Jump to content

Missouri Won’t Allow Pregnant Women to Divorce


Recommended Posts

Horizon Flame
Posted

 

Posted

I refuse to believe this... What kind of medieval joke is this?

Posted

What in the 1600s :deadbanana4:

Posted (edited)

Looks like scientists were wrong when they said time travel to the past is impossible.

 

Edit: Wait, according to the article this isn't even new.

Edited by Nano
Posted

Next tour stop for America: burning books and witches aka innocent women.

Posted

why are the laws getting dumber by the day

 

 

Posted

Us women need to stand together

Posted

What is WRONG with THEM?

Posted

The promotion that The Handsmaid's Tale is getting lately is insane.

Posted

Seriously what is going on in the states :biblio:

Posted

Death penalty for sex before and outside of heterosexual marriage coming any day now

Posted

How is this even allowed? :toofunny2:

Posted
12 minutes ago, KatyPrismSpirit said:

why are the laws getting dumber by the day

 

 

Getting? :toofunny3:

Posted

5ec1bbf4774b8707716ff4e3.jpeg?Expires=2062813921&Signature=VnXOJuAEdwXn0I65Sy887pE5Z3cTZbwKf9iN1Sjw715wdrBdBxT~D6y9YbwEJRamer3KdRwlOuqVRE4ydTI8LAfzO~INOcvhWb30zubCB0-tvouYTNWpkgvAm0U~98TKmsfpDGm7NXPt3bxUBerPRGS~ZtyZMS1VePXuHEWr72Q_&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJXYWFXCDTRLR3EFA

Posted

If you actually read the story it makes sense. Under Missouri divorce laws, a fetus isn't considered a person and has no standing in the divorce proceedings. Thus no consideration is given to future child support and custody. So, any child born after the divorce is finalised wouldn't be entitled to financial support normally part of a divorce decree. They would have to go through the same process of suing for support  as out of wedlock children. Looks like a misguided attempt by lawmakers to streamline divorce law.

Posted

This can't be true

Posted
1 hour ago, Marla Singer said:

The promotion that The Handsmaid's Tale is getting lately is insane.

No literally :deadbanana:

Posted

Oh.. so is it because the baby doesn’t exist yet? There’s no child custody case to have when there’s no “life” to battle over? Interesting.

Posted

I refuse to believe that this is real, like wtf :deadbanana4:

Posted
1 hour ago, BGKC said:

Oh.. so is it because the baby doesn’t exist yet? There’s no child custody case to have when there’s no “life” to battle over? Interesting.

But this is in direct contradiction to their abortion laws...I'm so confused. America is something else.

Posted

Uhmm, the ****?

Posted
2 hours ago, chessguy99 said:

If you actually read the story it makes sense. Under Missouri divorce laws, a fetus isn't considered a person and has no standing in the divorce proceedings. Thus no consideration is given to future child support and custody. So, any child born after the divorce is finalised wouldn't be entitled to financial support normally part of a divorce decree. They would have to go through the same process of suing for support  as out of wedlock children. Looks like a misguided attempt by lawmakers to streamline divorce law.

Right. I actually read the article instead of the sensationalized heading. It has to do with custody of the child. It still is weird but it is not nefarious.

 

Posted

B-b-but according to Joe this is just ultra MAGA. Nothing to do with actual Republicans. His consultants said so! After 6 months of working on that term. :cm: America is going to get very bad in some places, because Democrats refuse to acknowledge how disgusting, vile and repugnant all Republicans are

Posted

Even some of the so-called third world countries are better than this. WTF USA? You're supposed to be the role model for modernity and advancement yet you are here acting like you're in the medieval age :toofunny3:

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.