Comments on: Tarheel heartbalm, cont’d

By: KAT

KAT — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 16:14:50 +0000

The problem is that the law eliminates personal responsibility, making a third party financially responsible for the erring spouse based on highly subjective criteria of what may constitute appropriate behavior towards or around someone who is married. The spouse who cheats is the one who has the duty towards the wronged spouse, not the third party.

By: bob montgomery

bob montgomery — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:31:36 +0000

Lawyers say people typically file these claims as leverage in divorce and custody disputes. ‘A wife says I’m going to sue your girlfriend if you don’t give me $50,000 more in property settlement. That’s an improper use of the [law], and it shouldn’t take place

I don’t see the impropriety either. Seems like the threat of a lawsuit, or criminal charges, are used all the time. Plea bargains, settlements, etc.

I don’t see how the direction of the threat changes things that much.

By: CEB

CEB — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:59:29 +0000

Tom,
The impropriety seems to be that the wronged spouse is agreeing to not sue party A (the homewrecker) in return for money from party B (the spouse). Lesson: don’t cheat.

SC,
Whatever the (dubious) merits of the points you make, using the terms “Democrat Party” and “Repug Party” make you sound like a complete fool.

By: Tom T.

Tom T. — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 00:45:26 +0000

“A wife says I’m going to sue your girlfriend if you don’t give me $50,000 more in property settlement. That’s an improper use of the [law], and it shouldn’t take place.”

Why is this per se improper? Certainly, there may be plenty of cases where the alienation claim is factually unsupported, but if the facts are there, why is it wrong to settle such a claim in return for a monetary payment? How is that different from settling any cause of action for damages?

By: Supremacy Claus

Supremacy Claus — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 22:52:52 +0000

The Democrat Party lawyer destroyed marriage among the poor in the 1960’s, by their welfare laws making the poor male unnecessary to family welfare.

In the 1990’s, the Repug Party lawyer destroyed marriage among the middle class by making the breach of child support a Federal crime with indeterminate sentences, by forcing states to pass child support formulas with no upper limits. Parasitic middle class spouses now score big child support fortunes by initiating a divorce.

About half divorces have a low conflict. These marriages are salvageable. Any conservative, traditional law that slows the lawyer attack on marriage deserves a second look.