baby124:

This one you are shouting up and down. Open your wallet or bank account let us see what is there. Can you buy me as a random friend on NL a Birkin bag without feeling it? Otherwise what are you shouting about? 100,000 thasand a month salary wey no reach but apo garri. My brother please. Stop being self centered. If you marry without prenup and are richer than your wife, know that it is the fair thing to do to give her something to resettle in her new life. Shikena. Even a baby mama is entitled to something to take care of your child. So be careful where you spray your sperm. It's better in a marriage as it's an investment and safer for kids. Even if you end up in a divorce. Cheers.

Sagamite:


Jesus is cool, had good intentions and has been a benefit to the world, but he was a fraud and not the son of God.

If he is, then Guru Marahji is his brother.

ronald4lif:


I'd skip the snide remarks but let's address the emboldened, shall we?.

Why should I take up the responsibility to resettle her and for what reason exactly? Are you people admitting that women can't be self-reliant and depends on men for their conservation on the planet? Do we take it that men are more ingenious to excel than women and whose fault is it, even if that's the case. You see, no one owes anyone nada, zilch, neither is anyone a springboard to enable another to stand on their feet. So your admission of an inferior creature of women to men is neglible. Men owe you nothing. Ende.

As for the kids factor, a man can see to the livelihood of his kids without involving or assisting the mother.

Sagamite:


Why can't the state establish the utility both partners "bring" (not derived) to the union?

What is so hard about that?

You used "derived". You are mistaken. The courts are not there to compensate on they utility derived from the union. They are there to separate the financial utility contributed to the union.

And why do the states have to share such 50:50 when they can establish each's contribution?

baby124:

No snide remarks. Just playing with you there. I don't have time to come in NL and be fighting people I don't know. Now on to the matter. It is only in Nigeria you can get away with impregnating someone and taking care of only your child's needs. The court decides based on your income how much is adequate for child support. And it will not strictly reflect or accurately reflect your child's needs. Depends on your income. If you are high income, OYO is your case, YOU WILL PAY for your momentary indiscretion. Now onto the wife issue, I clearly stated that if you are better off. This is why people go to court to ensure their interests are protected. I am sure if you are better off you and a settlement is taken to court, it will not be your place to decide if you want to give alimony or not. Women also pay alimony you know right?

ronald4lif:


Yes, alimony is unisex even though I'd still like to point out that men are mostly the victims. I'm totally against the practice of alimony payments regardless of who's the benefactor and the victim.

Everyone should have complete possession of their wealth and no one should shortchange another for what they never owned or worked for.

The issue of kids welfare is entirely different and only an irresponsible fellow would grudge and shy away from contributing to their child livelihood. It's also worthy to point out that no amount of child support would gulp such figure as alimony defrayals usually are. And a father can challenge the expenditure of their kids and seek for accountability in a tribunal if they think the sum is overboard.

I've no issue settling an ex partner after a marital break down if I feel I'm better off but that would be on personal volition not through court orders and coercion.

Kimoni:


How can it be said that you've sucessfully brought utility except it's been proved to have been derived or enjoyed by another?

It's far easier to prove derivation...however, when things get to that heated stage, which of the partners will be truthful as to what they've truly derived from the other?

And hell NO, we are not just talking about financial utility or financial transactions here...which is why we should have talked about what marriage is in the first place.

If I ask you today, "what is the offical price of se.x?" What will your answer be? And I am not asking for Saga's price tag or Njoku's or Dayo's. For uniformity sake, let's say 5 hrs? What is the official benchmark price of 5hrs shagging? I can give you the answer for the American dollar or a barrel of crude oil.

Sagamite:


Fck me!

You still don't get it?

Divorce settlements is not about judges looking at what any party benefited from the union.

They don't (and should not) give a fck if you benefited or not.

If you like, let them fck you well in marriage, if you like, make dem no fck you well. That na your wahala.

They are there to divide the financial assets made.

So how should they divide that sensibly?

By actually contribution or but some lunacy of assumption?

Mindfulness:
Are you saying that Christians are the only people who have the right understanding of what a marriage should be like?

Mindfulness:
I have never tried to measure or determine what is good for every individual. How you find my views in none of my business. By now you should know that the more of you disagree with me, the better I feel. Call your friends.

Mindfulness:
I have the right to be happy. I am the only person responsible for my happiness. How is it anyone's problem? How is any cost attached to it? How is my selfishness a problem to anyone?

Sagamite:


The Gods will stamp it when I carry 16 wives to go and marry in the Shrine.

TV01:

I am saying that;

1. people are free to structure their relationships anyhow they choose
2. but not all relationships qualify as marriage
3. I consider the Christian ideal of marriage to be the best and am happy to compare, contrast and champion it against any other form.

Sagamite is saying marriage is outdated and unfit for purpose. He is also saying he has a better relationship model, but as the patent is still pending, he is unable to share it at this point in time

Mindfulness, as usual is not saying anything other than her gospel is about her feelings above all else !

You are clearly unable to state what is objectively moral or good, so how on earth can you determine what is individually good? And as you have no objective measure, everything becomes good based on your selfish unconsidered feeling.

Ergo, a woman can abandon her kids to pursue a feeling she deems good, and convince herself it's a good thing, regardless of the fallout or damage to others.

You are right, you really don't have a gospel worthy of the name, just a shallow mish-mash of feel-good tropes to help you justify your misdeeds - we've had your likes before. Hope you "feel better"

Anyone with a a smidgin of discernment can see what this implies - without even seeing any of your posts.

Keep trying to fill that hole with good feelings.


TV

Kimoni:


Wish you were answering these questions Saga.

The sex was just an example....to show that the value attached to different benefits in life differs and people are willing to pay different prices, cross different miles to achieve certain goals/benefits if they find it worthy. Going back to the Dangote example, while everyone else would think the rich guy is an idiot for marrying a pauper, only he can explain why he took such an "illogical decision". Only he understands why he is willing to take such risk when it has a high probablity of crystallization. At that point, he could well be said to be paying a price for something that only he understands the extent of the utility he is enjoying. We all don't have to understand it.

There are soo many things in marriage that are not readily quantifiable. As a man, If I marry a well-behaved girl from Sagamu because I want her to instill some cultural discipline into my kids which no girl in the UK may be able to offer, would most people understand the rational behind this decision? However, deep down, that action, when fulfilled completed you. She helped you achieve a fundamental goal of yours in life, and not just you, your offsprings, your lineage because you believe that discipline or knowledge will transcends generations. If this lady, but after several years gets close enough to you to realize the weight of what she hasbdone and during a divorce settlement case, request for a large chunk of your assets, would it really be unfair to give it to her? Would it really be fair to say she should be sent back with what she brought from Sagamu? and maybe indulged some access to your kids(at least they bear your surname, right) from the goodness of your heart?

We could have several variations of this example above.

Then coming to the alternative forgone - how do you measure what a woman would have achieved if she were not married to you? And forget academic degrees, I have seen illiterates become millionaires by merely buying and selling. Hence, earning potentials is also difficult to measure. So what would the judge do?

Looking at the financial value of what each party contributed before and during the duration of the marriage would be a very shallow way of judging marital disputes. It's like saying I want to reimburse my parents for all they spent on my education as I am now a "Dangote" and I feel that once I do that, I would have been able to adequately repay them for any academic success I achieved under their care. As logical as this sounds, isn't it the most ridiculous thing ever? Barring all emotions and sentiments emanating from the "parents" cited in this example, would it still make sense? Were these feats achieved based only on the fact that my school fees were paid as at when due? At least I read and passed all the exams on my own, so why wouldn't it be a fair deal?

But then, what about the constant advice, encouragement, stability of the home front, the broad shoulders I could always cry on abbl. Are these contributions of any value? Can they be quantified? If they cannot, would it suffice that the sharing be generous to the party, who at a first glance seems to have contributed and achieved less in the union? Trying to err on the side of caution maybe?


***But why should judges not care about the benefits? This whole argument revolves round benefits - enjoyed, forgone, contributed etc

craziebone:
How could you, @sagamite, call Ronaldo a homosexual!

I think that guy has some problems with relating to the opposite sex which could date back to possibly, childhood or adolescence or his very first ecounter with love. There are guys who are like that; including serial cheats, etc. He is definitely not gay.

I think you are a very good conspiracy theorist

Sagamite:


Continue deceiving and consoling yourself, mate.

He is as homosexual as fck!

He is the future LGBT messiah!

When he finally comes out, it would be one of the greatest boost to the LGBT campaign.

I repeat, craziebone: Cristiano Ronaldo is GAY!

Many in the western press know. Many westerners even know.

Have you seen his management come out to deny the accusation made recently?

Nope?

Yes, they would not because they don't want lie!

What they did is push out some useless rumour to masculinise him.

They just pushed out the rumour that "Is Ronaldo tapping his Agent's daughter's arsse?" to the press!

Yeah right!

A rumour is not a lie, so they did not lie. But it is a good PR tool to deviate from a story that is hard to verify, but which is true, but yet one does not want to admit.

Ronaldo is paying some fcking big time PR firms big money to help him manage this secret.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3322398/Is-Cristiano-Ronaldo-dating-agent-s-daughter-Real-Madrid-star-linked-Marisa-Mendes-admitting-s-seeing-number-women.html

Take your time to read the comments section. Many of the white people know he is a homosexual.

YOUR HERO NA POOF!

craziebone:


there is no article in your link. Only the name of the website and a plank page.

I strongly believe he is not only straight, he is cis gendered. He is not only those two, he is also ubersexual!

craziebone:
if he were gay, why would he want to hide it, especially when you confirmed he is a supporter of the LGBT movement in Portugal?

He would have everything to gain including positive media promotion and also a time magazine's person of the year Caitlyn Jenner comes to mind. Being gay and open about it is the surest way to fame, glory and acolades in the western world. So, i see no reason he would hide it if he were one.

@sagamite

Sagamite:


What is he going to gain?

Loss of advertising income?

Ridicule on the pitch when playing in some foreign countries?

Some team-mates hesitant to be seen hugging him after a goal (especially muslim and African ones)?

Being followed and all his pictures with men making headlines?

Consistent loss of WPoTY?

His global popularity diminished?

Or you think the West is everything?

You are asking me why would he want to hide it. Do you think there is no single homosexual footballer at the highest level in the world?

Why has none come out?

This guy, stop being in denial, men. All the glaring evidence is there, denying them would not change it.

Cristiano Ronaldo is a HOMOSEXUAL!

He will come out when he is retired and then he would be treated as a hero and a tool for promoting homosexuality by Western media.

craziebone:


he is never going to lose advert income. Infact, it will improve. The gay loby is one of the most powerful and rich lobbies in the western world.

He is not getting much from other parts of the world, so that won't matter. His biggest endorsement deals come from western companies. He will become the new face of the LGBT movement.

Sorry to say, but the west is most things as we speak. Culture, intellectualism, politics, economy etc are all western controlled. Why should he bother about his popularity in Africa and the middle east?

There is a particular player in the premier league that came out of the closet. He is American. Google it and see. Also, what is WPoTY?

Sagamite:


What the hell are you talking about?

You think if he comes out as a homosexual, his billboards would be up in Nigeria, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, India etc?

You think he is not getting much money as a global brand?

You think even in the West, all people support homosexuality?

You think he should not bother about the 1.3bn or so people in Africa and Middle East and his sponsors too don't give a shyt about them too?

So to you, someone being regionally popular is the same as someone being globally popular?

I suggest you google your American and find out when and how he came out.

WPoTY is "World Player of The Year".

STOP BEING IN DENIAL!

craziebone:


not everyone would want to cooperate with him and keep it secret, if he truely is gay. There are those jealous of his success. These people would do anything to pull him down. There are also those within the movement who would want him to comeout thinking: if he could get identified as gay, that would speed up the acceptance of gayness in the society. These people may not be patient very much and would like to let it out.

craziebone:

Also, it seems you stay in the UK. What is this homosexuality thing all about? I do think the sexual continuum" tale was manufactured by the APA so as to legitimize and normalize homosexuality. Come to think of it: if there is a sexual continuum, how comes it is limited to just homo, hetero, bi and transgender? Why isn't peadophilia, necromancy, beatiality and incest involved? Afterall, these people can also give the same arguements LGBT people give that they were born that way and that you do not think anyone who knows fully well the social implication of a thing, would continue to do it if it was a choice.

Sagamite:


Have you ever seen a Western paper outing someone that has not done anything wrong?

Have you even seen Al-Jazeerah outing anyone?

Or you think it is your NTA, Punch or Thisday that has the resources to out anyone?

Or you think out of all the footballers playing professionally in the top 5 leagues in the world, not a single ONE is gay?

Why have they not been outed?

What makes you sure he is not one of the footballers that was recently reported was about to come out but maybe decided against that?



Yes, you are right!

Homosexuality is an abnormal deviancy.

Only a complete foooool would tell me homosexuality is normal, but paedophilia is not. As peddled by the moronic liberals in the West.

They are both abnormal deviancies.

The homosexual and the paedophile are both born that way and it is not a choice. The only difference is that a party in one is deemed not to be able to give consent. But the desire for both is still odd and I think it is mental issue that needs to be addressed.

Yet this cretins want to bring Tyson Fury down for highlighting Homosexuality and Paedophilia are alike.

I was watching a TV series recently on UK TV called, First Dates.

There was a guy there who said he used to be a big playboy and was known for fcking all kinds of girls, then one day he had something like a tumour found in his brain and he was close to death and had to be operated on.

He went for the operation and when he came out, he became a homosexual.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Zwa8kC-vgU

I stand by my hypothesis that it is something in the brain and it needs to be investigated, not accepted. Especially not the forced acceptance the liberal fooools want to put on society.

craziebone:


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_English_football

Sagamite:


I don't get your point with the link.

baby124:

It is a partnership again. She is worth it. Your value to her, will not be the same as what she thinks her worth to you was in the marriage. Some of you claim traditional men, yet still want all the benefits of a housegirl in your wife and foot mat. Be ready to cough out the money when you either refuse to work on your marriage or don't care to respect the union anymore. If you marry a bad wife targeting your money, then that says a lot about who you are and your priorities. And you should not complain of such outcomes because it was inevitable. Now go and marry, and stop scaring yourself to a frenzy because of your little coins, that you won't let anyone rest. People like Bill Gates are good men to their wives. Their marriages are still in tact and they have nothing to fear or lose. So who are you, a regular employee like this mumu in the article shouting about money that Bill Gates can spend in one minute and not sweat?

iykedare:


Crap!

You reason like a dummy.

Kimoni:


Wish you were answering these questions Saga.

The sex was just an example....to show that the value attached to different benefits in life differs and people are willing to pay different prices, cross different miles to achieve certain goals/benefits if they find it worthy. Going back to the Dangote example, while everyone else would think the rich guy is an idiot for marrying a pauper, only he can explain why he took such an "illogical decision". Only he understands why he is willing to take such risk when it has a high probablity of crystallization. At that point, he could well be said to be paying a price for something that only he understands the extent of the utility he is enjoying. We all don't have to understand it.

There are soo many things in marriage that are not readily quantifiable. As a man, If I marry a well-behaved girl from Sagamu because I want her to instill some cultural discipline into my kids which no girl in the UK may be able to offer, would most people understand the rational behind this decision? However, deep down, that action, when fulfilled completed you. She helped you achieve a fundamental goal of yours in life, and not just you, your offsprings, your lineage because you believe that discipline or knowledge will transcends generations. If this lady, but after several years gets close enough to you to realize the weight of what she hasbdone and during a divorce settlement case, request for a large chunk of your assets, would it really be unfair to give it to her? Would it really be fair to say she should be sent back with what she brought from Sagamu? and maybe indulged some access to your kids(at least they bear your surname, right) from the goodness of your heart?

We could have several variations of this example above.

Then coming to the alternative forgone - how do you measure what a woman would have achieved if she were not married to you? And forget academic degrees, I have seen illiterates become millionaires by merely buying and selling. Hence, earning potentials is also difficult to measure. So what would the judge do?

Looking at the financial value of what each party contributed before and during the duration of the marriage would be a very shallow way of judging marital disputes. It's like saying I want to reimburse my parents for all they spent on my education as I am now a "Dangote" and I feel that once I do that, I would have been able to adequately repay them for any academic success I achieved under their care. As logical as this sounds, isn't it the most ridiculous thing ever? Barring all emotions and sentiments emanating from the "parents" cited in this example, would it still make sense? Were these feats achieved based only on the fact that my school fees were paid as at when due? At least I read and passed all the exams on my own, so why wouldn't it be a fair deal?

But then, what about the constant advice, encouragement, stability of the home front, the broad shoulders I could always cry on abbl. Are these contributions of any value? Can they be quantified? If they cannot, would it suffice that the sharing be generous to the party, who at a first glance seems to have contributed and achieved less in the union? Trying to err on the side of caution maybe?


***But why should judges not care about the benefits? This whole argument revolves round benefits - enjoyed, forgone, contributed etc

A40:

Sorry to butt in but are you implying that the man does not have a role to play in raising these kids? What compensation is due the man for his efforts and who pays it? Women pay for sex too you know. Unless there is clear evidence that she was actually earning money before you people met I don't see how her marriage could be explained as a potential impediment. She could get a job or a thriving business before getting married as any other reasonable person would do

Only a greedy person would demand half of the property of someone he or she wants nothing to do with. I'm not of the opinion that either spouse gets nothing in the event of a divorce but by God not 50%

Do you believe Elin is entitled to half Tiger Woods wealth? Or I married Serena and we broke up 10years down the line am I entitled half her money?

Kimoni:
I cant outrightly call every case where the wife demands 50% greedy, the peculiarities of each case would differ and each would be judged differently.

Kimoni:
On Tiger's case - can I ever judge that case objectively considering Tiger's escapades? I don't think so.

Kimoni:
With Serena - if you as a man has sacrificed all to keep the home front going while she concentrated on amassing trophies and earning money, why not?

...Sagamite, superior model e da ?

Kimoni:


The father definitely has a role to play but remember my discussion was based on a scenario where "Dangote" is the husband and the wife is an undergraduate/fresh graduate or so. Hence, he is the busy breadwinner with very little time to spare for the family while the wife is more hands on, sacrificing her life raising his children and providing stability for him and the kids.

I cant outrightly call every case where the wife demands 50% greedy, the peculiarities of each case would differ and each would be judged differently.

On Tiger's case - can I ever judge that case objectively considering Tiger's escapades? I don't think so.

With Serena - if you as a man has sacrificed all to keep the home front going while she concentrated on amassing trophies and earning money, why not?