Anyone know a good divorce lawyer?

[Anonymous]

Submitted by davelj on April 14, 2008 – 4:24pm.

Dave, when you look into the mirror, what do you see?

Oprah called. She wants her teleprompter back. Please revisit your prior observation: “Marion’s a retard.”

Dave, go back to college please. You can’t seem to conceptualize and your thinking is too simplistic.

[patientlywaiting]

Blonde divorces her rich old husband on youtube:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/04/the-advent-of-y.html

[patientlywaiting]

Blonde divorces her rich old husband on youtube:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/04/the-advent-of-y.html

[patientlywaiting]

Blonde divorces her rich old husband on youtube:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/04/the-advent-of-y.html

[patientlywaiting]

Blonde divorces her rich old husband on youtube:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/04/the-advent-of-y.html

[patientlywaiting]

Blonde divorces her rich old husband on youtube:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/04/the-advent-of-y.html

[scaredyclassic]

At least it has become apparent why divorce lawyers will never lack for employment…

Drink Heavily.

[scaredyclassic]

At least it has become apparent why divorce lawyers will never lack for employment…

Drink Heavily.

[scaredyclassic]

At least it has become apparent why divorce lawyers will never lack for employment…

Drink Heavily.

[scaredyclassic]

At least it has become apparent why divorce lawyers will never lack for employment…

Drink Heavily.

[scaredyclassic]

At least it has become apparent why divorce lawyers will never lack for employment…

Drink Heavily.

[zzz]

I didn’t get a chance to read every post as there were sooo many. In all the posts about woman’s raging hormones and speculation that men don’t get divorced because their wives might take half, why has no one has asked about the validity of men receiving spousal support? There was an article in the WSJ about this last week. No one mentioned that 30% of woman outearn their husbands. Or that woman who have graduate degrees are less likely to get married or have children. What about those men who’s hormones are raging with a deep desire to procreate? What about the woman who shy away from marriage or children because they don’t want their husbands to take half? If marriage isn’t just about love, then why get married? If you don’t want to have children, and you don’t rely on your spouse to provide for you financially, then what do you achieve from subscribing to the institution? I’m honestly asking these questions wanting to solicit the opinions of others.

If you analyze having children purely from an economics standpoint or from an environmental standpoint, or in terms of having free time, then absolutely, having kids is the worse thing you can do. I suppose most people really don’t bother to analyze why they are having kids – I have many friends who wanted them, so they had them- simple as that. Is that selfish, I suppose. On the other hand, we need new generations of workerbees to support SSN and Medicare. Is it wrong when adults who are unable to take care of themselves procreate, therefore relying further on others to assist them in the forms of welfare? My point – people don’t do things necessarily because of a single rational train of thought – such as oh I won’t have kids because I believe in supporting the environment, or oh I won’t have kids because its counterintuitive to the accumulation of wealth, or oh I will have kids because their cute. Is it ever that simple?

[zzz]

I didn’t get a chance to read every post as there were sooo many. In all the posts about woman’s raging hormones and speculation that men don’t get divorced because their wives might take half, why has no one has asked about the validity of men receiving spousal support? There was an article in the WSJ about this last week. No one mentioned that 30% of woman outearn their husbands. Or that woman who have graduate degrees are less likely to get married or have children. What about those men who’s hormones are raging with a deep desire to procreate? What about the woman who shy away from marriage or children because they don’t want their husbands to take half? If marriage isn’t just about love, then why get married? If you don’t want to have children, and you don’t rely on your spouse to provide for you financially, then what do you achieve from subscribing to the institution? I’m honestly asking these questions wanting to solicit the opinions of others.

If you analyze having children purely from an economics standpoint or from an environmental standpoint, or in terms of having free time, then absolutely, having kids is the worse thing you can do. I suppose most people really don’t bother to analyze why they are having kids – I have many friends who wanted them, so they had them- simple as that. Is that selfish, I suppose. On the other hand, we need new generations of workerbees to support SSN and Medicare. Is it wrong when adults who are unable to take care of themselves procreate, therefore relying further on others to assist them in the forms of welfare? My point – people don’t do things necessarily because of a single rational train of thought – such as oh I won’t have kids because I believe in supporting the environment, or oh I won’t have kids because its counterintuitive to the accumulation of wealth, or oh I will have kids because their cute. Is it ever that simple?

[zzz]

I didn’t get a chance to read every post as there were sooo many. In all the posts about woman’s raging hormones and speculation that men don’t get divorced because their wives might take half, why has no one has asked about the validity of men receiving spousal support? There was an article in the WSJ about this last week. No one mentioned that 30% of woman outearn their husbands. Or that woman who have graduate degrees are less likely to get married or have children. What about those men who’s hormones are raging with a deep desire to procreate? What about the woman who shy away from marriage or children because they don’t want their husbands to take half? If marriage isn’t just about love, then why get married? If you don’t want to have children, and you don’t rely on your spouse to provide for you financially, then what do you achieve from subscribing to the institution? I’m honestly asking these questions wanting to solicit the opinions of others.

If you analyze having children purely from an economics standpoint or from an environmental standpoint, or in terms of having free time, then absolutely, having kids is the worse thing you can do. I suppose most people really don’t bother to analyze why they are having kids – I have many friends who wanted them, so they had them- simple as that. Is that selfish, I suppose. On the other hand, we need new generations of workerbees to support SSN and Medicare. Is it wrong when adults who are unable to take care of themselves procreate, therefore relying further on others to assist them in the forms of welfare? My point – people don’t do things necessarily because of a single rational train of thought – such as oh I won’t have kids because I believe in supporting the environment, or oh I won’t have kids because its counterintuitive to the accumulation of wealth, or oh I will have kids because their cute. Is it ever that simple?

[zzz]

I didn’t get a chance to read every post as there were sooo many. In all the posts about woman’s raging hormones and speculation that men don’t get divorced because their wives might take half, why has no one has asked about the validity of men receiving spousal support? There was an article in the WSJ about this last week. No one mentioned that 30% of woman outearn their husbands. Or that woman who have graduate degrees are less likely to get married or have children. What about those men who’s hormones are raging with a deep desire to procreate? What about the woman who shy away from marriage or children because they don’t want their husbands to take half? If marriage isn’t just about love, then why get married? If you don’t want to have children, and you don’t rely on your spouse to provide for you financially, then what do you achieve from subscribing to the institution? I’m honestly asking these questions wanting to solicit the opinions of others.

If you analyze having children purely from an economics standpoint or from an environmental standpoint, or in terms of having free time, then absolutely, having kids is the worse thing you can do. I suppose most people really don’t bother to analyze why they are having kids – I have many friends who wanted them, so they had them- simple as that. Is that selfish, I suppose. On the other hand, we need new generations of workerbees to support SSN and Medicare. Is it wrong when adults who are unable to take care of themselves procreate, therefore relying further on others to assist them in the forms of welfare? My point – people don’t do things necessarily because of a single rational train of thought – such as oh I won’t have kids because I believe in supporting the environment, or oh I won’t have kids because its counterintuitive to the accumulation of wealth, or oh I will have kids because their cute. Is it ever that simple?

[Author]

Posts