In refernce to CNN's alimony reform in MA
About time that loafers have to start living like people. What happen to the bigots who passed the original law? This the tip of the iceberg. I have been hungry and cold to pay child support, even after some of my children were married or adults. One woman's lie in court is worth a stack of bibles. Part of the problem is governors’ staffing the courts with liberal women judges.
There is not a place in the area that I have not placed my resume to at some time. Once out of work and over 40, the snowball starts to roll. I am still severely behind. Hopefully things will change with better employment; I have been called for a job-interview soon.
Judges side with women rather than with the purpose of the law—especially women judges. Such women judges are simple overpaid bigots. My ex-contempt of court in tax returns allowances was not considered by the woman judging in my case.
I had to pay the fines because of her cheating on the tax forms, thus causing me to lose returns and pay fines because she had already claimed my court decreed dependents—this happened for about ten years.
I may even get arrested because I have not been properly employed; thus severely behind in payments. However, she kept one premise, that is: “If I thought she was not nice, I would have to wait until de divorce to find out how bad she was.” She kept that part of her word.
We need to vote for real people, rather than for clowns as our reps and congressman; and political party does not mean anything—feminism does.
A moment
"I think, therefore I am"
Showing posts with label divorce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label divorce. Show all posts
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Why Are So Many Women Liars and Cheats?
Seed NewsvineLiars and Cheats
Why are most women such liars and cheats?
Walking over men, on high-ells, stilts and cleats.
Laughing but, then pretending they go to church,
To be praised at were hard core feminists lurch.
But, not each is actually a sneaky liar and cheat
And, their husbands see you as a bum from the street.
Some are actually nice, but then you pay the price
Their hubbies expect you to treat your tyrant very nice.
It is a mockery of what a marriage actually should be
The bible teaches, to both equality, it’s for all to see.
It is the price you pay, for seeing that tight blouse sway
It was for a reason, you should have looked the other way.
A liar and a cheat in disguise, got you to say “I do”.
Next time you better check if she is real and true.
After your commitment she is your ever torment
Stepping on you, while pretending to be eloquent.
Next time, you peek, and choose one who is actually meek.
And it is in meekness that you too should always seek.
If she is meek, you have gotten a pearl--very rare
She is the one you should keep, and for you to bear.
Liars and cheats, many they are and taking advantage
The more you are humble the more you need courage.
So, if yours is nice and true, do for her all in your reach.
Love her, and love her, as the prophets did teach.
DFF Leonardo, November 2011
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Marriage is a sacred contract with a purpose
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/17/us/pat-robertson-remarks-on-alzheimers-stir-passions.html
From: NY Times
Robertson Stirs Passions With Suggestion to Divorce an Alzheimer’s Patient
By ERIK ECKHOLM
Published: September 16, 2011
____________________________________________________
My Take
Marriage for convenience is one of the most shameful of all acts in Christianity. When two people make a contract, each party depends on the honesty of the other—it is based on trust; Mr. Robertson’s advice on marriage should not be different.
However, now, marriage has become a burden to a man who seems to claim following Christ, but who is trying to be running away from his test. Christ did not say that to follow Him would be pleasant; rather he said: “Take you cross and follow me.” We are in this world to prove who we really are.
Robertson’s response to a man in grief was not about faith. It sounded more about being faithful when convenience is present. Now, how about the sic wife, who will care for her—a nursing home? One has to talk to nursing-home workers before such statement. Was not the agreement “ … for better or for worse, in sickness or health …? That sic spouse’s relatives should considering suing the husband, for breach of contract if that divorce materializes.
Where is the love that the sic spouse needs at this critical time? Love is not there from that Husband. The agreement is biding. But surprisingly, the advice comes from a man who has used the name of Jesus Christ as if he was a true believer. Mr. Robertson has not read Ephesians 5:25, or if he did he is neglecting it. Nor has he read Mathew 19:8-9, where Jesus states that divorce was not from the beginning --not to occur unless because adultery.
Some of the article’s comments support the healthy spouse to be able to remarry to go on with their happiness. If such happiness [selfishness] is essential to go on, does it mean discard ing the sick spouse? That means that the ultimate reason for marriage is being disregarded--unity.
Yes, it touches the case of multiple spouses, but if extended marriage was part of the agreement there is no problem. For, unfortunately open marriages are on the rise, though secretly; but at times implied, if it comes from the Hollywood crowd. However, if such agreement is made in soberness, it should be to the greatest happiness for each. Nonetheless, disposing of a sick spouse like disposing of a worn-out pencil, is being unchristian; and Christ advised for one-spouse marriage.
Now, is the time for Christians to prove on what side each person is on. Nevertheless, Jesus stated: “By their fruits you shall know them”. Robertson’s advice also raises another question: Are these tell-evangelists preaching to save souls as Christ focused on—eternal life, or are they a bunch of capitalists cashing in on convenience to please the audience, and to get more followers and thus, getting more money; and getting glory on the eyes of the world?
Any true religion follows the entire bible with focus on being Christ-like, rather than focusing on lustful material conveniences.
How Christ-like would it have been if Robertson would have advised the tormented man to pray and ask God for guidance, and ask to be able to love his wife, and be able to go on with life. That would be the ultimate test of true love, and following Christ.
From: NY Times
Robertson Stirs Passions With Suggestion to Divorce an Alzheimer’s Patient
By ERIK ECKHOLM
Published: September 16, 2011
____________________________________________________
My Take
Marriage for convenience is one of the most shameful of all acts in Christianity. When two people make a contract, each party depends on the honesty of the other—it is based on trust; Mr. Robertson’s advice on marriage should not be different.
However, now, marriage has become a burden to a man who seems to claim following Christ, but who is trying to be running away from his test. Christ did not say that to follow Him would be pleasant; rather he said: “Take you cross and follow me.” We are in this world to prove who we really are.
Robertson’s response to a man in grief was not about faith. It sounded more about being faithful when convenience is present. Now, how about the sic wife, who will care for her—a nursing home? One has to talk to nursing-home workers before such statement. Was not the agreement “ … for better or for worse, in sickness or health …? That sic spouse’s relatives should considering suing the husband, for breach of contract if that divorce materializes.
Where is the love that the sic spouse needs at this critical time? Love is not there from that Husband. The agreement is biding. But surprisingly, the advice comes from a man who has used the name of Jesus Christ as if he was a true believer. Mr. Robertson has not read Ephesians 5:25, or if he did he is neglecting it. Nor has he read Mathew 19:8-9, where Jesus states that divorce was not from the beginning --not to occur unless because adultery.
Some of the article’s comments support the healthy spouse to be able to remarry to go on with their happiness. If such happiness [selfishness] is essential to go on, does it mean discard ing the sick spouse? That means that the ultimate reason for marriage is being disregarded--unity.
Yes, it touches the case of multiple spouses, but if extended marriage was part of the agreement there is no problem. For, unfortunately open marriages are on the rise, though secretly; but at times implied, if it comes from the Hollywood crowd. However, if such agreement is made in soberness, it should be to the greatest happiness for each. Nonetheless, disposing of a sick spouse like disposing of a worn-out pencil, is being unchristian; and Christ advised for one-spouse marriage.
Now, is the time for Christians to prove on what side each person is on. Nevertheless, Jesus stated: “By their fruits you shall know them”. Robertson’s advice also raises another question: Are these tell-evangelists preaching to save souls as Christ focused on—eternal life, or are they a bunch of capitalists cashing in on convenience to please the audience, and to get more followers and thus, getting more money; and getting glory on the eyes of the world?
Any true religion follows the entire bible with focus on being Christ-like, rather than focusing on lustful material conveniences.
How Christ-like would it have been if Robertson would have advised the tormented man to pray and ask God for guidance, and ask to be able to love his wife, and be able to go on with life. That would be the ultimate test of true love, and following Christ.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Women's Infidelity
http://womensinfidelity.com/
Research and the Book
Michelle Langley
---------------------------------------
My Take
Research shows bias in Women-defenders.
We men have been and still are being discriminated by everyone from religious leaders to politicians; and, worse by the courts of divorce. Professional preachers, especially tell-evangelists, and the media, have been the enemies of the male gender, in top of what we suffer at home. Now, research by a women, brings more light to the nature of women.
Will the bigots repent? I doubt it. That is how they keep themselves from sleeping in the doghouse. By blaming other men for domestic violence, they show their oppressive wives that they are OK; such men have joined the feminist movement in male-bashing.
Bigots have always known the truth; but they did not have much evidence thrown at
them. Thus, biased people kept their crusade. If any man brought up evidence to show that women are culprits of domestic disharmony just like men and sometimes worse, those men who brought evidence, were chided and belittled even by other man; especially those in leadership positions, who benefit from numbers in population.
I had to prove my take on a journalism class in the University of Massachusetts in 1993. After being told that I “was going against the grain”. My bibliography was not enough. I was invited to bring in the research books and professional magazines. I did not see such requirements from other students’ research. I was the only-one who had to bring in the evidence—I am a man; and I was writing about equality on domestic violence.
In that research, I found that married, men have a greater chance of getting killed by their own wives, by 10%; I was threatened my “Ex-wife” while married. Also, I found that women start most of the violence at home. That complimented my own marriage that was in the midst of a divorce. The violent spouse got custody of the children, even after the judge knew that mom (My “EX”), had bitten our four year old daughter in the face.
The book in reference that lead me to write this piece, appears to be obscure to me. I did not yet read the book. I did not see any news about the topic; but the info in the add-info gives enough to know what is in the book. Granted, I sometimes go a few days without checking the news on the WEB; but, I normally surf the news.
However, I have about half dozed of main media publishers, sending me daily headlines. So, this info does not qualify for headlines. Well, it appears to be because the book exposes “women as being like or worse than men”. The major media appears to have disregarded the great book – it exposes feminism’s distortion. I bumped into the book Women's Infidelity by Michelle Langley, in a Google’s ad.
Research and the Book
Michelle Langley
---------------------------------------
My Take
Research shows bias in Women-defenders.
We men have been and still are being discriminated by everyone from religious leaders to politicians; and, worse by the courts of divorce. Professional preachers, especially tell-evangelists, and the media, have been the enemies of the male gender, in top of what we suffer at home. Now, research by a women, brings more light to the nature of women.
Will the bigots repent? I doubt it. That is how they keep themselves from sleeping in the doghouse. By blaming other men for domestic violence, they show their oppressive wives that they are OK; such men have joined the feminist movement in male-bashing.
Bigots have always known the truth; but they did not have much evidence thrown at
them. Thus, biased people kept their crusade. If any man brought up evidence to show that women are culprits of domestic disharmony just like men and sometimes worse, those men who brought evidence, were chided and belittled even by other man; especially those in leadership positions, who benefit from numbers in population.
I had to prove my take on a journalism class in the University of Massachusetts in 1993. After being told that I “was going against the grain”. My bibliography was not enough. I was invited to bring in the research books and professional magazines. I did not see such requirements from other students’ research. I was the only-one who had to bring in the evidence—I am a man; and I was writing about equality on domestic violence.
In that research, I found that married, men have a greater chance of getting killed by their own wives, by 10%; I was threatened my “Ex-wife” while married. Also, I found that women start most of the violence at home. That complimented my own marriage that was in the midst of a divorce. The violent spouse got custody of the children, even after the judge knew that mom (My “EX”), had bitten our four year old daughter in the face.
The book in reference that lead me to write this piece, appears to be obscure to me. I did not yet read the book. I did not see any news about the topic; but the info in the add-info gives enough to know what is in the book. Granted, I sometimes go a few days without checking the news on the WEB; but, I normally surf the news.
However, I have about half dozed of main media publishers, sending me daily headlines. So, this info does not qualify for headlines. Well, it appears to be because the book exposes “women as being like or worse than men”. The major media appears to have disregarded the great book – it exposes feminism’s distortion. I bumped into the book Women's Infidelity by Michelle Langley, in a Google’s ad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)