If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politics UK)   No-fault divorce makes splitting up too easy say judges, who want to hang a critical "bad-thinking" clause on at least one half of the couples and shame them for it   (politics.co.uk) divider line 407
    More: Interesting, Tory MPs, couples, Westminster Hall  
•       •       •

7004 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2014 at 10:09 AM (13 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



407 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-15 08:33:51 AM
This brave MP defending the social importance of committed relationships was the same one vigorously opposing the marriage equality bill earlier this year.
 
2014-01-15 08:36:28 AM
Last year rather.
 
2014-01-15 09:02:14 AM
How about requiring them to sign a legitimate contract that is legally binding and can be dissolved if one party reneges on their part?
Then all the other voo doo mumbo jumbo they do can be moot, which it is.
 
2014-01-15 10:03:43 AM
Dear Tories.

Kindly fark off and die in a fire.
 
2014-01-15 10:11:22 AM

Sybarite: This brave MP defending the social importance of committed relationships was the same one vigorously opposing the marriage equality bill earlier this year.


Sanctity, man. SANCTITY.

/never forget
 
2014-01-15 10:11:35 AM
Christ.  They're like Republicans, but whinier.
 
2014-01-15 10:11:41 AM
Ironic, considering that their state religion was founded on the concept of divorce.
 
2014-01-15 10:12:17 AM
Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.
 
2014-01-15 10:13:02 AM
Easy: Divorce tax.  The State gets half.
 
2014-01-15 10:13:22 AM
When one person totally sabotages the relationship and contributes way less than the other person, why should there be no difference in equity at the separation?
 
2014-01-15 10:14:33 AM

Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.


Your strawman is fat.
 
2014-01-15 10:14:36 AM
Just another reason why government shouldn't be involved in marriage.
 
2014-01-15 10:14:52 AM

The Muthaship: When one person totally sabotages the relationship and contributes way less than the other person, why should there be no difference in equity at the separation?


Because you signed the contract stating such.
 
2014-01-15 10:15:25 AM

Theaetetus: Ironic, considering that their state religion was founded on the concept of divorce.


Henry VIII introduced the concept of the disposable wife.  Divorce was merely one of many options he made available to him.  It's good to be king.
 
2014-01-15 10:16:34 AM

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Because you signed the contract stating such


That was foolish of me.

Was it negotiable?
 
2014-01-15 10:16:34 AM
"For the sake of the country, we need to be judgmental. Besides, there are plenty of people who never cease to be judgmental about members of parliament."

That's because their lives are affected by the decisions you make, and they're prefer those decisions to not be farking stupid.
 
2014-01-15 10:18:44 AM
Can we please give the Tories and Repubitards their own country - maybe call it "Derptopia" - and just GET FARKING RID OF THEM!

I know the Conservative MPs aren't yet displaying even a shadow of the derpitude their big brothers in the GOP have, but I think they aspire to it. Out with them all! They clearly hate living in civilization anyway.
 
2014-01-15 10:18:59 AM
Marriage ain't for sissies.
 
2014-01-15 10:19:16 AM
Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.
 
2014-01-15 10:20:47 AM
I am in favor of divorce courts adopting a public shaming approach to marital split ups complete with heated lectures from the judges, wildly argued cases by the marital partners and closing remarks to rival that of Al Pacino's opening remarks in "And Justice For All".  Tape them, edit them and run them through syndication and you'll have rating numbers that will turn Judge Judy into a blubbering mass of tears.
 
2014-01-15 10:20:49 AM

pheelix: Theaetetus: Ironic, considering that their state religion was founded on the concept of divorce.

Henry VIII introduced the concept of the disposable wife.  Divorce was merely one of many options he made available to him.  It's good to be king.


No, not really.  Plenty of English kings executed/divorced wives they didn't like in history.  Henry 8 was different in that he was married to a woman he couldn't kill without starting a war, and whose family had too many friends in the Vatican to divorce.  Then he married a woman he could behead, being an English noble, and then he did.
 
2014-01-15 10:21:59 AM
The only person who is a bigger than your ex-spouse is the loser who married them in the first place.
 
2014-01-15 10:22:20 AM

Theaetetus: Ironic, considering that their state religion was founded on the concept of divorce.


Like rain on your wedding day?
 
2014-01-15 10:24:26 AM

The Muthaship: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Because you signed the contract stating such

That was foolish of me.

Was it negotiable?


Yes, that's what a pre-nup is for.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:12 AM

vudukungfu: How about requiring them to sign a legitimate contract that is legally binding and can be dissolved if one party reneges on their part?
Then all the other voo doo mumbo jumbo they do can be moot, which it is.


Wouldn't work. In order to dissolve a contract, one party has to prove the other was ... at fault.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:15 AM
ITT: Paragons of marital bliss
 
2014-01-15 10:25:16 AM
I should have sued my mother-inlaw for failing to disclose that my (now ex) wife required psychiatric medicine and had been institutionalized in her teens.

So, get married, no meds, suddenly she's MY burden! fark that shiat, I ditched that crazy redhead. And I do mean craaazy. Delusional, pathological liar that got brutally violent when you picked at her lies.

She'd be great on Fox News.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:20 AM

Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.


"Gerald Howarth told fellow MPs that they were entitled to be "judgemental" about the public because the public were always judging politicians."

Sounds like advice this guy could use.
 
2014-01-15 10:26:06 AM

pkellmey: Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.


Just admit it, you want to watch people suffer. You're a sadist without a whip. A hastily built facade of Morality only serves to make you look like a sociopath AND a busybody.
 
2014-01-15 10:26:29 AM

Laobaojun: Makes more sense than the "My actions shouldn't have consequences!  How dare you 'shame' me for being stupid?" crowd.

If you don't like getting shamed, don't be farking stupid.


whatisthisidonteven
 
2014-01-15 10:26:57 AM
So, the Tories are the British equivalent of the GOP?
 
2014-01-15 10:27:53 AM
I gave my former wife a choice.  A) I file on grounds of adultery, force her and the dude she farked to appear in court,  and seek spousal support (she was an officer in the Navy and was making bank with BAH/BAS). B) I file on grounds of irreconcilable differences, and she signs the separation agreement stating that I get both the dogs, and am absolved of her credit card  and student loan debt.

She chose wisely for once in her life.

She later dragged that moron to California with her, married him in vegas, got deployed to Afghanistan six months later, and subsequently cheated on him during the year she was over there, and now she is getting divorced again.

/CSB
/whore
 
2014-01-15 10:29:20 AM

GORDON: Easy: Divorce tax.  The State gets half.


Did you seriously just say that outloud? Great. Well, we know what's up next on the political agenda.

/not sure if brilliant
 
2014-01-15 10:29:50 AM

lennavan: Yes, that's what a pre-nup is for.


Oh yeah.

Those things are bulletproof!
 
2014-01-15 10:30:12 AM
The woman half of the couples, amiright?
 
2014-01-15 10:30:16 AM
If I were still married to my ex, I would have killed myself by now.

I thank my lucky stars every day for quick and easy divorce.
 
2014-01-15 10:30:59 AM

pkellmey: Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.


And they will never be the same
 
2014-01-15 10:32:18 AM
Just don't get married. It's an antiquated ritual anyway.
 
2014-01-15 10:33:23 AM

GORDON: Easy: Divorce tax.  The State gets half.


Why do you hate men? I mean if the State gets half, and the biatch gets half, why in the hell would a man ever get married?
 
2014-01-15 10:34:32 AM
Never mind his divorce rant his anti feminist "the women are out to get us" rant is even better.

/and when I say better I mean equally nonsensical
//accidentially read the article
///sorry
 
2014-01-15 10:35:05 AM
Done in one.  Last one out get the lights.
 
2014-01-15 10:35:15 AM

DubyaHater: Just don't get married. It's an antiquated ritual anyway.


It's a contract that the state recognizes giving the two partners special status towards each others medical treatment, inheritance, property, and any children they have together. In the United States it also gives them welfare in the form of tax breaks.
 
2014-01-15 10:35:50 AM

The Muthaship: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Because you signed the contract stating such

That was foolish of me.

Was it negotiable?


It's called a pre-nup and it is totally negotiable.
 
2014-01-15 10:39:40 AM
Shame can be good when someone's done a bad thing. But divorce? Are we gonna start covering our women too? Maybe a little pillory in the public square?
 
2014-01-15 10:41:50 AM

Mentalpatient87: pkellmey: Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.

Just admit it, you want to watch people suffer. You're a sadist without a whip. A hastily built facade of Morality only serves to make you look like a sociopath AND a busybody.


This. Why should people that decided they can't stand to be together have to listen to some useless fellow in a poncy wig telling them they should, because *reasons*
 
2014-01-15 10:43:32 AM

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Because you signed the contract stating such.


Wait, I missed that bit on the contract I signed, Can you point out this clause ?
 
2014-01-15 10:44:20 AM

Slaves2Darkness: DubyaHater: Just don't get married. It's an antiquated ritual anyway.

It's a contract that the state recognizes giving the two partners special status towards each others medical treatment, inheritance, property, and any children they have together. In the United States it also gives them welfare in the form of tax breaks.


As long as you stay married. And 50% of marriages end in divorce. What advantages have you gained at that point?
 
2014-01-15 10:44:48 AM

Fano: Mentalpatient87: pkellmey: Consequences aren't necessarily a bad thing.

Just admit it, you want to watch people suffer. You're a sadist without a whip. A hastily built facade of Morality only serves to make you look like a sociopath AND a busybody.

This. Why should people that decided they can't stand to be together have to listen to some useless fellow in a poncy wig telling them they should, because *reasons*


Maybe they just can't reach climax unless they're screaming ZERO SYMPATHY!
 
2014-01-15 10:48:34 AM
i1.kym-cdn.com
/except it doesn't go far enough
 
2014-01-15 10:49:37 AM
Rapmaster2000

Christ. They're like Republicans, but whinier.

....
techgeek07

So, the Tories are the British equivalent of the GOP?

From the same group that whines like a biatch if someone mentions democrats or mentions politics while not in the political tab. Hypocrites are hypocritical.
 
Displayed 50 of 407 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report