troutie jr Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 We should sue people for cutting us off on the road. We should also sue our friends for turning out to be $hitty friends. We should sue our employers for lying to us telling us work is 9-5 when we all know a lot of days in fact it is 9-6 or even 7. We should sue advertising agencies because when I drive an Audie I am not smiling like goof with a James Bond type in my passenger seat. We should sue people for cutting in front of us in line, bad manners are prefect candidates for a law suit. We should DEFINITELY sue the government for all those times we voted for those candidates that had great plans for our money BEFORE they had their hands on it but just sank our country and pockets further into the ground once in office. What a joke this spoon fed, top rewards for minimal output, nation we live in is :lmao: Hands up!! Who has to go pop their TV dinner in the microwave? Mehhhh don't bother, I can totally imagine who..... What's the point of becoming a surgeon when the money is in becoming a lawyer:lmao::lmao: I'm sick:sick: No problem let's sue:D Link to post Share on other sites
NoIDidn't Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 What a joke this spoon fed, top rewards for minimal output, nation we live in is :lmao: I thought you didn't live in the US. Link to post Share on other sites
Gwyneth Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I too was worried about this and have been doing my research. Fortunately as mentioned, most states do not allow for this. Though, you Can sue for anything. This BS though (or as I like to call her, SS [stupid spouse]) couldn't afford to sue me. She didn't even sue her ex husband for child support... Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I'm sorry you take offense to my opinion Cobra. I just think its crazy! And no, I'm not taking issue with the whole american culture, there are many things that are great about it. I've just never understood compensation culture. Divorce does cost a ton of money, correct. But how exactly can this alienation of affection be completely proven beyond reasonable doubt? For example, say a H feels he has alienation of affection from W. After years of trying to fix this problem he eventually looks out of the marriage and has an affair. The W wants a divorce and sues the OW for alienation of affection? This is only one example of how I foresee a million different loopholes. And no, I dont believe people should be able to sue because they are "hurt". My boss hurts my feelings sometimes. Can I sue him? No - because its life. However, my if my boss breaks the UK law and sexually harrasses me? I'm protected by my law to sue him. I just don't get it. And no, the UK isn't a sad place to live - it's what we make it. Both of our countries have their faults, and both have their wonderful aspects too. I respect where your coming from... but your still wrong. Just because you think it would be hard to prove doesnt mean that you should deny people the right to try! Yes you should be able to recoup the expenses caused by a divorce! If a person drives into your car... that person has to pay to fix it! Now if someone breaks your marriage, and it costs you a bunch of money, you should absolutely be able to try and recoup those losses. Thats fair! Thats right! If you cant prove that to a judge and jury... thats your problem, but you should have the chance to try. You seem to be coming from a place of fear! Walk in the light and do what is right! Why should people be allowed to hurt you and take your money without consequences. There is something to be said for punishing dishonesty! Link to post Share on other sites
KATANYA Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 So, forgive my ignorance of American laws, but does this mean a BS can sue the OP for alienation of affection because the WS cheated but she/he can't sue the WS? Therefore, we must be assuming that the OP was solely responsible for luring the WS out of the marriage, convincing him/her to have an A and also convincing him/her to "alienate" the BS??????????? If the OP has that kind of power, why can't they just get their OM/OW to get a divorce........God knows we read enough posts about that never happening! Maybe the OP should be able to sue the MM/MW for things like alienation of affection, stress, emotional abuse, abandonment, misrepresentation????????? Of course I'm being tongue in cheek here for all the BS who are about to slam me and say "Shouldn't be there to begin with" but bottom line is that the OP gets sucked in, used and abused by the MM/MW too........if we are compensating hurt feelings and vengence, I think many OP would have pretty solid claims! Link to post Share on other sites
GreenEyedLady Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Maybe the OP should be able to sue the MM/MW for things like alienation of affection, stress, emotional abuse, abandonment, misrepresentation????????? Of course I'm being tongue in cheek here for all the BS who are about to slam me and say "Shouldn't be there to begin with" but bottom line is that the OP gets sucked in, used and abused by the MM/MW too........if we are compensating hurt feelings and vengence, I think many OP would have pretty solid claims! Or the WS claiming it's a sexless M? What about in that case? I think it's crazy and am glad I live in a no-fault, no AOA state...Geez, I used to be a SAHM (& graduate student) and I left my XH (who cheated on me) and embarked on a career and now I make twice as much as him...Now that's the best revenge there is... Why give the OP more power than they actually had...Your beef should be with the spouse...he/she's the one who owes you something... Link to post Share on other sites
Gwyneth Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I too think it's ludicrous a BS can sue the OW/OM for alienation of affection. It takes two to destroy a marriage, and those two usually include a wife and husband--not the other person. The other person is usually present when there's an existing problem in the marriage that the husband and wife sometimes refuse to see and deny marriage counseling. I agree that American's are so gung ho about money and look for Any reason to sue. It's a disgrace, really. Just because some guy honked his horn at me and I became emotional doesn't mean I can go and sue that person. I mean c'mon! Link to post Share on other sites
NoIDidn't Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 It takes two to destroy a marriage, and those two usually include a wife and husband--not the other person. Alienation of Affection is not about destroying the marriage, though. Its about the betrayed spouse losing the affection of the wayward spouse - even if just for a short period (a few months). With most Americans saying that they think infidelity is wrong (regardless of the number of people presumed to be doing it), the betrayed is generally going to win. Could that be part of the reason why some disagree with the laws? Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Alienation of Affection is not about destroying the marriage, though. Its about the betrayed spouse losing the affection of the wayward spouse - even if just for a short period (a few months). With most Americans saying that they think infidelity is wrong (regardless of the number of people presumed to be doing it), the betrayed is generally going to win. Could that be part of the reason why some disagree with the laws? The BS that won are very RARE... it happened only a few times... probably why they don't want to put the money and the energy. Link to post Share on other sites
their_here Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Alienation of Affection is not about destroying the marriage, though. Its about the betrayed spouse losing the affection of the wayward spouse - even if just for a short period (a few months). With most Americans saying that they think infidelity is wrong (regardless of the number of people presumed to be doing it), the betrayed is generally going to win. Could that be part of the reason why some disagree with the laws? My dog isnt showing me affection. I put peanut butter down there and still nothing. Can I sue the vet for fixing him and taking his desire away? Link to post Share on other sites
NoIDidn't Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 The BS that won are very RARE... it happened only a few times... probably why they don't want to put the money and the energy. Lizzie I wouldn't know. I would just assume that as everyone claims they are so against infidelity, that they would find in favor of the betrayed. I also think that actually suing using this law is rare too. I wonder where we can go to check the stats on its usage? I think the main reason people don't put in the energy and money is because the OP in most cases can't afford to pay them anyway. Plus who wants to go to court saying their spouse cheated on them (in cases of infidelity)and have their dirty laundry aired? I wouldn't. Link to post Share on other sites
their_here Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Once again, for the second night in a row -- I am in tears, I am laughing so hard. Now , way am I gross and your not gross for being hard? That isnt fair. Are you messing with my dog? I'm going to sue. Where's my lawyers number? Link to post Share on other sites
pollywag Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Alienation of Affection is not about destroying the marriage, though. Its about the betrayed spouse losing the affection of the wayward spouse - even if just for a short period (a few months). With most Americans saying that they think infidelity is wrong (regardless of the number of people presumed to be doing it), the betrayed is generally going to win. Could that be part of the reason why some disagree with the laws? So your husband had an affair on you right? why didn't you sue his mistress instead of staying with him? and let me ask you this how do you kiss him knowing his lips were all over his OW's nether lips and prb ass too? I don't get that? Link to post Share on other sites
their_here Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 So your husband had an affair on you right? why didn't you sue his mistress instead of staying with him? and let me ask you this how do you kiss him knowing his lips were all over his OW's nether lips and prb ass too? I don't get that? Shhhhh. She likes it. Now why did you blow her cover? Oh sorry wasnt it the OW that was doing the blowing? I gotta find my dog. BRB Link to post Share on other sites
Gwyneth Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 LOLOL...some of you crack me up! I still find this a type of law suit a waste of time, energy, and money. Give me a break! I understand the BS is hurt and a bit bitter, but to sue the OM or OW is a bit ridiculous. Sounds like a same to me. What if the husband deliberately goes out and find another woman so that his wife could sue her? Wow...is it that easy? Scam. Link to post Share on other sites
NoIDidn't Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 So your husband had an affair on you right? why didn't you sue his mistress instead of staying with him? and let me ask you this how do you kiss him knowing his lips were all over his OW's nether lips and prb ass too? I don't get that? I am not quite sure how to answer this post. First off, it didn't need the graphic (and wrong) picture that you paint. Second off, it could be the tipping point for an argument as the question could be asked of anyone who sleeps with a married person accepting that they have probably done the things that you speak of with their spouse. But here is my answer. I had no reason to sue her. She didn't have anything to take. Not to mention, I can't in my state anyway. On your other rathering yucky to even consider questions, he never had sex of any sort with her. So nothing to worry about in that department. So sorry to disappoint. Link to post Share on other sites
troutie jr Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Shhhhh. She likes it. Now why did you blow her cover? Oh sorry wasnt it the OW that was doing the blowing? I gotta find my dog. BRB :lmao::lmao: Link to post Share on other sites
their_here Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 LOLOL...some of you crack me up! I still find this a type of law suit a waste of time, energy, and money. Give me a break! I understand the BS is hurt and a bit bitter, but to sue the OM or OW is a bit ridiculous. Sounds like a same to me. What if the husband deliberately goes out and find another woman so that his wife could sue her? Wow...is it that easy? Scam. You tell them. YA know my local petsmart is hiring. I should tell the manager to put up a sign for all BS's who want money from OW/OM Link to post Share on other sites
troutie jr Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Alienation of Affection is not about destroying the marriage, though. Its about the betrayed spouse losing the affection of the wayward spouse - even if just for a short period (a few months). With most Americans saying that they think infidelity is wrong (regardless of the number of people presumed to be doing it), the betrayed is generally going to win. Could that be part of the reason why some disagree with the laws? Destroying the marriage....okay. So people are supposed to stay married because the law says be miserable? The idea of a law suit in this matter is obsurb. No one can make another love them, and should they try they can't think much of themself. As far as I'm concerned the BS deserves the raw paper and not the real deal. Link to post Share on other sites
troutie jr Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I found the dog. That manho. He was humping the coffeemaker. I didnt know he liked coffee. Boy i was using peanut butter this whole time. I hear Baily's works well in the coffee. Gets the dog's groove on! :lmao: Link to post Share on other sites
their_here Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Destroying the marriage....okay. So people are supposed to stay married because the law says be miserable? The idea of a law suit in this matter is obsurb. No one can make another love them, and should they try they can't think much of themself. As far as I'm concerned the BS deserves the raw paper and not the real deal. Thats telling them sister..AMEN Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 did you find your dog? All this suing thing is just plain ridiculous... I think the OW would have to be an idiot like this one case where she tried to get into the estate... then she got sued back... was a 'zoo'... Link to post Share on other sites
KATANYA Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Alienation of Affection is not about destroying the marriage, though. Its about the betrayed spouse losing the affection of the wayward spouse - even if just for a short period (a few months). But this is my point (or question??)...the BS loses the affection of the Wayward Spouse - even for a few months. I can't see how the BS could establish that this happened BECAUSE there was an OP. Many marriages without the OP involved could make this claim...then who do you sue? The flaw in the logic is that the loss of affection can only be established if the BS finds out about the OP and has an OP to blame?? I guess I'm still not getting it - I can only claim my H is an cold, uncaring, insensitive spouse who does not give me attention if he has an OP. Either way, wouldn't you want to just get rid of the spouse if there was no affection? And to establish that there was an alienation of affection for only a few months surely doesn't hold any merit....what if he's been having an A for years and things have been 'good' up to the point you found out about the OP? It all sounds like a very large stretch of the imagination to assume anyone would actually be able to make such a claim. Gosh, sue the WS for breach of contract (marriage is legally binding), sue the WS for pain and suffering, or better yet, file for divorce, take half of everything (or more), and be done with him/her. Why drag on misery??? Link to post Share on other sites
their_here Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I hear Baily's works well in the coffee. Gets the dog's groove on! :lmao: I need to try that. This isnt fair. He is getting all the fun and I'm left with my anal beads. boy oh boywonder if my lawyer is around. He has a dog Link to post Share on other sites
OpenBook Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 did you find your dog? All this suing thing is just plain ridiculous... I think the OW would have to be an idiot like this one case where she tried to get into the estate... then she got sued back... was a 'zoo'... Yes, he was humping the coffeemaker. The dog, I mean. Are you talking about Charles Kuralt? He was married forever, had an affair with one woman that lasted for decades, up until his death, and (if I remember correctly) she wanted the house they had built together by a river (but of course HE paid for it!!) ... the "love nest." Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts