Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged husband

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Bryan Pregon

Iranian Women's Soccer Captain Will Miss Asian Cup After Husband Takes Passport | Bleac... - 12 views

  •  
    "Iranian women's soccer captain Niloufar Ardalan will not be present at the Asian Cup, as her husband has decided to invoke his legal, husbandly right to withhold her passport."
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    It's sad that there are still countries that give men power over their wives. Legally, a woman should be able to go where she wants without her husband's approval. There are rights for husbands but none for the wives which is unfair.
  •  
    This woman is obviously very successful to be the captain of the travelling team that will be participating in the Asian Cup and for her husband to withhold her passport is hindering her success. It's very shocking and saddening to see this kind of misogyny still present within this world today.
  •  
    I think that this is completely wrong. I believe that a woman should have free rights to do things she wants to do and go where she wants to go. This is a big thing for her and for her husband to withhold her passport is in no way okay.
  •  
    That woman should have the right to join her team. She seems very successful. I don't think men should have control over the women and have no rights of their own.
  •  
    I think it's terrible that he would do that. If it's something she enjoys she should be able to go out and do it. Especially something this important.
  •  
    this is totally legal but not ethical, I feel bad for the soccer captain but I'm not entirely on either one side in this particular predicament. I feel if she wants to go badly then she should talk to the husband about it because nobody else can do anything for her right now.
williamdoner

Woman Unknowingly tweets husbands Death - 0 views

  •  
    A woman saw a car get totaled so she tweeted the 911 dispatch and didn't realize that it was her husband
nelsontad

Edith Windsor: Case against Defense of Marriage Act 'went beautifully' | The Raw Story - 0 views

  •  
    i think that you should be able to get married no matter if your gay or not its not their life so why are they so against gay marriage
  •  
    in my opinion I think that you should have the right to be married no matter if your gay or not. Its not their life its yours i just dont understand why they are so against gay marriage. It's not like its hurting us.
  •  
    I'm glad that she won this case, because the law states that if your husband or wife were to die, you get the things they leave behind. I don't see why it would be different if you are gay. It just makes no sense. I don't understand why this law was passed in the first place.
Mallory Huggins

Oops, I left my sexual orientation at home - 5 views

  •  
    I think that is crazy, why people think that some people would choose to be tortured everyday is beyond me. I mean come on. I think this issue should just resolve like now, yes I understand that in the bible it says that homosexuality is a sin. But God made you who you are. People have to understand that, obviously there is a plan, it just hasn't showed itself to everyone yet. Being Homosexual is a life, if a Heterosexual stepped into a Homosexual's life for one day they would understand that they go through so much crap constantly. I think if it was just passed as a law people would forget about it. And everything in the world would be a lot less hectic. P.S.... I love the translation at the bottom!! That is hilarious!! :D
  •  
    my whole view on this is that it is ridiculous. gay people should get their rights already.
  •  
    In all reality..... If Religion is your reason to say, "Being gay is not okay," then you really need to know your history. First, Christmas, if I recall the documentary that I watched not to long ago correctly, was a time for grown men to beat there wives, and go out and have "gay sex" with each other? So, if you denounce gay marriage because of Catholicism, or Christianity, you just denounced Christmas. Second, for those of you who are Hindustan, you have a celebrated holiday that is for 2 guys, and 1 girl, to "get it on." It's called Karma Sutra. Yeah, religion should not be allowed to interfere in America's choice to permit/deny gay marriage, and not just for those 2 reasons. (Those reasons being that the religions allow it themselves, yet say it is not okay.) Let's just read out constitution. We've all heard, "Freedom of Religion," before, right? Well, right there, religion should not be allowed to found a reason as to deny gay relationships. To add, let us look at the Declaration of Independence, "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Pursuit of happiness includes marriage correct? If so, define marriage Religion definition: The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife. Actual definition: Marriage is a social union or legal contract between people called spouses that creates kinship. Just by out constitutional freedoms, and foundations, most of it points in the direction of gay marriage should be legal, which Jenny, is why I agree with you. As for being gay being something you can fix, don't think so. I don't see people changing there skin color. (Except Micheal Jackson, but we all still know that he was not as light-toned as that.) Do you see people choosing there eye color? Either that is one expensive (or failed) surgery, or it does not happen. I don't think you are capable of changing the way someone is born, (unless it changes your physical appearance, which does not change you
sydniestark

Melania Trump demands retraction from People on story alleging assault - 6 views

  •  
    Melania Trump is demanding a retraction and apology from People magazine for publishing a former writer's account alleging Donald Trump assaulted her while she was on assignment. Melania Trump listens as her husband delivers remarks at Trump National Golf Club Westchester in New York in June 2016.
  •  
    If Trump did grope her, he had his wife, and everyone has their dignity. Although some are kind of denying it, some are standing by it. If he groped her his wife wouldn't accept it, she really denied it.
stacy martinez

Michelle Obama: The Clinton surrogate that could finish off Trump - 6 views

  •  
    "When they go low," Clinton says on the campaign trail, "We go high," her supporters shout back. In 2008 and 2012, President Barack Obama's campaign aides anointed Michelle Obama "The Closer." This year, Hillary Clinton may well designate her most popular surrogate the starter, the reliever and the pinch-hitter, too.
  •  
    The first lady, Michelle Obama has been known for her ability to persuade and has since been called "the closer" for her husbands previous campaigns. Just recently Mrs. Obama opened up with sexual assault cases against Trump, (not to her of course but past charges or claims). Thus being the second time this year alone that Michelle has connected with her audience and left her point clear with support.
  •  
    In her speeches you can tell she is very passionate about what she is saying. She is a democrat so many will say she's only taking Hillary's side because of that, but it goes deeper than that. She believes that Hillary winning will have people standing up against Trump and his bad comments towards women. She doesn't think that what he says is an okay thing for anyone to say, especially someone who might become our president.
Emma Preston

What Happened to "Baby Gabriel?" - 2 views

shared by Emma Preston on 05 Sep 12 - No Cached
Calee Morgal liked it
  •  
    The then-8-month-old known as "Baby Gabriel" disappeared in 2009. The boy is still missing; his mother faces kidnapping and child abuse charges. She sends the boy's father a series of spiteful texts saying she killed him, and she later recants her statements
  • ...7 more comments...
  •  
    I really do personally believe this women should be jailed for murder, but legally, it would be difficult to get a conviction. Due to our legal system, we have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, (about 90% chance) that she killed her baby. She gave a second story, so one of the two stories must be true. 50/50 chance, good luck actually proving it. All she has to say is, "I said that to hurt him, and I gave the baby away," and she would probably just be convicted for kidnap. Either way it is a tough case, I think I may have to follow it.
  •  
    I agree with Payton she should be jailed for murder. I believe that she did kill her son, she wouldn't have told him that she killed him if it wasn't true unless she's crazy, which she probably is. None of that would have happened if she would've just gave the father custody, but instead she left for Texas with her son.
  •  
    I also think that she should be put in jail. If you're gonna say you killed him, it's usually not something you're lying about, and if she just gave the baby away, someone would have seen the stories and said "Oh I have this child" or something like that, but no. Nobody said anything so it goes to show that it all comes back to her.
  •  
    I agree the mother should be jailed. They even have proof that the mother killed thee baby by sending a text to her husband saying that she killed the baby and dumped the body in a dumpster somewhere in Texas.
  •  
    Almost three years later, his disappearance is still a mystery. And a trial that gets underway this week may finally provide some answers to what happened.
  •  
    I agree with the both of you. No sane, rational person would say anything about killing their own child, whether or not it's true. I believe that she is guilty and should be jailed and have to go under a serious psychiatric assessment. I feel so bad for the father, this must have been such a traumatic experience.
  •  
    I too believe she should be jailed for murder of her child. She is not rational nor sane for making these allegations if they're untrue. Libby is right saying she needs to undergo some serious psychiatric assessments. I don't understand how a mother could do that to her own young child and blame it on the father. Just a very messed up thing to do or even imply on doing.
  •  
    For some reason this reminds me a lot of the Casey Anthony case :/
  •  
    For everyone that thinks this lady is "crazy," you do understand that she is protected legally under the idea of what is most likely temporary insanity even if you can prove she killed a baby? If your reasoning is, "she is crazy, and needs to be jailed," you are not going to get her jailed under our legal system. As for proving she killed her baby.... You must understand all she has to say it, "I said it to hurt him," and that would be hard to disprove. I really doubt you could actually prove that she was not lying when she sent that text. As for giving the baby away, that is a whole matter of its own. If you can find someone to take a baby, that person is unlikely going to give the child up.
theresa schwenk

Oklahoma Mother, 18, Kills Intruder Breaking Into Her Home While on Phone With 911 - Ya... - 9 views

  •  
    Wed, Jan 4, 2012 9:01 AM EST 911 operator told young mother she could not shoot until man entered her home. Multiple reports of a dozen orcas have whale watchers thrilled in Orange County. Higher gas prices will push the cost of coffee, breakfast items up across U.S.
  •  
    This is a very interesting situation. I feel bad for that new mother because she had just lost her husband, and then someone tried to break into her house 5 days later.. I think this is a justified shooting as well.
Madyson Burnett

Suspect in Craigslist slaying tells reporter she killed in 3 other states - 6 views

  •  
    This is crazy that someone could kill 22 men in 6 years.
  • ...14 more comments...
  •  
    She murdered more people than Jeffrey Dahmer and in a shorter time period too. Wow.
  •  
    I'm not too sure how credible the story is. But, if it is true how had they not have noticed any type of connection between victims? Say, area of killing, type of person they are, etc.
  •  
    At least she admits it. I think stories like this, are influenced by movies!
  •  
    The murderers are really young to have done something like that!
  •  
    She said she killed in Alaska and Florida, causing the police to investigate in both states. Which are probably the furthest states away. It would take a while for the police to investigate the cases. I think that she is trying to gain attention and possibly delay her trial.
  •  
    This is crazy! Who could do something like that?
  •  
    so she must have put a lot of thought into the murders so she could spare her self more time with the states working together
  •  
    I think that this is crazy! How can she just sit there and say her and her husband had this planned since they met... Kinda stupid and maybe even a little psycho.
  •  
    that's crazy! its a good thing they caught her. who knows how many more people she would have killed if she was still out there.
  •  
    She said that the police wont find full bodies, only body parts.. from a wide range of ages starting at 13! The couple have had plans to kill together, but the victims never showed up. Barbour said she knew they were going to kill someone together since the day they met! How can someone even have the slightest thought of something like this!!
  •  
    She's heading to prison as a young girl. She wants to be labeled as crazy as possible.
  •  
    Women are crazy.
  •  
    At least she admits it.
  •  
    I seriously don't think she was able to kill just over twenty men since she was thirteen without one getting away or fighting her back. She'd have to take the men by surprise and even then, I don't think a thirteen year old would have successfully committed a murder and got away with it. I think she is just trying to prolong her trial and send the police on a search for the bodies or parts of these individuals she killed. Regardless, one life is time is prison twenty is a couple lifetimes.
  •  
    I think you can never be too careful with people on craisglist.. It is full of many people who don't always tell the truth and they are on there for the wrong reasons. There has always been scary problems with Craigslist
  •  
    This was interesting to me, the way she admits to something but the process is taking longer to find her guilty. It's just weird to me that the girl admitted to something more but she's still being questioned. I also think it's a little sketchy that it took her two months and then she finally came out with the story and the locations where she killed them. She did state 2 people got away so finding them would help.
Bryan Pregon

Newtown victims' families sue maker of gun used in 2012 attack | Reuters - 27 views

  •  
    "The families of nine people killed in a 2012 massacre at a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school sued the maker of the gun used in the attack on Monday, saying the weapon should not have been sold because it had no reasonable civilian purpose."
  • ...11 more comments...
  •  
    I understand there rage towards the gun company, but you can't sue them for selling a gun. that's what there job is, that's just what they do. they didn't intentionally sell it to that guy knowing the terrible things he was going to do.
  •  
    I think the gun makers should not allow that gun to be to sold to the public. Its too powerful. But on the other hand the shooter could just get another gun. I don't think its the gun manufactures fault. People do crazy things, and it just happened to be their gun.
  •  
    I agree that the gun should not have been sold to a civilian and the maker/seller should be sued for the crime.
  •  
    They shouldn't sue the maker/seller, it was legal to sell that type of gun at that time. The seller didn't know that Lanza was going to shoot 20 first-graders and 6 teachers.
  •  
    I agree that it is wrong to sell such a powerful weapon to the general public. Never the less, you still aren''t going to get back some of those guns they have sold. A military issued weapon should not be sold to the general public, it has no good use for the public. But at the same time, I believe there is no reason to sue the company. The company didn't know this was going to happen.
  •  
    This whole massacre just absolutely angers me. I cannot believe that a gun that would be used in the military was used by a young, inexperienced man to kill 20 children and 6 faculty. Yeah, the gun-maker didn't know that Lanza was going to go out and do this, but they could have sold a different gun (a gun that would NOT be used in the military.) I think the victims' families did the right thing by sewing the gun-maker. He killed children and wives/husbands....LOVED ONES. That's not okay.
  •  
    I agree that it is wrong to sell such a powerful weapon to the general public. Never the less, you still aren''t going to get back some of those guns they have sold. A military issued weapon should not be sold to the general public, it has no good use for the public. But at the same time, I believe there is no reason to sue the company. The company didn't know this was going to happen.
  •  
    I agree with them with the thinking that such a powerful gun shouldn't be sold to just anyone, a gun like that only has one purpose and it isn't hunting. I don't think its fair to sue the gun company, just because you buy a gun doesn't mean you are going to do what happened on that terrible day.
  •  
    I think that we should have better background checks before people are sold guns. Also the gunmaker had no idea that Lanza would do something like what he did. The families have a good case because he shouldn't have had the gun at all because it is a very highly powered weapon.
  •  
    I do believe that such powerful guns should not be allowed to the public, especially for recreational use. I also do believe that before guns are sold to civilians we should issue many different back ground check systems. This is to ensure no gun is more powerful than the ones the law has and no one who is dangerous has a dangerous weapon.
  •  
    I agree that these guns shouldn't be sold to the public and in fact only used for military purposes. But I do not agree that the maker of the gun should be sued. He just made the gun. He didn't influence the carrier of the gun to do what he did with it. It's like suing a company who makes knives in the same situation. It's all about the user, not the maker.
  •  
    Guns shouldn't be sold to the public the maker of the gun should not be sued.
  •  
    I agree with them with the thinking that such a powerful gun shouldn't be sold to just anyone, a gun like that only has one purpose and it isn't hunting. I don't think its fair to sue the gun company, just because you buy a gun doesn't mean you are going to do what happened on that terrible day. You can make the gun, but there's no evidence showing the maker of the gun influenced the shooter to do what he did.
amcconkey

Hillary Clinton barks like a dog to slam Republicans - CNNPolitics.com - 3 views

  •  
    Not really. But Clinton told a colorful story on Monday in Reno that ended with the former secretary of state barking like a dog. Clinton was in the middle of a riff about how, in her view, Republicans say things that are not true, when she remembered a radio ad that she said ran in rural Arkansas while her husband, Bill Clinton, was running for office.
1 - 12 of 12
Showing 20 items per page