No vaginamony for lesbian couples

[Zuberi TauParticipant 10606]

http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/Va–Supreme-Court-says-unmarried-same-sex-couples-are-legal–too-12864148
Top Virginia court nixes alimony for woman now cohabiting in same-sex relationship
If Samantha Cucco, after her 2008 divorce, had been in living with a man in a relationship analogous to marriage, she would have forfeited the alimony her ex-husband agreed to pay for eight years.
So, under a landmark U.S. Supreme Court same-sex marriage decision last year, it was only right that she also forfeit alimony payments after cohabiting with another woman and entering into a marriage-like relationship her, the Virginia Supreme Court decided last week.

[RhinoParticipant 3477]

Courts being fair to men for a change? Color me shocked and I am sure these women are now rising up like a storm to fight this with other like minded individuals.

[Eric LauderParticipant 12053]

I checked the article.
It surprises me how much moronic had been the first two mangina judges.

Wrong, said the state Supreme Court. They noted that a divorced woman who cohabits with another woman could collect spousal support, while a divorced woman who cohabits with another man could not.

That’s pure common sense applied to the law.
The first two judges proved to be ultra manginas.

SUPREME LEADER KIM JONG-UN'S FASHION STYLIST - if you want a new look or if you're a very beautiful trans you can call me, phone number +85079255312 / mobile 01921421211. The worth of a man isn't the usefulness that women get from him. Avoiding living with a woman, a man isn't rejecting a lot of sex: he's rejecting sexual starvation. MGTOW IS TACKLING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONVENTION OF ISTANBUL: http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482e --- Article 4, Section 4 "Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention". WHAT I LEARNT FROM A GENDER STUDIES CLASS IN LUND, SWEDEN: every time feminists accuses men of doing something, odds are likely either them or persons associated with them are doing the exact same thing but a lot worse. WHO I'M RIGHT NOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1okpAj7Fhw Basically my former life have been a conflict between this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz_RQVkvke4 and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFIMeyTK-sU That's, more or less, all about me.

[the roadParticipant 3125]

Good. F~~~ that scumbag beotch for trying to abuse the system. I hope that this hurts her bad financially having to pay back the stolen money.

#MANOUT

[Anonymous 5]

It’s the philosophy of political correctness coming back to bite women on their ass.
I can’t believe how f~~~ing misogynistic those first two asshole judges were!!!!
Imagine,,,,their decisions implied the new partner wasn’t worthy of being a valid partner SIMPLY BECAUSE OF HER GENDER!

Women in general and feminism in particular are freeing men in ways they never could have imagined.
The “Equality” thing, equal representation in the workplace, non-objectifying,,,and every other facet of their ideological construct all works for men.
This is especially true for the hamster battle cry of “We don’t need men!!!!!!!!!”

Feminism is a Messiah for men, not women.

[Oz-BlokeParticipant 3233]

Typical, lesbian Samantha Cucco wanted it all her way and the legal system finally made a non-gynocentric decision. I can feel the shockwaves in the US lesbian community. Bet you there are a lot of cohabiting and engaged lesbians quaking in their high-heels as word of this ruling reaches their walking wallets (ex-husbands). Could you imagine the household income of two employed lesbian lovers who are both collecting fat alimony checks from their ex-husbands! Two people, four incomes and no condoms to buy! Enjoy dining at Y girls, saves us doing it 🙂

#ManOut

[AttonParticipant]

Legal c~~~ punting.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[RusskyParticipant 13503]

Atton wrote:

Legal c~~~ punting.

Cunnt & Puntt
attorney at law

proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome

[hellraiderParticipant 2837]

one step forward, two steps back.

while we see some changes here and there, all the rest is going downhill faster and faster.

[narwhalParticipant]

I get why there’s a positive view of the ruling, but to me, it’s not good, as it implies that alimony is valid in the first place.

Alimony only makes sense if two people in a marriage are not equal, usually the woman is less then the man. In this case, the woman had the right to get education and training the same as her ex-husband did, yet she chose not to. She may have chosen to stay at home, yet that was her choice as no man can legally force a woman not to work.

To me, the divorced woman’s cohabitation with a man, woman, dog, cat, or monkey is completely irrelevant. Being a human being declared legally equal to her ex-spouse means she has right to alimony payments. Period.

Ok. Then do it.

[Author]

Posts