Is in the same place where it says it’s ok to hurl insults at people you don’t know, simply because you disagree.
Look it up - it’s there.
According to Webster’s New World Dictionary
self-righteous (adj.)
filled with or showing a conviction of being morally superior, or more righteous than others; smugly virtuous
Yeah, I’d say so. I’m thinking mentally deficient as well.
I can’t, and I don’t have to.
I’m not a fucking lawyer.
You don’t need a reference book, and you don’t (shouldn’t) need a law reference book to validate what is obvious to any child.
Stealing is stealing.
I assure you from personal experience that there is nothing under Colorado law that requires a divorced couple to live separately.
Funny, self righteous as I am, I never needed to insult anyone to make myself feel more secure.
Seems when you all get backed into a wall with the cold hard light of FACT, you hurl insuts.
OK by me, I’m just using my trial time to weed out the dickheads.
This is a stupid line of argument.
“They didn’t have healthcare in the Old Days, so it’s okay if someone who needs healthcare now doesn’t get it!”
They churned butter by hand in the old days, too. They also “bled” patients to try to cure every ill under the sun. They believed in vampires. Do you do all of this as well? No? Then shut the fuck up about what they did in the old days, because it’s not relevant to this discussion.
Oh, and:
[QUOTE=mattmorgan64*
The bottom line is higher health care costs for all, with no explanation as to why costs are rising.[/QUOTE]
If you’re an American (which I will assume both you and AuGratinare, you do know that these “higher health care costs” are actually driven by new technology, a rising aging population, bureaucracy (whether that’s good thing or not I don’t know), and…get this? LESS INSURED PEOPLE.
Let’s break it down like this:
Health care costs rise for whatever reason. Employers start cutting jobs because they cannot afford to employ as many people because they cannot afford to shell out for health care. Suzy can’t find a job because none are offered because the jobs have been cut. Suzy goes on any low-income-based medical insurance. Suzy gets sick, the government picks up some or most of the slack of her medical costs, and guess what? Healthcare costs rise. More employers cut jobs. Less people are able to get jobs, so they go on low-income healthcare. Lather, rinse, repeat.
I am not going to deny that there are plenty of people who commit fraud. The thing is, America’s digging a hole as far as healthcare goes. I could’ve made this example more complete with more underlying factors, but I wanted to write a post, not a term paper.
And I assure you, from personal experience, that I am not talking about Colorado.
See if you can answer this without using the word “spin.” Think of it as a thought experiment.
Where have you established that receiving benefits that are **legally due ** is stealing? Not being a lawyer and all, how can you make a judgement that is superior to the judgement handed down by the court?
Unfortunately, you ended up doing neither.
I’ll ask again.
How are benefits obtained under a false divorce LEGALLY due?
Then I am free to disbelieve you. You stated it as a certain fact to butress your argument. You can’t prove it’s a fact because it turns out you pulled it out of your ass. Doesn’t help your argument much.
One thing you need to get used to about this message board is that when you start tossing alleged facts about, you’re going to need evidence of some sort. When we’re talking about the morals of this issue, opinions are good enough. Some of us may think you’re a jackass to hold that opinion, but hey, you’re entitled. When you use matters of fact to support your opinion, be prepared to show that it is a fact when requested.
Whew, wish I’d seen this. C’mon guys, cut a brother some slack. The man is on a mission. How can you be against dickhead weeding?
What the FUCK does any of that PURE BS have to do with my OP?
You must be one of those people the mods talked about in the lawnchair rules.
Well, I, for one, have finished with my dickhead weeding for the evening. 'Night, all. Have fun storming the castle!
Night.
See here’s the thing. You have not established (as I asked you to in the previous post) that the divorce is illegal. You seem to be suffering from selective cognition.
Really. Read Max’s post again. He explains it very well (your ham-handed rebuttal notwithstanding.)
I really don’t get the gripe. People get divorced for all kinds of stupid and petty reasons and there’s nothing wrong with that, but if a couple divorces in order to get enough support to be financially stable, that’s somehow a wrong reason?
In a legal sense, people that get married become codependents. As long as their combined income is enough to support both of them, it’s a win-win situation. If one of them becomes disabled, it can cause reduced income and increased expenses. Now their combined income does not cover their combined expenses. Financially speaking, they would be digging a hole they could never hope to get out of. Sooner or later, it’s their debtors that will be loosing out when they inevitably go bankrupt.
It is no longer possible for them to survive as codependents. Legally speaking, why shouldn’t they get divorced? I submit that if there are any good reasons to get a divorce, this is one of them.
And **mattmorgan’**s head explodes in 1,2,3…