You forgot that little part of marriage vows that promises to stick by the other "in sickness and in health". I didn't bail on him, I fought for him and with him and we got through it. He's been sober for 3 years now and things are better.
I suppose I could've walked but that doesn't say much about me as a person, or as a wife.
I got my husband back but lost the chance for kids. If I had left it would've been the reverse.
For all of you judgemental types out there - pray that's never a choice that you are faced with.
LQ
HUGS.
He took himself--and thus your marriage--down a rocky path that cost you both--but you honored your vow. Blessings on you.
"But the good reverend would probably not see it this way - after all, fewer babies born to Baptists equals fewer parishioners and less money, doesn't it."
"For all of you judgemental types out there - pray that's never a choice that you are faced with."
God Bless you and your husband. Doing the right thing is so hard and you so seldom get any credit for it from outsiders.
I didn't say you SHOULD bail on him. I did think you meant you left him, and I was meaning to say that such a decision was totally valid.
I did mean to assert, and I still will, that you should not have sex with anyone who you would not have children by. "Accidents" are inevitable. The birth control pill only achieves its high "effectiveness" by including a secondary drug to kill any "accidents" while the child is still tiny enough to be mistaken for "heavy flow."
If a woman is married to a man who would abstain from sex during an illness, blessed be her and her husband! But if a woman's husband demands that being married means they should have sex, than she does have grounds for anullment since he has separated the purpose of sex (love and procreation) from the recreational value of it.
>> For all of you judgemental types out there - pray that's never a choice that you are faced with. <<
And yes, I will.