Law in Contemporary Society

View   r7  >  r6  ...
MichaelBrownSecondPaper 7 - 29 May 2008 - Main.EbenMoglen
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="MichaelBrownIntro"

The Injustice of Alimony in America

Line: 10 to 10
 

The Crux

Changed:
<
<
The reason why I find alimony unjust is fundamentally the lack of equity involved in the process. Utilizing a legal, theoretical, and economic framework, I contend that alimony should be abolished in America. My antagonism for alimony comes from the fact that marriage as a concept fails in my eyes. Divorce rates are higher than they have ever been. I see alimony as one part of the problem that stems from the legal framework for marriage. Without alimony people might consider more heavily the decision to get married in a different way, the same way a higher earning spouse considers the decision to divorce differently now because its cheaper to keep him(er) as they say. I believe the purpose of law is to support certain notions of morality. I cite the absence of adultery as a crime in common law as wholly about morality that the law underwrites. I have no crisis, my measures are not without criticism. I also fundamentally disagree with treating marriage as a means to acrue property and maybe that is the property. Without changes in the law I cannot test whether social benefit will come from. I might go so far as to say that marriage cannot succeed as a contract and a means to acrue property. A propertarian theory of marriage is at odds with a contractarian one. One grants equitable relief and one damages.
>
>
The reason why I find alimony unjust is fundamentally the lack of equity involved in the process. Utilizing a legal, theoretical, and economic framework, I contend that alimony should be abolished in America. My antagonism for alimony comes from the fact that marriage as a concept fails in my eyes. Divorce rates are higher than they have ever been.

  • Are you sure that's true? What's your source?

I see alimony as one part of the problem that stems from the legal framework for marriage. Without alimony people might consider more heavily the decision to get married in a different way, the same way a higher earning spouse considers the decision to divorce differently now because its cheaper to keep him(er) as they say. I believe the purpose of law is to support certain notions of morality. I cite the absence of adultery as a crime in common law as wholly about morality that the law underwrites. I have no crisis, my measures are not without criticism. I also fundamentally disagree with treating marriage as a means to acrue property and maybe that is the property. Without changes in the law I cannot test whether social benefit will come from. I might go so far as to say that marriage cannot succeed as a contract and a means to acrue property. A propertarian theory of marriage is at odds with a contractarian one. One grants equitable relief and one damages.

 

The Legal Rationale


Revision 7r7 - 29 May 2008 - 18:26:14 - EbenMoglen
Revision 6r6 - 28 May 2008 - 19:50:04 - MichaelBrown
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM