Um, no.
Posted on 05/07/2011 9:28:57 PM PDT by TheDingoAteMyBaby
Tom Hanks is 46?
When was this written?
I remember his dressing up like a girl when I was in high school.
He has to be older than me.
I recall in the early 90s he made the transition with roles like Philadelphia and Forrest Gump. One factor that I think helped his success is that his show Bosom Buddies didn’t last.
Usually when actors are part of a long-running television ensemble, their careers never achieve the same level of success once the show ends. There are exceptions, like Michael J. Fox.
Just looked him up.
Dude is 54. Way older than me.
Not for long.
“Zip it”
Exactly what I said. The readiness to unzip it has caused all manner of grief.
“heart throb”???????LOL. He was never that. But he was an actor with credibility.....but..Hanks was toast after that ridiculous “The Da Vinci Code ‘ movie. Hanks sold OUT on that one. Bummer for him.
That was a horrible movie but I don’t completely write him off over it. If he continues making those type of movies than yes for sure he is written off but for now I think I would write him off over “Joe versus the Volcano” before Da Vinci Code. Was “The Da Vinci Code” after “Band of Brothers”? Also don’t forget he just produced “The Pacific”. So don’t write him off for one very very horrible movie. Now as for heart throb????? That was funny. Plus only two lovers? He was divorced before meeting Rita Wilson so his first wife was his first and then Rita? Wow. If true that is amazing for a celebrity.
Hanks did some good stuff............then he threw it all away with that Di Vinci code BS. Sad.
Did you skip “The Pacific” then?
maybe fidelity IN the marriage. But what about outside of it. That must explain the BLISS part. LOL.
The article ID on this article is 144,402, while the articles featured on the http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/index.html page are numbered around 1,384,700.
And if you search for “virgin happier marriage” on that page, you get the actual date of the article:
Femail
Article
Do virgins have happier marriages?
28/10/2002 08:39:13
So this article actually is about eight years old.
Gotta say that if that is the way a spouse is classified - as a possession - it's no wonder marriage is in trouble.
If the question is indeed whether virgins have happier marriages, then, with qualifications to the answer, I am inclined to say “yes”. If they are firmly committed to monogamy, and to the relationship between husband and wife, yes. The folks who are more interested in collecting stories of this or that conquest will find faithful marriage a chore or something of no appeal to them, I fear.
If Mr. Hanks and his wife have a long and happy marriage, that’s great. We could, as a civilization, stand much more of that. I no longer watch his movies, though. As others here have noted more eloquently than I can, after Da Vinci Code, ffft. And it will never change. So, kudos for the long marriage, zip for the ups and downs of making sometimes crappy movies.
The real answer may be that the best spouses are people who are the least obsessive-compulsive. Someone who can't control his or her sexual urges before marriage may be a bad spouse because he/she can't make the tough decisions to control sexual or any other urges in general. However, a person who has the same obsessive-compulsive tendencies but remains a virgin for religious reasons is still likely to be a bad spouse because those personality traits will come out in other areas during the marriage. The right answer is to strike a positive balance in all things. Abstaining until marriage for religious reasons is fine, but someone who abstains and knows how to strike life's balances will be a good spouse while someone who abstains but still doesn't understand balances will be a bad spouse.
It’s rare to see a successful person who doesn’t practice conservative values in conducting his family life and business affairs. Alas, it’s also the case that successful people who stray from those values are as likely to be conservatives as they are liberals.
Also — I think that there’s really only correlation and not causation between reported pre-marital virginity and marital happiness. A marriage between two virgins these days is going to be between two people who are very strong outliers in their religious fidelity, and that, more than their sexual history, is going to shape the experience of their marriage. I’d bet you’d find no distinction in reported happiness of two such religious people when one, or both, was widowed or divorced, and hence not a virgin, despite having scrupulously honored religious dictates on sexual purity.
...why consult the Bible when Tom Hanks is willing to weigh in on an important issue...
I didn’t want to take any of his time away from being good.
Nevertheless one doesn’t go to a piano player in a brothel for music lessons.
Your reading and comprehension skills are deficient.
Perhaps you would then restate in small words what is the intended meaning of your post 30.
Thanks
To you, no and I’d appreciate you not making any more comments to me. Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.