hi Blog My life has been so much better since I lost almost 19 pounds! http://alturl.com/546zc
hi Blog This is the easiest way to lose fat! http://goodforthesole.org/ov/
Blog hi Ever since I started using garcinia I lost thirteen lbs! http://almadesalina.com/pu/
Hubris—in Classical Greek tragedy, insolent defiance caused by excessive
pride toward the Gods.
“What does a poor American defaulting in Looneyville, West Virginia,
have to do with me?” Behind his high-tech, titanium composite glasses with
an unlikely red-and-white polka dot design, Doktor Flick’s anxious tone
betrays uncharacteristic insecurity. Looneyville, I learned, was a real town.
In 2007, U.S. citizens were falling behind in payments on their mortgages in
record numbers in Gravity Iowa; Mars, Pennsylvania; Paris, Texas; Venus
Texas; Earth, Texas; and Saturn, Texas.
Since 2000, housing prices in the United States had increased dramatically,
driven by a combination of low interest rates, a strong and growing
economy, and an innate desire for home ownership. U.S. President George
Walker Bush, a former investment banker, set out his administration’s
agenda for “an ownership society in America” clearly on December 16,
2003: “We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national
interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your
own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country.”1
Unknown to most, the housing boom was driven primarily by strong
growth in the availability of money. Banks and mortgage brokers fell over
themselves to lend to new homebuyers. Innovative mortgage products
enabled people traditionally denied loans to borrow. George Bush was full of
praise for the bankers and their new affordability products.
“Life Isnt About Finding Yourself…
Life is about Creating Yourself…”
Thanks n regards
Domestic violence redefined: 5 percent of Saudi women beat up their husbands
About five percent of the married Saudi women regularly beat their husbands, according to a study conducted by Dr. Abdul Aziz Al-Muqbil, a staff member of Al-Qassim University who is also a social and a family consultant.
He told local daily Al-Madinah on Friday that 45 percent of the Saudi children were subjected to various kinds of physical abuse and that 21 percent of them were being regularly beaten.
The academician noted that incidence of family violence was steadily rising and said verbal abuse might be the spark that ignites family violence. “Many people confuse between firmness and violence on numerous occasions. This may result in family breakdown and will not ensure children a proper upbringing,” he cautioned.
Al-Muqbil also said negligence was another face of family violence. He cited a case of a girl who had been staying in a protection home for more than 10 years without anyone asking about her. “This is a clear example of family abuse,” he said.
The academician refuted claims that family violence was hereditary and said it was a kind of temporary punishment. “A female accepting to marry randomly without knowing the man just out of fear of spinsterhood is also a case of family abuse,” he said.
Al-Muqbil believes that the prevailing culture in society is encouraging family violence. “Some wives bear physical abuse by their husband for fear of divorce which is more painful to them than physical abuse and beating,” he said.
He cited lack of proper family planning, unwillingness to settle petty differences, disputes over methods of upbringing and boredom in the house as factors that would ultimately lead to family violence.
“Differences over birth control are also among the causes that may breed family abuse,” he said.
In an earlier report carried by Arab News, the Jeddah police had reported that on average, 145 wives beat their husbands in a month, constituting 20 percent of the annual rates of such incidents.
Wives only go for physical violence when they reach a state of explosion and can no longer control themselves, said Fathiyyah Al-Qurashi, member of the Saudi Human Rights Commission, while responding to the growing number of incidence of husband beating.
<a href=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/an/abbox;sz=336×280;ord=123456789?” target=”_blank”><img src=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/an/abbox;sz=336×280;ord=123456789?” width=”336″ height=”280″ border=”0″ alt=””></a>
~*~Types Of Girls~*~
HARD DISK GIRL:
she forgets about you, the moment you turn her off
Everyone knows that she can’t do a thing right,
but no one can live without her.
She is good for nothing but at least she is fun
Difficult to understand and access
Always busy when you need her.
She makes horrible things look beautiful
She is always fast and faster.
Brings a smile to your face
When you are not expecting her, she comes, installs herself and uses all your resources.
If you try to uninstall her you may lose everything...
From, Date :-
Shri K.P. Singh, Director of Rajya Sabha Secreteriat, 201 Second floor , Parliament House Annexxe, New Delhi – 110001
Honnorable Smt Jayanthi Natarajan and members of the parliamentary committee,
I _______________________________ strongly oppose the proposed MARRIAGE LAWS (AMENDMENT) BILL in its current form . This Bill completely excludes the possibility that a woman can also be a cause of any sort of marital discord and financial hardship can also be faced by the husband. It just takes into consideration that irrespective of the fact on who is petitioning for the divorce, it the husband who is assumed to be one guilty of breaking the marriage and must be forced the satisfy the financial hardship condition of the wife.
Section 13D is unconstitutional and must be amended
Section 13D of the amendment has been copied from law commission’s recommendation in 1978, but it does not hold good in 2010 and must be suitability amended. Section 13D in the current form of the bill states the below
13D. (1) Where the wife is the respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, she may oppose the grant of a decree on the ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to her and that it would in all the circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage.
Adverse Repercussions of section 13D
This section would lead to widespread misuse of this Bill, as then the husband will be forced to ‘buy’ a divorce, while the wife can choose to walk out, at her whims and fancies. Moreover this section also completely excludes the possibility that the husband can also face financial hardship at the times of a divorce.
There are many families in India today where husbands have assumed responsibilities of the household and wives are the primary bread earners. This bill will discriminate against these husbands should their wives petition for divorce. Also in many households husbands become unemployed, ill, handicapped or infirm and should a wife choose to abandon and divorce a husband under these circumstances the husband would have no legal recourse to seek adequate compensation from the wife on the grounds of financial hardship.
The current concept of gender neutrality like that of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act which takes into consideration that both, the husband and the wife can face financial hardship has been totally ignored in this Bill, specially in this section.
Section 13D must be amended to make it gender neutral
“13D. (1) The respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, may oppose the grant of a decree on the ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to them and that it would in all the circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage.”
The word Financial Hardship must be specifically defined
The word financial hardship must be defined because this will become a tool for extortion. It must be clearly specified as to what liabilities the petitioner of a divorce petition must fulfill to satisfy the “financial hardship” condition of the respondent before a divorce can be granted.
Child custody and visitation rights should also be decided while granting divorce
Child custody and visitation rights should also be decided before granting divorce, while deciding maintenance of the child under this Bill.
Condition of finishing all pending litigation before divorce is granted
The proposed law has been copied from the 71th report of the law commission published 1978. However laws like 498a and DV Act came into existence in 1983 and 2006, hence quashing of such cases against husband and his family were not in consideration at that time and the law commission never even considered the wide spread abuse of sections like 498a and DV as they happen today.
Unlike the west in India a divorce case is normally accompanied by many cases namely, maintenance child custody, 498a, adultery, domestic violence, IPC Sec 506 and many more. Most of the times multiple maintenance cases , 498a and DV are all filed together to harass the husbands and his family members and to extort money through nefarious means. In cases where the wife is petitioner for divorce and where she may also be guilty of adultery, or crime against the husband and his family or misuses the other gender biased legislations like 498a and DV, she can easily choose to just walk away from the divorce without having to satisfy any conditions whatsoever. In other words the husband will have absolutely no defence and will be stuck with court cases running for years on end while the wife can happily get the divorce as she likes.
In the case of Swati Verma vs. Rajan Verma reported in (2004) 1 SCC 123 the honourable Supreme Court of India was cognizant of the same concern when it averred. “ Having perused the records placed before us we are satisfied that the marriage between the parties has broken down irretrievably and with a view to restore good relationship and to put a quietus to all litigations between the parties and not to leave any room for future litigation, so that they may live peacefully hereafter…”
In the case of Naveen Kohli vs. Neelu Kohli (AIR 2006 SC 1675), the Hon’ble Supreme Court recommended to the Union of India to seriously consider bringing an amendment in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to incorporate irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce. The essence of the above case was large number of criminal cases were pending against each other. So in essence if either party initiates criminal cases against each other then it should be considered an ground for divorce.
If the current law comes into being in the present format, this will lead to the wife walking out with the divorce while the husband will still be stuck in a legal tangle of cases for many decades.
Amendment to finish all litigation before granting divorce
I demand that an amendment will be inserted that decree of divorce be granted only when all litigation including but not limited to child custody between the husband and the wife has been resolved to the satisfaction of either of the parties, with the post condition that no party will initiate any other litigation against each other once the divorce decree has been granted. This will not only allow either allow the parties to separate and start their lives peacefully , but will also allow the reduction of the tremendous judicial burden of false and frivolous litigation that is pending in the Indian courts .
“Life Isnt About Finding Yourself…
Life is about Creating Yourself…”
Thanks n regards