lyrics are here:
http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/cledus-t-judd/p aycheck-woman-13661.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by khankrumthebulgar on 06:02 PM March 15th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Bottom line is this. Marriage is a horrible adhesion contract that offers Men nothing but obligations and responsibilities. Even using a Condom is no longer a guarantee against Paternity Fraud by a Woman. I see only more of a marriage strike ahead. I spoke with a good friend today about this subject. He was Divorced in 2000 and has had a 3 year relationship with a Woman. But she wants or expects unreasonable demands for financial support.
Marry a Foreign Woman. Two of my former business partners have and are very happy. Marriage in the US makes no sense. This society is so messed up thanks to the Feminist Hate Agenda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Canada, I think it's 1 year for common law.
--bandersnatch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:29 PM March 15th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Spain Muslims Issue Fatwa Against Bin Laden
Thu Mar 10, 3:31 PM ET
By DANIEL WOOLLS
MADRID, Spain - Muslim clerics in Spain issued what they called the world's first fatwa, or Islamic edict, against Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) on Thursday, the first anniversary of the Madrid train bombings, calling him an apostate and urging others of their faith to denounce the al-Qaida leader.
The ruling was issued by the Islamic Commission of Spain, the main body representing the country's 1 million-member Muslim community. The commission represents 200 or so mostly Sunni mosques, or about 70 percent of all mosques in Spain.
Muslims Attending Prayers Outstrip Christians In Spain, two years ago the nes was that the number of British Muslims praying at mosques outstripped the number of regular worshippers in the Church of England, now is Spain. .................
Besides inmigration, disgrunted local young males are converting to islam in droves every year, very soon the scum of western females will have only left the old male ehunucs to defend them, the old judges, politicians, lawyers, and so on, the western oldies, the ehunucs that sold their male children to the rotten feminists, poor idiots they will be haunted like dogs.
More about it:
France is Not a Western Country Anymore
By Guy Milliere
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 31, 2003
France's new identification with radical Islam. In many French cities with a growing radical Islamist population, no teenage girl can go out in the evening, at least not without a full burqa. If she does, it will mean that "she is for everybody": in short, a whore. In the same cities, every teenage girl - regardless of religion - has to wear the Muslim veil if she does not want to be harassed or killed. Almost every month, a young woman is mugged and raped in a suburb of a big city. Gang rape has become so frequent that a new word, used by the rapists themselves to define their hideous actions, is used by everybody: tournantes (revolving). To the rapists, the woman is nothing, a mere object to be thrown away after use. The people who speak about "revolving" seem to forget a human being is involved as the victim. Policemen do nothing. Every decent person knows the problem is Islam, but no one dares to say it. It could be dangerous. The streets are not safe.
One year ago, a French Muslim decided to create a new business: he was tired of seeing people drinking Coca-Cola - all this money going to Americans! He found a factory and started to produce Mecca Cola. On the label, he put a picture of the Al Aqsa mosque, with a large part of his profits would help to support the Palestinian cause. In some suburbs of Paris, Coca-Cola has disappeared; Mecca Cola has replaced it. A few days ago, another Muslim businessman announced he will start to sell Muslim-Up. It will have the taste of Sprite or Seven-Up, but it will be a Muslim drink - and naturally the profits will go to the Palestinian jihad, as well.
Three radio stations in France are Muslim radio stations, and if you listen to them, dedicated to broadcasting the voice of hate and racism all day long.
Now six million Muslims live in France, at least ten per cent of them are radical Islamists poised on the edge of violence. And these radical Muslims have allies on both the extreme Left and the extreme Right. France is not a Western country anymore, it is now the leader of the Arab/Muslim world.
As a result:
France gives men and women same rights and responsabilities regarding children.
13 de diciembre de 2004 OCTAVI MARTÍ | París
La Asamblea Nacional francesa (cámara de diputados) aprobó ayer el proyecto de ley que equipara los derechos y deberes de padres y madres. El texto, propuesto por los socialistas, fue aceptado por unanimidad.
La ley establece la igualdad de derechos de hombres y mujeres en cuanto a la guardia y custodia de los hijos tras la separación de la pareja. La custodia recaía hasta ahora en la madre.
One more about the falling of the west:
(How different from western family courts)
Chicago Tribune (01.10.2003)/- Two years ago, Mahmood Khawel, a 34-year-old financial consultant and devout Muslim from the Midlands city of Peterborough, wanted a quickie divorce.
So he went to an Islamic court in London where he performed the divorce ritual known as talaq. Standing before a judge, he declared three times in succession that he was repudiating his wife. Judge Omar Bakri Muhammad, an expert in Shariah, the sacred law of Islam, granted the divorce on the spot.
But now Khawel and his wife have changed their minds. They want to reconcile. Last week, Khawel was back in Muhammad's courtroom, asking for an annulment of the talaq.
"OK, brother, don't worry," Muhammad told him.
None of this would be recognized in any British civil court, according to legal experts, but for growing numbers of Britain's 7.6 million Muslims, Shariah is the law.
During the past decade, a parallel universe of Islamic jurisprudence has sprouted across Britain. Shariah courts can be found in almost every large city. In London, different Muslim immigrant groups--the Somalis in Woolwich, for example--have established ad hoc courts that cater to their community's needs.
Most operate quietly
No one knows how many of these courts are operating in Britain. Because of their informal nature, reliable statistics do not exist.
Most of the Shariah courts go about their business quietly. But Muhammad, 44, a native of Syria who studied Islamic law in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, does not shy from controversy.
His outspoken support for Osama bin Laden and his praise for the Sept. 11 hijackers--"the magnificent 19," he calls them--have landed him in trouble with British anti-terrorism authorities. Earlier this year, police closed his north London office, and last month they seized all his legal files.
But the faithful who fill the makeshift courtroom above a North London sweatshop care little about Muhammad's politics. They come here because they believe he is uniquely qualified to settle their marital disputes, sort out their business partnerships and decide the amount of blood money that should be paid to compensate the victim of a crime.
In his white gown, white skullcap and beard, Muhammad is an imposing figure behind the cluttered table that serves as his bench. Justice is rendered with swift certainty, and many pleadings are handled via the Internet.
Divorces form the bulk of his caseload. For men, getting a divorce is simple. For women, it can be more problematic. Usually, women have to buy their way out of an unhappy marriage. They also have to give up custody of their children and forfeit their property rights.
Muhammad said he tries to be lenient with women who are the victims of physical or psychological abuse by their husbands. These women are not required to pay off their husbands, and they also get to keep their jewelry and dowry, which are considered the bride's property under Islamic law.
He also said he gives the benefit of the doubt to women in cases where they married against their will. In these instances, he said, he simply annuls the marriage contract.
But if a woman wants a divorce "because her husband is impotent or he smells bad or he is ugly," the woman has to pay her husband double the value of her dowry, he said. In all cases, community property and custody of the children go to the husband. In the case of very young children, there is joint custody until age 7. Then the father gets full custody.
The custody laws are "quite logical," Muhammad said. "A child comes from the seed of a man. The woman is the soil in which the seed is planted. A man is fully entitled to the fruit of his seed."
British civil law would disagree, but Muhammad shrugs.
"I can't change God's law," he said.
Separate realms
Anjem Choudary, a lawyer with a degree from a British university, represents clients in Shariah court as well as in Britain's civil court system. He often hears the argument that when Muslims choose to live in Britain, they should obey British law.
"They do obey British law," he said. "But the Shariah is God's law. It is a fundamental part of being a Muslim. If you call yourself a Muslim you must put God's law ahead of man's law."
When the two are in conflict, as in the case of child custody laws, God's law prevails, he said. But why would a woman give up custody and surrender her property rights when she could easily obtain a no-fault civil divorce? The answer is usually family pressure.
A Muslim woman who ignored Islamic strictures and obtained a civil divorce would immediately be declared an apostate. In the insular and tightly knit immigrant communities of Britain, this would disgrace her entire family.
"The Shariah is what we live and die by," said Khawel, the man who was seeking to annul his divorce. Khawel and many others in the Muslim community have little faith in Britain's "manmade laws." This is especially true when their main source of information about it is the tabloid press, which tends to highlight cases of rapists escaping punishment while homeowners go to jail for defending their property against burglars.
Meanwhile in the West:
80 percent of marriages in Russia end up in divorce 06/25/2004 16:09
More and more Russians who got married, come back to the registry office to divorce.
The current ratio of marriages to divorces in Russia is 1000:800. Less number of children are born: there were 36 million children in Russia in 1989, currently we have only 26.3 million children.
The number of families with no children is increasing. Families are becoming smaller - 65 percent of parents have only one child, 28 percent - two children, only 7 percent have three and more kids.
According to sociologists, after the divorce the woman with a kid (or with no kids) has little chance of getting married again. There is no man to get marry to: mortality rate of the men of working age is extremely high. The number of women in their 30s exceeds the number of men significantly.
700,000 of Russian children have no parents to care about them, one third of these children ended up in orphanages. More than 50,000 children escape from home every year.
The West also has many trends of the Russian family. People marry at older age, many couples do not get married, many people prefer having several marriages in the course of their lives, the birth of the first child is postponed for future, the number of kids in the family is reducing - both the West and Russia have all this.
However, different things cause family collapse in Russia: poverty, lack of social guarantees, terrible level of health care, alcoholism, problems with housing.
According to public opinion poll, if the family has decent income and one of the parents of the kids gets sick, they end up in poverty soon, and nothing can draw them out of poverty after this.
The recent survey of Levada-Center demonstrated that everybody in Russia, even wealthy people, are scared to become poor. The second child in the family indicates not only the family stability but the person"s confidence about stable future. The majority of Russians have not this confidence so far.
Those selfish ladies:
Fifty percent of Russian women are short of men
03/04/2005 16:05
Russian women's ability to love is directly connected with men's ability to make money
The center for demography and ecology of man has recently conducted a new research. The center's leader, Anatoli Vishnevsky, told reporters that only 535 of a 1,000 Russian women were married. The research revealed that about 50 percent of female respondents have never had a husband, lost their spouse, or were leading single lives.
Russian women's inability to find their lifetime partners may inevitably lead to serious demographic problems, Anatoli Vishnevsky believes. According to the scientist, the number of women in the reproductive age will be decreasing very fast during the coming years. The number of potential mothers will halve by 2050 and will take only a third of their current number at the end of the century. The demographic crisis will lead to lamentable consequences: the birth rate will reduce considerably.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 06:02 PM March 15th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
"Every decent person knows the problem is Islam [...]".
Yeah, right. Actually, every person knows the problem is American imperialism. Or so they say here in good old Deutschland.
Look, that you're afraid of people doesn't mean you have to post all your radical bullshit behind the anonymity of the net.
Maybe the admins here should reconsider if anonymous postings should be allowed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:20 AM March 16th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
It is not about America whatever, is about the fact that muslims in Europe was science fiction when i wa young, and thanks to feminism it is a reality.
The point is that islam is radical anti feminism, and at the pace things are developing feminism and willbe erased from many western nations in a couples of decades.
As an example France, till now, under traditional christian values, custody of children was automatically given to women, and women had no financial responsabilities regarding children, well you know typically western values, men reduced to chatle and slave labor, well not anymore.
Patrick J. Buchanan told NPQ in an interview that according to his research, "it is as difficult to find a Western society where populations are not shrinking, as it is to find a Muslim society where populations are not exploding."
"There is not a single Western nation that has a birth-rate today that will enable it to stay alive in its present form after the middle of this century."
"He expressed his fears frankly in the following words: "The Islamic peoples of North Africa and the Middle East are moving in the hundreds of thousands into Europe every year."
"Of Europe's forty-seven nations, only one, Muslim Albania, was, by 2000 maintaining a birthrate sufficient to keep it alive indefinitely. Europe had begun to die."
"Europe's future is as [EURABIA], how will the native population react? Particularly given that Muslims are quick to consolidate power once they achieve the ability to do so. The northern states of Nigeria are a good example of what happens to a secular state once Muslims win at the ballot box. The sharia courts are already being applied to Christians, despite assurances that they wouldn't be. If you need a starker example of Muslim coexistence, look to Sudan."
So what?, no more second class status for men. So the idea i wanted to give, is that probably the cancer of feminism would be eradicated not within westen values, but from outside them, westen civilization has passed the point of no return.
Nothing related American imperialism or whatever, so relax, cheers!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 06:26 PM March 15th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Well, see subject...
When the German anti-DV "violence protection law" was coming up here, I was pretty sure I had read some slogans and points accompanying it before, but in English - on US websites.
There recently was a decision here from what would be the equivalent to the US Supreme Court, saying that agreements that cause a wife to remain without anything after divorce are "immoral" and thus void.
Are we beginning to see the parallels here? I think there's a lack of multilingual MRA's to match whoever imports/exports all this..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 04:54 PM March 16th, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
The little screwing you get is not worth the mega screwing you will take from the state!
Validates the motto: "If it flys, floats or fucks never ever buy it; rent it!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:50 AM March 17th, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 09:08 AM March 18th, 2005 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Rminds me of the line from Pippin...
i wonder if all the fornicating i am getting
is worth all the fornicating i am getting?
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
ArtflDgr writes "The whole article can be found