Here is an article from thea href=”http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2196058,00.html” Times /aon the rewritten rules of marriage and divorce in Britain. I found the a href=”http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,564-2195098,00.html”responses to the debate /aon the issue of whether or not divorcees should live off their ex-partner’s fortunes interesting. I wonder if all of these intrusive rules are a href=”http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/050930140708.k6bnuj54.html”why marriage in Britain is “on the rocks?”/a (Hat Tip: a href=”http://dhdiary.blogspot.com/”dhdiary blog/a)br /br /What I find amazing in these divorce cases is that the British legal system sees fit to think that women are entitled to enormous compensation from their rich ex-husbands because they go into the marriage expecting to be wealthy and then, when the marriage ends, they have a “need” to keep up this wealthy standard of living. br /br /Wouldn’t the equivalent for men be that a guy expected super hot sex when entering the marriage and once divorced, should be able to expect this from the ex-wife on a regular basis as long as a “need” is present? Maybe men in Britain should bring up this idea to the Parliament and see how it plays out.
May 25, 2006 - 4:27 pm