Shotgun 1 #51 August 6, 2010 QuoteI see those types of thing posted . . . OH, sorry, I missed that you were talking specifically about the arguments in here. I was thinking of the actual arguments going on in the courts and such. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #52 August 6, 2010 >If Adam and Steve were married, then were going to get a divorce . . . >who would be given spousal support? If government is still involved? Whoever makes the most differential salary, if one of the two cannot support themselves. Which is no different than today: ================= Personal Finance Women Increasingly Paying Alimony Betsy Schiffman, Pink 03.13.07, 2:10 PM ET The picture of equality looks awfully strange to Kim Shamsky. The 47-year-old business owner pays her ex, a 65-year-old retired Major League Baseball player, thousands per month in temporary spousal support. He's not seeking alimony to help pay for the kids' birthday parties, since they don't have children. Nor was he instrumental in building her business. They married seven years after she started a handful of staffing firms and amassed a small fortune on her own. The daughter of a New York City taxi driver, Shamsky started her first staffing agency at age 27 with the help of a 21% loan. Not only was she able to make her first business profitable, but she's also worked furiously to ensure the success of all five businesses she's started since. Small wonder she is outraged at having to pay thousands of dollars a month to her ex. ================== If government is not still involved? Whatever their civil union says. >Secondly, who would get the fishnets and pumps, and who would get >the wigs? Or all the old Broadway showtune records? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 334 #53 August 6, 2010 QuoteI have no problem with gay marriage. I think they should be miserable just like the straight married people. ... and pay the higher federal income taxes that two-earner marrieds pay vs. being single. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #54 August 6, 2010 just sayin . . . Puts bondage na whole new light, no?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #55 August 6, 2010 If your kick is financial domination, have fun...Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #56 August 6, 2010 Quote If your kick is financial domination, have fun... You say that like its a bad thing.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #57 August 6, 2010 QuoteSecondly, who would get the fishnets and pumps, and who would get the wigs? duh - Bolas ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #58 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteI see those types of thing posted . . . OH, sorry, I missed that you were talking specifically about the arguments in here. I was thinking of the actual arguments going on in the courts and such. thanks I'm glad to hear that some of the courts can at least keep the practical separated from the emotional ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #59 August 6, 2010 QuoteIf Adam and Steve ... How original! Quote ... were married, then were going to get a divorce . . . who would be given spousal support? Traditionalkly it is the man that is made to provide the support. That has not been the case for quite a long time. In most states - possibly all of them (I'm not taking the time to do a 50-state survey), the laws, rules of court and guidelines regarding spousal support, child support and alimony are gender-neutral. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #60 August 6, 2010 Quote That has not been the case for quite a long time. In most states - possibly all of them (I'm not taking the time to do a 50-state survey), the laws, rules of court and guidelines regarding spousal support, child support and alimony are gender-neutral. Yes, but let's not pretend that those laws are actually applied in a gender-neutral way."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #61 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuote That has not been the case for quite a long time. In most states - possibly all of them (I'm not taking the time to do a 50-state survey), the laws, rules of court and guidelines regarding spousal support, child support and alimony are gender-neutral. Yes, but let's not pretend that those laws are actually applied in a gender-neutral way. I understand your point; but fortunately, so do many state legislatures. Accordingly, to counteract the very human-nature bias to which you're referring, many states have very specific, formula-based guidelines that are used to determine support and alimony. I've seen it in operation myself in several states, and it really does level the playing field quite well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #62 August 6, 2010 Quote Quote If Adam and Steve ... How original! Quote ... were married, then were going to get a divorce . . . who would be given spousal support? Traditionalkly it is the man that is made to provide the support. That has not been the case for quite a long time. In most states - possibly all of them (I'm not taking the time to do a 50-state survey), the laws, rules of court and guidelines regarding spousal support, child support and alimony are gender-neutral. Bwaaahahahah . . . Tell me there is not a very large difference! Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Tell us that there are just as many women paying spousal support or even more females than males paying support. The reason that you won't do the 50 state survey is because it will not support your point.Just because it is SUPPOSED to be equal does NOT mean that it is!I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #63 August 6, 2010 > Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #64 August 6, 2010 Quote> Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #65 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuote> Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. Why? Are you saying gay parents can't have children?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #66 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote> Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. Why? Are you saying gay parents can't have children? Yes. Anatomically impossible. Or do you have so little arguiment that you need to change the subject. Either deny or confirm that spousal support over the 50 states is or is not heavily sided with the male paying the support.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #67 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote> Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. Why? Are you saying gay parents can't have children? Yes. Anatomically impossible. Or do you have so little arguiment that you need to change the subject. Either deny or confirm that spousal support over the 50 states is or is not heavily sided with the male paying the support. I didn't change the subject -- you did. You've very wrongfully claimed gay parents can't have children. You've just stated it's anatomically impossible. That's simply ridiculous.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #68 August 6, 2010 >Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Well, that's fine to say, but in fact a great majority of women _do_ end up with the kids - and that's why they get the support checks. Take away child support and the numbers get a lot more even. (Not 100% even since on average more men support women financially than vice versa.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KidWicked 0 #69 August 7, 2010 Quote Secondly, who would get the fishnets and pumps, and who would get the wigs? What a hackneyed, cliched, bigoted statement.Coreece: "You sound like some skinheads I know, but your prejudice is with Christians, not niggers..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #70 August 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote If Adam and Steve ... How original! Quote ... were married, then were going to get a divorce . . . who would be given spousal support? Traditionalkly it is the man that is made to provide the support. That has not been the case for quite a long time. In most states - possibly all of them (I'm not taking the time to do a 50-state survey), the laws, rules of court and guidelines regarding spousal support, child support and alimony are gender-neutral. Bwaaahahahah . . . Tell me there is not a very large difference! Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Tell us that there are just as many women paying spousal support or even more females than males paying support. I never said or even remotely suggested that that was the case. Whichever spouse is in a better financial position, the formula guidelines account for that, neutral to gender. The fact that more men in our society still tend to be in better position financially than women, neither supports nor negates that. Your lack of reading comprehension is an embarrassment. Re- read my post, as well as my post in reply to Southern Man's observation (post #61). Quote The reason that you won't do the 50 state survey is because it will not support your point. You have no idea what you're talking about, and you argue like a little boy. I really have no time for your childishness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #71 August 7, 2010 QuoteAnatomically impossible. Well, there's always this: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://therealrevo.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/turkey-baster.jpg&imgrefurl=http://therealrevo.com/blog/%3Fp%3D10453&h=300&w=300&sz=9&tbnid=K5DWvaQbHlBGZM:&tbnh=116&tbnw=116&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpicture%2Bof%2Bturkey%2Bbaster&usg=__kEV_zxtO8kRcq13tAnTw8jO2xIE=&sa=X&ei=5q9cTNLXJIj2tgPIpenDDw&ved=0CBoQ9QEwAg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #72 August 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote> Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. Why? Are you saying gay parents can't have children? Yes. Anatomically impossible. Or do you have so little arguiment that you need to change the subject. Either deny or confirm that spousal support over the 50 states is or is not heavily sided with the male paying the support. I didn't change the subject -- you did. You've very wrongfully claimed gay parents can't have children. You've just stated it's anatomically impossible. That's simply ridiculous. I see. Rediculous. If you can show me how a sperm to sperm contact can generate a child in a male body, or an egg to egg contact, without any sperm present, can generate a child in a woman's body, then I guess it would be ridiculous. A gay male couple has no way to reproduce without a seperate host for the fetus to survive in while it gestates. A female gay couple cannot reproduce without the inclusiopn of a male somewhere in the mix. SO, it is anatomically impossible for a gay couple to concieve between themselves without an outside host or donor.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #73 August 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote > Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. Why? Are you saying gay parents can't have children? Yes. Anatomically impossible. Or do you have so little arguiment that you need to change the subject. Either deny or confirm that spousal support over the 50 states is or is not heavily sided with the male paying the support. I didn't change the subject -- you did. You've very wrongfully claimed gay parents can't have children. You've just stated it's anatomically impossible. That's simply ridiculous. I see. Rediculous. If you can show me how a sperm to sperm contact can generate a child in a male body, or an egg to egg contact, without any sperm present, can generate a child in a woman's body, then I guess it would be ridiculous. A gay male couple has no way to reproduce without a seperate host for the fetus to survive in while it gestates. A female gay couple cannot reproduce without the inclusiopn of a male somewhere in the mix. SO, it is anatomically impossible for a gay couple to concieve between themselves without an outside host or donor. OH.. I get it..only children of couples you approve of are human beings worthy of love. Hate to break it to ya Clint... there are millions of kids in this country whose biological parents are not married or a couple. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #74 August 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote > Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. Why? Are you saying gay parents can't have children? Yes. Anatomically impossible. Or do you have so little arguiment that you need to change the subject. Either deny or confirm that spousal support over the 50 states is or is not heavily sided with the male paying the support. I didn't change the subject -- you did. You've very wrongfully claimed gay parents can't have children. You've just stated it's anatomically impossible. That's simply ridiculous. I see. Rediculous. If you can show me how a sperm to sperm contact can generate a child in a male body, or an egg to egg contact, without any sperm present, can generate a child in a woman's body, then I guess it would be ridiculous. A gay male couple has no way to reproduce without a seperate host for the fetus to survive in while it gestates. A female gay couple cannot reproduce without the inclusiopn of a male somewhere in the mix. SO, it is anatomically impossible for a gay couple to concieve between themselves without an outside host or donor. OH.. I get it..only children of couples you approve of are human beings worthy of love. Hate to break it to ya Clint... there are millions of kids in this country whose biological parents are not married or a couple. Sigh . . . No - My argument, if you took the time to read the post, was that I didn't include in my argument, child support, because by default, a gay couple cannot have a child UNLESS adoption was involved. >>>>as referenced here and above Quote Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. . . . and where do you get "worthy of love" out of ANY legal document, let alone ANYTHING that I said above? THAT is rediculous. But nice try at a misdirection and spin. (By Both of you) Would you care to try another? Do you wish to confirm or deny that the scale is heavily tipped in the males favor of bearing the financial cost of SPOUSAL support.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #75 August 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote > Go ahead and say that the numbers of support payers are equal to both sexes. Not even close. In most cases women get custody of the children, so men end up paying (the person who has custody almost always gets support.) Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. Why? Are you saying gay parents can't have children? Yes. Anatomically impossible. Or do you have so little arguiment that you need to change the subject. Either deny or confirm that spousal support over the 50 states is or is not heavily sided with the male paying the support. I didn't change the subject -- you did. You've very wrongfully claimed gay parents can't have children. You've just stated it's anatomically impossible. That's simply ridiculous. I see. Rediculous. If you can show me how a sperm to sperm contact can generate a child in a male body, or an egg to egg contact, without any sperm present, can generate a child in a woman's body, then I guess it would be ridiculous. A gay male couple has no way to reproduce without a seperate host for the fetus to survive in while it gestates. A female gay couple cannot reproduce without the inclusiopn of a male somewhere in the mix. SO, it is anatomically impossible for a gay couple to concieve between themselves without an outside host or donor. OH.. I get it..only children of couples you approve of are human beings worthy of love. Hate to break it to ya Clint... there are millions of kids in this country whose biological parents are not married or a couple. Sigh . . . No - My argument, if you took the time to read the post, was that I didn't include in my argument, child support, because by default, a gay couple cannot have a child UNLESS adoption was involved. >>>>as referenced here and above Quote Child support should not be an issue in this case - unless adoption was allowed. Spousal Support. . . . and where do you get "worthy of love" out of ANY legal document, let alone ANYTHING that I said above? THAT is rediculous. But nice try at a misdirection and spin. (By Both of you) Would you care to try another? Do you wish to confirm or deny that the scale is heavily tipped in the males favor of bearing the financial cost of SPOUSAL support. Do you wish to confirm that MOST men far exceed in amount of earnings as opposed to most women? ITs the way this system was set up.. its traditional... and I would lay odds that if you hired a woman.. you would pay her less than a male employee.... its traditional... since men are presumed to be the bread winners in this society. IF you and all the other men who want to bellyache about having to support your children help CHANGE the tradition I think you would find it easier to not have to pay that child support. By just doing that, allowing for financial equity for women , they can support those children when you trade them in on the trophy bimbo's Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
