Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Is Perpetual Alimony Justified?

“Alimony is a system by which, when two people make a mistake, one of them keeps paying for it” --Peggy Joyce

Recently, presentations were made to legislative delegations in Florida. Below is a statement made to the Palm BeachCounty delegation by one of the Alliance For Freedom From Alimony's, Inc.members, Andrew Kondoleon which presents some thoughtful insights and perspectives on alimony:

Good Afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen:

My business partner and I ended our 19 year business venture, we split the assets, but since I wasn’t the one who wanted to end the business venture, I would like him to continue to pay me a salary for the rest of my life. Can you create a law to make that happen?

My employer of 18 years fired me due to a new direction the company was taking. I received one year’s severance pay. However, I really liked my job and I would like the company to have to continue to pay my salary for the rest of my life. Can you create a law to make that happen?

I lived at my parent’s house growing up. It was a nice home, fully furnished, food in the frig, a great neighborhood. My father says since I’m now of adult age I need to find a place of my own and support myself. I would like my father to continue to support me for the rest of my life as he did the past 20 years. Can you create a law to make that happen?

Well, I’m guessing you would not create a law for any of these above situations I mentioned. I’m guessing you would say the first two were unfortunate situations in life, and the third one of the
person wanting their parent to continue to financially support them was just part of growing up and being an adult. However, can any of you tell me why we have Florida Statute 61.08 which can grant permanent alimony?

If it’s to keep people off the welfare rolls, fine, I can understand rehabilitative alimony. Even welfare laws have limits as to how long someone can collect, why not the Florida alimony law? Texas has a three year rule in their statute and there is no evidence of them having a disproportionate number of charity dependent divorcees on its welfare rolls. My belief is if you tell someone their going to have to be self sufficient, they become self sufficient. Permanent alimony takes away self
responsibility by the receiver.

I was married at 19 years of age. I separated from my ex-wife at 38 years of age. If I live to the average age of 78 I will be paying alimony for 40 years, twice the length of my marriage. I’m now remarried. Who do I owe more financial loyalty to, my current wife or theex-wife who the law enjoins me to, even though my desire was to end therelationship? There is definitely unwanted stress on my current marriage due to the inability to end all ties from my prior marriage. My current wife and I talk about having a child, but I don’t see how we can afford it with a lifetime alimony noose around my neck. Permanent alimony needs to be stricken from the legislation.

Why do we tolerate, continue, and judicially mandate a system of lifetime serfdom upon the dissolution of a marriage relationship? I’m guessing the answer to the question is "that's the way we've always done it." The law of domestic relations in the 21st centuryrequires more than this.

I ask all legislators to read the Olsen v. Olsen (Idaho 1976) Justice Shepard's opinion and realize a change is needed in Florida alimony legislation. Thank you for your time.

* Marriages to foreigners increasing

Falsified Court Records stay on Public Docket
* Judge Charles Elloie to Retire in Disgrace
Commission: Drug use, excessive absenteeism warrant judge's removal

* Bills aim for regular increase in alimony
In Greece
Divorce in India: Dump hubby, lose maintenance

* The Virtual Chase - lots of resources

Be sure to visit these sites:

Participate in our Forum discussion group:

Join the Alliance For Freedom From Alimony, Inc. to support the fight to abolish

Monday, December 10, 2007

Women’s Tactics In Seeking Alimony : Part 2 - Profit Motive

"A lawyer is never entirely comfortable with a friendly divorce, anymore than a good mortician wants to finish his job and then have the patient sit up on the table."


We have heard from the feminists that they are seeking equality for women, but the evidence shows us that they are seeking more than that. They want dominance! In Part 1, we have seen some of that evidence from the statistics that counter the myths, distortions, stereotyping that feminists would have everyone believe.

When statistics show that of approximately 75% of the divorces that are initiated, they are initiated by women. Where is the equality in that?

An typical example of this is in the following article:

"Real Women Stay Married," by Susan Orr, Washington Watch, June 2000 which states:

"If we look at divorce statistics, it is easy to get the wrong picture. Almost by default, we assume the man leaves behind a long-faithful, if older, wife who sacrificed to help him and their children. Usually, we envision a relationship with a younger woman who is all too willing to help him spend the wealth originally intended for his family to complete the picture. Such stereotypes are there for a reason. Too frequently, they represent the case. Would it surprise you, however, to learn that only 25 to 30 percent of all divorces are initiated by the husband?"

What kind of incentive is there for a woman to divorce their spouse? Plainly, one of the most powerful incentives is that of the profit motive and promise of a guaranteed lifetime income without having to put up with a spouse they no longer care for. The feminists have been extremely influential in enabling the ease and ability of a woman to get divorced and obtain these lucrative divorce endowments.

Propaganda by the feminists has misled the legislatures to pass laws favorable to them and to the detriment of men.The courts further compound this with blatant gender bias in their rulings forcing men to a life of servitude post dissolution. Even the Idaho Supreme Court Justice Shepard in his dissent on page 3, in the case of Olsen v. Olsen, 98 Idaho 10 (1976), which can be found by
clicking here
, stated this when he said:

"the question facing the Court is whether a judicially imposed system of involuntary servitude is to be continued wherein one human being is placed in bondage to another for what is effectively the remainder of his natural life."
Led by the propaganda of feminists and encouraged by the family law courts that have been blinded with this propaganda, outrageous laws have been implemented by the legislature in direct violation of the constitutional separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislative branch of government by usurping a citizen's constitutional right to privacy in decisions relating to marriage. To further compound this egregious error, the courts have denied the hapless spouse, from whom divorce is sought, the same due process of law given to the worst of criminals.

With administering these egregious laws, the courts aid and abet many women who have no desire to make marriages work out by indulging their selfish motives to destroy the family and to wreak vengeance on the object of their hate under color of law.

The courts not only encourage this activity but also help perpetuate it because it is a multi-billion dollar industry that only benefits attorneys' of which group the judiciary is a standing member. Legislators, who are by and large attorneys, make the laws that the courts enforce. The courts are for the most part run by the judiciary who are all attorneys.

If the courts were interested in preserving the families, they would not encourage "no-fault" divorces and the adversarial nature of family law court proceedings. But, if it weren't for adversarial-type proceedings, then, how would the attorneys run up such large and exorbitant fees. Of course, the defendant in these type cases has the additional burden of having to pay the cost of not only their own defense, they have to pay the attorney's fees of the ex-spouse who is prosecuting them. This leads to a substantial depletion of a family's assets.

The fabric of our society is being rendered to the point of destruction of family values to where a stable marriage no longer counts and declining moral values are encouraged by the oppressive alimony laws in most states. By granting "lifetime permanent alimony" they are providing a profit motive incentive for many spouses to leave their spouse, eliminate their family responsibilities, reduce the incentive to remarry, allow them to live with a "significant other" outside the bounds of marriage and saddle their ex-spouse with a lifetime of financial debt. They do this in order that they will not lose the alimony welfare payments.

"While everyone debates why folks are shacking (or hooking) up in increasing numbers, nobody in the media mentioned what happens when people live together out of wedlock: Illegitimacy explodes." Read more about this in the article: Divorce Down, Marriage Down, Illegitimacy Exploding.

The non-marital birth rate in 2005 increased to 48 per 1,000 unmarried women ages 15-44 years, up from 46 in 2004. The recent increases in non-marital birth rates have been especially notable among women age 25 and older. Births to unmarried women constituted 37 percent of all U.S. births, the highest level ever reported.Click here to read the report.

The end result of all the feminist's propaganda is the resultant male backlash of the "Marriage Strike" now in effect and the cohabitation is creating an ever-increasing number of "bastard" children in our country. They have created a situation where men see what has happened to other men and it has instilled in them a fear of the "financial suicide" and a possible lifetime of servitude associated with getting married and knowing that they have a 50% chance of facing a divorce.

If you, the voter, don't elect legislators who will correct this situation rapidly, it portends an ominous future for the institution of marriage and the family, as we know it.

"Let the wife make the husband glad to come home, and let him make her sorry to see him leave." --Martin Luther



* The Abusive Woman
* Abusive and Violent Women in Relationships


* The invisible victims in domestic violence

* Sexual Utopia In Power - Sexual Thermidor: The Marriage Strike
* Why It Is Impossible To Have A Rational Discussion With Feminist
* More Feminist Hypocrisy

* Fraud And Corruption With Cass County Family Court 43rd Judicial ...

* FOX News Alan Colmes: Who Needs Air America?
* A Prime Example Why The World Hates America!

Be sure to visit these sites: and

Take part in our

Forum discussion group:

Join the Alliance For Freedom From Alimony, Inc. to support the fight to abolish alimony.