Posted on 11/08/2005 8:01:14 AM PST by TBP
A retort to a simple-minded statement is no strawman.
Is "instantiating" a word? Sounds good even if not.
That post is apparently misdirected.
It is a word, but I meant initiated.
I was just yanking your chain.
I will just say this I am married 10 years now, have no children with my current husband, and we are together because we choose to be together not out of need or expectation, but I will tell you this, the day my husband says to me I don't love you anymore or I want to be with someone else HE IS FREE TO GO..I force no one to stay married to me, or will try to talk them into staying, I am a grown up can take care of myself and I either want the *Right* relationship or none at all...
Some people are willing to settle for form over substance.
That is fine, as long as you realize that you (both) are indeed putting your desires over what would be best for you children if you had any. I never said you couldn't divorce for selfish reasons, just that when it comes to kids, the only reasons that are justifiable as far as I am concerned are abuse or neglect. It is difficult in todays world to find anyone who understands that there are things bigger than themselves... so folks use selfish reasons for all sorts of things.. I know its not going to stop just because its wrong and damaging.
I know this much, should my wife try to pull one of those "I don't love you anymore" or "we've grown apart" type of divorces on me, will be a cold day that I grant it, as long as my child is still at home. I will not willingly subject my child to what I and my siblings had to go through. If that means we have to put on appearances until he is off to college so be it. If it isn't abuse or neglect, we can get through it, at least until he's on his own.
Yes..But it might be an all together different situation if it is ONLY you and your wife and she says..I DO NOT LOVE OR WANT TO BE WITH you anymore..then what???
Agreed, I stated, explictely with a child at home. All of my comments here have been divorce when you have kids. If there are no kids, its just 2 adults... and so all they can do is hurt each other.
If folks don't have kids, then its a completely different perspective. I am still no great fan of divorce, but in a situation where it is just a husband and wife, and no kids have been produced then obviously the only issues to consider are their own.
Once you have kids, marriage does take on an entirely different purpose. It doesn't mean that those who have no kids are any less married. I still think that the only real justifiable reasons for divorce are abuse and neglect, but when no kids are involved, the damage is limited to 2 adults.... While I do believe a husband has an obligation to his wife, and her to him even if they are childless, the damage done by divorce here is only to adults. Which is still real, but they at least are on even keel, and not helpless participants.
I agree on the one with ya...
Not raising kids thank goodness, but God Bless the ones that are, it's a tough job now a days that is for sure...
You make a few good points, but miss the main reason that parents should get a divorce. It boils down to happiness. If either spouse is unhappy, then the children are raised in a fashion that promotes unhappiness as a demeanor. If the parents can be genuinely happy after a divorce, you should applaud that.
I'm not referring to happiness in a cursory form. But, more like a soul that is enjoying this journey we call life. If parents can provide that role model to children, they are doing their jobs. Married or divorced.
I think the point of the article, and a lot of the current research, is the importance of re-thinking divorce in "low conflict" marriages. Yes, there are truly awful marriages that exist. Even when children are involved, it is probably best for divorce to occur in those situations. I'm sure you've seen the discussion from posters about adultery, abuse, addiction, etc. People do, however, seem to be rethinking those divorces that occur because of a "lack of connection" or "falling out of love" or "not meeting each other's needs" or those other Lifetime TV pop psychology type of frivolous reasons. From what I've read, it appears to me that those who oppose divorce even in cases of abuse, adultery, addiction, etc., are a distinct minority.
The person or people getting away from a truly loathsome person?
I know I would hate to be married to someone I did not love or who did not love me. But knowing what real love is like spoiled me.
Then tough. Be kind to each other anyway. If you are going to marry 'for the kids', be nice 'for the kids.'
So the husband didn't ridicule the wife before they married? He did a 180 degree turn after marriage? Riiiiight.
Besides, you didn't read my whole post. I never said they should stay married and be mean to each other, did I?
People change my dear....Remember the Burning Bed with Farrah Fawcett??based on a true story, she killed her husband after years of abuse ONLY expereinced after they were married..
Betty Broderick killed her husband after he left her abusive ways, something that did not happen while dating, many stories of this nature time and time again..
Think Laci Peterson had one inclination while she was dating Scott Peterson that he would turn into a monster, commit adultery and kill her and her un-born child!!!
And they were too selfish to be kind to each other. They could feel like they were taking the 'moral high ground' by staying together, but they didn't really care enough about the kids to give them a decent home life.
even if the parents aren't consciously blaming the kids on some level they do and the kids pick up on that.
If they were truly trying to do the right thing, they wouldn't blame the kids. They would say, "Okay, I've married the wrong person - or at least she seems wrong right now. I'll do what I can to treat her kindly, so that the kids can thrive and grow up in a secure environment."
Marriage takes a firm commitment. Unfortunately, too many are too selfish to make that kind of commitment.
Of course they do. Marriage is not about "I'll live with you until I change." Marriage is a commitment. Unfortunately, too many are ruled by their feelings and can't seem to comprehend what a commitment is let alone live by one.
And yes, it takes two committed to the marriage.
I've never even implied that people should stay married to an abusive person. What I DID say is that, if you are going to stay married 'for the kids' then live out that commitment and be kind to your spouse.
Or they learned to dislike each other. Being kind to a constant source of stress in your life isn't easy.
But the can't always control it, the blame game in life is much more emotional than it is logical, and emotions are tough things to control at the best of times. And it's pretty obvious that someone in a failed marriage probably lacks the ability to control their emotions. The reality is that people say "OK I married the wrong person and now I'm stuck here for the children and I hate my life and all the people that are part of making suck". It's easy to take the high road when not in the situation but down in the trenches of reality life isn't that cut and dry.
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.