It's literally: She's a divorced woman, she spent her life being a home-maker, and now she doesn't have a husband to care for and because she's a divorcee no man will have her. Therefore, since you agreed to the divorce, she's a ward of your estate.
Instead the Left said, "what if we use it like weaponized welfare against demographics we hate?"
That would be fine if he's the one who wrecked the family and she can prove it. "He's a beta and I'm sick of having to tolerate his existence" shouldn't be an acceptable reason to destroy a man's future.
Alimony is a paleo-con concept.
It's literally: She's a divorced woman, she spent her life being a home-maker, and now she doesn't have a husband to care for and because she's a divorcee no man will have her. Therefore, since you agreed to the divorce, she's a ward of your estate.
Instead the Left said, "what if we use it like weaponized welfare against demographics we hate?"
That would be fine if he's the one who wrecked the family and she can prove it. "He's a beta and I'm sick of having to tolerate his existence" shouldn't be an acceptable reason to destroy a man's future.
Alimony predates no fault divorce by generations. It has no place in the modern system until that mistake is corrected.
Even then, not good enough. I've never accepted the idea that you have a right to your socio-economic class and lifestyle.