Posted on 03/01/2006 7:09:06 AM PST by ZGuy
So in your universe, it's OK to kill them? No soul=animal, not human...
bump for later read
1.) Zero self esteem
2.) 100 percent arrogance 3.) The continued path to intense depression and fear.
Sorry I started living with my boyfriend at age 29 I am now 45 and experienced none of those feelings and don't regret it at all. My friends who live with their partners never regreted it and never experienced those either. They are quite happy living together and their relationships are mature and stable. BUT every human being is different of course.
My experience has been decidedly different.
Please explain this as I am trying to parse this sentence but I don't get your meaning.
LOL!
And that works for you.....
Many people do not realize the implications of modeling that environment for children. I am not trying to offend you I just get the sense that when they grow older neither will respect any values you hold deeply because of your lack of willingness to formally commit to being a "family" in which they feel they would want to belong. Children desire boundries, continuity and safety. In the back of childrens minds they know when they do not have it, and when they do.
I am curious, did you have a sense of continuity in your home growing up?
Can I ask a question: Why don't you want to get married?
I have no problem admitting that the little voice in my head told me that things were spiraling out of control. Would I call it sin? Well, I'm a Catholic sir, and I believe there are more grevious sins than living with a woman.
In retrospect, I would certainly have reconsidered, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it sinful or wrong. It just showed us both that we were incompatible in our living arrangements. We're both still good friends to this day.
$2100/month child support here. I don't mind paying the support, I do mind that there is no way to insure that even so much as a single penny ever gets to the kids.
Alimony is over, thankfully. That I did mind!
Give it a rest!
We can't be responsible for the choice of others.
They get to choose their own hell...
BUMP
I'm sure there are but that one is not inconsequential.
Ah. Good. I'm not the only one.
Precisely.
A woman with self-esteem would not allow such living conditions.
I lived with someone for 5 years, then married him. I'm not sure that living together is a good trial run for long-term marriage. You can test compatability in terms of sex, living habits, chore division, etc. But you can't anticipate everything like the effect of children, aging parents, changing health, etc.
Still, I think ruling out certain basic incompatabilites before marriage gives marriage a better chance. I never felt like I was walking on egg shells. We got married because it seemed like the next logical step if we wanted to have kids and pool our money. I remember thinking we were at the point to decide if we would move to the next stage of life together or if we needed to move on separately. Evenutally I was the one pushing for a decision because I was ready to move on with life.
I guess it's normal in a relationship for one person to be more goal oriented than another (push to buy 1st house, get started on home repairs, plan vacations). Funny, I would have thought in most cases its the woman pushing her partner to decide if they should get married or each start over. Biological clock ticking, you know.
Unfortunately, after about 11 years marriage, it became apparent that this was not going to work in the long term, for many reasons that we couldn't anticipate. However, children, not the marriage license, have made separation/divorce impracticle. Now in our 22nd year of marriage (and 27th year together) I can see the light at the end of the tunnel as my youngest child is in high school. It's civil enough, but not what I want out of marriage.
I'm not sure I would ever again give up my own house/apartment to live with someone. I might co-habitate, but I would want a place apart available. I've gotten used to my privacy within my own home. I not sure I would ever marry again, though I won't rule it out.
Actually, you can't draw but on one account, you can't add up all your spouses. You would draw on the one that paid the most.
And I think that this idea is ABSOLUTELY JUSTIFIED. Even if you do have issues with your husband's ex. Most people on FR are all about the mom staying home with the kids, but yet they are all over Ex's who get some of the poor widdle divorced man's Social Security. If I spent 20 to 25 years at home raising kids, with no taxable income and my husband decides to take off with the town floozy, I should have no retirement??? I think NOT. I should be entitled to half his SS because I supported HIM and HIS children throughout our marriage. Why does system not work for you?
Now that being said, if the wife has worked in her life, and her Social Security is greater than the half she would get from HIS, she would draw on her own.
Interesting chicken/egg take.
Did I miss anything?
Yeah, you missed the fact that what is under discussion is not just two different personal opinions about relationships--"the way I see fit" vs. "the way you see fit." What's at stake is the way civilized people have regulated their family lives and reared their children down through history. Social conservatives believe we should not cast aside the patterns of the past if we risk losing the benefits society gained from those patterns. One of the main benefits of regulating sexual behavior within marriage was the security which that arrangement afforded the most vulnerable members of society--our children. It is abundantly evident now that widespread cohabitation has weakened the bonds of marriage and endangered the physical and psychological welfare of children. That's why I have no problem whatever calling it "bad behavior."
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.