Wife of NBA great Dwight Howard files for divorce after 6 months. WANTS HALF OF EVERYTHING

Yakuda said:
No it's not the same result. If a contract is broken then then one party can sue the other for non-performance. If it's dissolved there is no possibility of suing. Dissolving is just another contract agreeing to part ways.
Click to expand...

Yes and i am saying that is a distinction without a difference for the conversation i am having with the other party.

The issue we are discussing is 'can contracts be ended'.

I point out that all of them can be ended. They can be broken, where you may face law suit. Or they can be ended via consent.

My point stands. If you want to cry 'you should use the word dissolve and not broken for the ones ended by consent' IT CHANGES NOTHING with regards to the point i made as is equavelent to pointing out a typo.

You are saying 'your point is accurate but the proper word to use is dissolved'. to which i reply 'nobody cares as it is not relevant to the point being made here'.
 
QP! said:
Yes and i am saying that is a distinction without a difference for the conversation i am having with the other party.

The issue we are discussing is 'can contracts be ended'.

I point out that all of them can be ended. They can be broken, where you may face law suit. Or they can be ended via consent.

My point stands. If you want to cry 'you should use the word dissolve and not broken for the ones ended by consent' IT CHANGES NOTHING with regards to the point i made as is equavelent to pointing out a typo.

You are saying 'your point is accurate but the proper word to use is dissolved'. to which i reply 'nobody cares as it is not relevant to the point being made here'.
Click to expand...
Of course they can be ended. A contract is a voluntary agreement between 2 parties. Its not a contract if both parties don't enter into it freely. That's why she shouldn't get a cent unless they agreed he would give her any money if they divorce. The 50% thing is just got overreach
 
I'm not sure but I think the way it works is that she is only entitled to half of what he earned during the time they were married. Anything he had prior to that she can't touch. That's just what I've heard.

Aside from that, if the dumbass didn't have a prenup he deserves to get shafted.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
HAHAHAHA. Hear that everybody? This idiot supports affirmative action and wants whites denied jobs just for being white and then he says he hates racism!!!
Click to expand...
Geebus you are truly an imbecile. Neither of those things are true. I do hate racism, and the sub human morons that promote it. I just wish that you'd hang with the racists that think people with pigment are too stupid to get IDs and need your help to get jobs, if you believe that folks with pigment shouldn't have an opinion because they are just too dumb go hang out with the racists that agree with you. Having any agreement politically with an imbecile like you makes me feel like I need a shower.
 
QP! said:
increasingly less the exception and the trend is moving fast.

Women are graduating at 60/40 rate to men from top job degrees in University and that is growing and not slowing.

So what will you say when 'men' are 'not equal' in the relationship?
Click to expand...
that the projected stats of more than half of all women over the age of 35 will be single, childless, and wondering what happened to all the good men. It's why projected investment capital is in cat food and boxed wine.
 
QP! said:
Why?

I understand that is your view for you but why do you think you should be able to impose that on other?

If they can 'make a decision to get married', why can they also not 'make a decision to get divorced'?


Marriage is simply a contract and you see no contract in history that cannot be cancelled if all the parties who are signatories to it ALL AGREE to cancel it. Even irrevocable trusts can be cancelled if the one who initiated along with the parties all named agree to cancel it.
Click to expand...
that you can't see the issue is normal, but it's also why I think the state should not be involved in marriage.

the current state of marriage and divorce is inevitably leading to a rise in single moms, more kids from single mom households in prison, and more men self deleting themselves due to women completely destroying them in divorce for reasons as petty as not being happy
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that the projected stats of more than half of all women over the age of 35 will be single, childless, and wondering what happened to all the good men. It's why projected investment capital is in cat food and boxed wine.
Click to expand...
you mean the same "projected stats" that show those "good men" as increasingly living in their parents basements, playing video games, never having a good job or girlfriend or wife, and becoming an incel who either commits suicide or ends up in jail after shooting others up when he projects his inadequancies on to others?

Those "projected stats"?
 
QP! said:
you mean the same "projected stats" that show those "good men" as increasingly living in their parents basements, playing video games, never having a good job or girlfriend or wife, and becoming an incel who either commits suicide or ends up in jail after shooting others up when he projects his inadequancies on to others?

Those "projected stats"?
Click to expand...
so you've never heard of the term hypergamy? or the effects of social media on current dating? where the fuck do you morons get any of your information??????
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so you've never heard of the term hypergamy? or the effects of social media on current dating? where the fuck do you morons get any of your information??????
Click to expand...
So you have never heard of incels or the effect of social media on young men?

Where the fuck do morons like you get your information?????
 
SmarterthanYou said:
then if it was a mutual mistake, why would she want 'equitable' assets after just 6 months?????????
Click to expand...
For the same reason he should get equitable assets after 6 months. If it is a mutual mistake, they should walk away with a fair distribution.

Now the question is what is "fair" or "equitable"? Given that it was only 6 month long, then it is only probably the assets that were commonly received in those 6 months. Assumably he had earned money before, and after, that there will be no attempt to divide.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so you've never heard of the term hypergamy? or the effects of social media on current dating? where the fuck do you morons get any of your information??????
Click to expand...
trump setup a pipeline of underage girls for him to have sex with. That was the reason for his "modeling agency." He thought being in a position of power allowed him to force these girls to have sex with him.

A normal person would have a more egalitarian view of things. A wife is not a slave, or property. She is a partner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top