Do we want to talk about no-fault divorce?

So you're OK with no fault divorce now?

Your point being what? Since it's not unique to this topic, it should be ignored?

http://wordforge.net/index.php?posts/3511664/

Done repeating myself. Everything I have said is perfectly consistent, if not 100% lawyerballing pedant-proof.

No, that it's not uncontroversial or surprising that a contract can be invalidated on those grounds. It requires sufficient evidence of course. But just because a prenup or contract can be invalidated for things like coercion or duress, that doesn't suddenly make prenups or contracts worthless.

Yes, because of something that you feel happens much more frequently than it does (without having actual proof), you want to end another thing.

We all know your shtick, this is your position on a variety of topics, lol.

People lie. Women are people. Men are people. Men think it’s worse when a woman lies than when a man lies. Why is that?

I ruined "what you really mean" for you, didn't I?

Those are examples of lawyers pointing out correctly that hypothetically, prenups can be invalidated because of unconscionability, duress or other factors.

What we are looking for are actual examples of judges doing so AND it not being justified.

In other words, someone falsely claiming that they were coerced and yet a judge granting it, or a judge finding a "bullshit" reason to invalidate a prenup.

Because women are held less accountable.

If the false claim is accepted without verification, there is no way to prove it after the fact. And apparently "bullshit reasons" are a matter of opinion if none of that qualifies with you.

Sure, there would hypothetically be some false claims that are accepted. But you claimed to have examples. Which should suggest that there are times when claims of coercion or what have you were ultimately shown to be false.

Here's an analogy for you: I can say that there have been times that people have been wrongly convicted of crimes. At trial, the jury or judge found that the person was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But then an appeals process happened to show new evidence existed, the trial was tainted, etc.

Something similar could be shown with prenups. A judge accepts a prenup for false reasons, and there is an appeal or information that comes out later that shows the judge made an error.

And if you think the reasons listed in the links are "bullshit," that's fine. I'll agree to disagree on that. But I don't want to put words in your mouth. Are you saying (for instance) that threatening someone with retribution if they don't sign a prenup is a bullshit reason to invalidate the prenup, preventing a party from having a lawyer review a prenup is a bullshit reason to invalidate the prenup, a prenup requiring sex X number of times is a fair term to put in a prenup, having a prenup where one person gets all the money and the partner is left on welfare is a fair?

No, I did not claim to have examples you would accept.

But you know full well the process is the punishment in situations like this. Someone taking a massive financial hit is not going to be in a good position for a protracted , uphill legal battle. So he concedes.

Sex cannot be a reasonable transaction. They should leave with what is theirs. "Threatening with retribution" is subjective to the point of meaninglessness. It could mean "sign it or I won't marry you," or "sign it or your entire life will be ruined beyond repair." Is it subject to any investigation? Is there any burden of proof? No. There is a claim, and whether or not it is accepted at face value.

What else does your incel leader say?

I'm beginning to suspect every single rant you have about accountability is because someone, somewhere, got away with the same shit you didn't.

And likely they did so because they weren't a fundamentally unsympathetic prick.

Nope. None of this stems from anything I have experienced.

He, like every conservative, can't possibly conceive of a world where every human interaction isn't adversarial, or sneakily Machiavellian style adversarial.
This doesn't necessarily require trauma; it could be as simple as some Jethro in his family, school, or workplace cramming the wrong pamphlets into his head at an impressionable age.

I am not a conservative. That's just your tired old "fit everyone into a predetermined category" schtick. There are plenty of areas where I disagree with the "conservative" position. You just ignore everything that doesn't suit your "all or nothing," "with us or against us" stupidity.

Pot. Abortion.
Wow, that washes the fash right off!
You're a whole brand new thing that no one's ever seen before!!


*Snicker*

Also a significant portion of law enforcement and judicial practices, among other things.

Another purity-testing douchecannon who thinks he's clever. Some pet cause you have in mind invalidates all others.

Tell us more about how book banning saves children from their pee-pees being cut off by cartoon mad scientists.
That never gets old.

Just as soon as you show me where I said that.

No, filtering "age appropriate access" through your tired fucking clown world beer goggles to mean "yay book burning" does not count.

Yeah, you're the most specialist little boy in the universe.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Tap dance some more.

Take your psychic powers to a casino so you can put a ring on Jenee.

Exactly my point. The notion of a court trying to adjudicate who wronged who more in a relationship and trying to divvy up assets/custody based on it is absurd. It reminds me of a Chris Rock joke I heard some years ago: Marriage is 1-2 good years and the rest of time you're just trying to build a case against each other.

lol. Really? In what world?

In this one. I thought I've linked to stats about the Duluth model and different sentencing for the same crimes, on top of these family court outcomes. But nobody wants to hear inconvenient things like that.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Tap dance some more.

Sounds to me like you're refusing to take responsibility for your own failures and blaming the system for them.

All I know, is if I ever got married it's a pretty much a 50/50 if it's my fault.













I'm not kidding, pretty much every girl I've dated would be a twin to one of the above.

I've gotten better, I've learned to weed them out. Which explains a post I made a few days ago