|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,316
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,316 |
Thought you might find this interesting, Zen... Here's what Dr. Harley has to say on same-sex "marriages" and homosexuality... From Defending Traditional Marriage by Dr. Willard F. Harley, Jr. (Chapter 13 Pgs. 209-218)...Same Sex Marriage a Threat?
Is There Anthing Wrong with Gay and Lesbian Relationships?
"Over the past thirty-five years, I've watched as our government has done just about everything imaginable to lose the meaning of traditional marriage. We've allowed the enactment of laws that suggest traditional marriage has become outdated-that a permanent and sexually exclusive relationship of extraordinary care is no longer relevant. And all this has occurred with very little resistance despite devastating consequences to our families and to society in general. In each case these laws were passed with hardly a murmur of opposition.
That's why I was shocked to witness the energy behind grassroots efforts to resist same-sex marriage. Why now? I must say that I honestly didn't understand how this issue could create such a firestorm of protest when so little opposition had arisen against earlier changes in laws regarding marriage. But whatever the reason, I was energized by the realization that the controversy had awakened a sleeping giant. And legislators were listening.
In response to the public outcry, legislators at first simply enacted laws against same-sex marriage, hoping that would be enough to satisfy their constituents. But when judges challenged those laws as being unconstitutional, it became apparent that nothing short of a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage would suffice. So states throughout America are now in the process of changing their constitutions. They want to define marriage in their state constitutions as a relationship between one man and one woman-just so judges will not tamper with it.
From my perspective, traditional marriage was already doomed by cultural bias against extraordinary care in marriage and by the passage of laws supporting infidelity and divorce. So what difference would it make if gays and lesbians "married", when marriage had already lost its traditional meaning? Based on the legal and cultural trends we've considered so far in this book, I had already predicted that traditional marriage would be reduced to a cultural footnote within the next few decades.
Consider the numbers. My best estimate of the percentage of marriages that suffer from infidelity is 60%. That's over half of all marriages. And the percentage of the marriages that end in divorce is about 45%-almost half. In contrast, where same-sex marriage or civil unions are encouraged, they account for just 0.5 percent of all marriages. That means only five couples out of a thousand actually choose that path-99.5% choose heterosexual marriage. How much influence could that half of one percent have on the rest of us?
So when I first became aware of the same-sex marriage issue, I didn't view it as a significant risk for traditional families. There were too few of them to have much impact. On the other hand, laws favoring infidelity and divorce have had, and continue to have a devastating effect on marriage. It seemed to me that all of that energy going into avoiding same-sex marriage was being directed at the wrong issue. Traditional marriage was already on the rocks-and not because of the same-sex marriage issue.
Nonetheless, the more I studied the arguments both for and against same-sex marriage, the more convinced I became that the fourth element of marriage-that it is betweeen a man and a woman-does need to be supported. Let me explain why I'm now on board.
Do Same-Sex Relationships Really Work?
Traditional marriage creates the most fulfilling relationship that is possible in life. When all four of its essential elements are in place, a husband and wife-and their children-are very happy. But when even one of those elements is lacking, trouble is on the horizon.
It's easy to see how the lack of extraordinary care, sexual exclusivity, or permanence would wreck a relationship. But is it all that important for the couple to be of opposite sexes?
Admittedly, there's not much published research on this topic. As with surveys that ask people about incidences of infidelity, it's difficult to obtain accurate data regarding fulfillment in same-sex relationships. In public surveys, most people will either deny ever having had an affair or, when they do admit it, will tend to downplay its diastrous consequences. Likewise, in surveys, same-sex couples who are fighting for the right to marry are likely to downplay frustration or dissatisfaction with their relationships.
But I've observed hundreds of same-sex couples in my own professsional experience, and they have always stood out to me as being characteristically frustrated and depressed-many to the point of suicide. Same-sex relationships tend to be very brief and, especially for men, very unhealthy and violent. Granted, I've seen my share of unhealthy opposite-sex relationships as well. Yet on average, the same-sex relationships I've witnessed have been far more fragile.
For these and a host of other clinical reasons, I've discouraged my clients from maintaining their same-sex relationships. Instead I encourage them to either pull away from romantic relationships entirely for a time or to turn their attention to opposite-sex relationships. And, contrary to public perceptions, I've seen many clients successfully reorient themselves to opposite-sex relationships. Scores of my previously gay and lesbian clients are now happily married with children-all because they embraced a traditional definition of marriage that is marked by extraordinary care for life.
I have absolutely no doubt that same-sex relationships can be very romantic. And they can be characterized by the extraordinary care I've suggested. But even in the best of these relationships, when a couple has been honest with me, they have both admitted that they would have preferred feeling the same way toward someone of the opposite sex. The truth is, on average, opposite-sex relationships tend to be more stable and fulfilling. And that, in itself, is a good reason to promote traditional marriage rather than same-sex marriage. But there's also another, even more important reason: the welfare of our children.
A Biological Father and Mother Make the Best Parents
When parents share genetic traits with their chilren, it gives them an instinctive advantage for understanding what those children need. Shared genetic traits also tend to help children understand why their parents react the way they do. That emotional similarity helps parents and children form a bond that is much more difficult to form in alternative families. And that bonds leads to trust that makes training much easier to implement.
Since gay and lesbian relationships do not lead to the creation of offspring that share genetic traits of both partners, they suffer a distinct disadvantage when it comes to raising children. At best, just one of the parents has that biological connection to the child. And as a result, they lack the same emotional empathy that biological parents tend to have.
Also, because gay or lesbian couples do not offer both a male and female parental role model for their children early in life, such children are at a distinct disadvantage later in life. In most families biological fathers and mothers tend to play very different roles in the training of children that help balance love and care (a mother's influence) with responsibility and discipline (a father's influence). Granted, I acknowledge a significant overlap in these traits-women are also responsible and disciplined, and men do demonstrate love and care. But in most families, care is more empathasized by mothers and responsiblity is more influenced by fathers.
A father gives his children insight into the way men tend to view the world, and a mother gives them a woman's perspective. As long as both parents respect each other's way of thinking, a child grows up with understanding of the value of both men and women. Diversity training begins in the traditional family, where children come to appreciate the differences between their mother and father.
Same-sex couples offer childre little hope of understanding and appreciating the differences between men and women because they cannot provide daily exposure to both a father and a mother. Instead, they tend to reinforce a false belief that men and women are not made for each other because they cannot demonstrate to children the exquisite way that a man and woman can blend together.
In addition to concerns about male and female parental influences, there is also another reason to be concerned about the ability of gay and lesbian couples to raise children most successfuly: their relationships are notoriously unstable. As we've already discussed, problems they have trying to make their relationship fulfilling often cause them to jump from one relationship to another-in constant search of that perfect match. As a result, their relationships don't usually last very long. Only a very small percentage stay together long enough to raise a child to adulthood.
As I already mentioned, it's difficult to get accurate information about the stability of same-sex relationships from surveys. But the countries that have enacted laws granting same-sex marriage and civil unions have provided our first truly objecive measures of the stability of same-sex marriages. For the first time, we have their divorce rates.
We are all aware how fragile opposite-sex marriages have been recently-divorce rates are incredibly high. In fact, one of the arguments used in support of same-sex marriage is that they can't be any worse than opposite-sex marriage. But the first solid evidence we have on that subject from Sweden is that same-sex marriages are worse-much worse.
In the Swedish study, the divorce rate of same-sex couples was compared with the divorce rate of opposite-sex couples over a similar period of time. It was found that same-sex male couples were 50 percent more likely to divorce, and same-sex female couples were 167 percent more likely to divorce than their opposite-sex counterparts. In other words, divorce statistics among same-sex couples reflected what I already knew-they are unstable whether or not they marry.
And these results are particularly impressive when you consider that same-sex couples in the most stable relationships would be the first to take advantage of the opportunity to marry. The early results from Sweden should give same-sex couples a temporary advantage over their opposite-sex counterparts when dvorce rates are compared. But this study indicates that the first group of same-sex couples to have married in Sweden are actually more likely to divorce than opposite-sex couples in the same culture. And I expect future studies to show the divorce rates of same-sex couples to be even higher.
If same-sex relationships are much less stable than opposite-sex relationships (as shown in the Swedish study), it should be ovbious that they're not the ideal place for chilren to be raised. Children neeed safety and stability, and same-sex relationships tend to provide exactly the opposite-danger and instability.
In chapter 10, I presented other reasons why children need a biological father and mother who stay together, so I won't repeat them here. But I will repeat the conclusion of thousands of studies: the best way to raise happy and successful children is for them to be with their biological father and mother who are united in marriage and who love their children and each other. In other words, a same-sex couple simply cannot give children the advantages that biological parents are able to provide.
Why Experiment with the Lives of Children?
Many call same-sex marriage a social evolution. I'm in favor of doing things if they work. But I think same-sex marriage is more accurately characterized as a social experiment, and early results of this experiment are not at all encouraging. In fact, they are downright frightening, especially from the perspective of our children.
Why experiment with the lives of our children? Even if only one-half of on percent of couples will exercise the option of same-sex marriage, it's still an unsafe and unstable environment for both them and the children they could raise.
Children will believe almost anything we tell them when they're young. So why give children the impression that same-sex relationships offer the same advantages as opposite-sex relationships when it's not true? And why would we want to mislead children into thinking that same-sex relationships are safe and secure when it's so clear that they're not? They are more violent, more unhealthy, and more unstable than their heterosexual counterparts.
Men and women are made for each other physically, emotionally, and spiritually. I am a witness to how successful and permanent a relationship between a man and woman can be when they give each other extraordinary care.
Traditional marriages have suffered a body blow lately because our culture has failed to teach us the meaning of extraordinary care in marriage. And the same cultural changes that led to uncaring marriages also helped create the legal changes that made infidelity and divorce more common. Today, the success of marriage is at an all-time low when it comes to acheiving its potential. But in spite of its failure, heterosexual marriage is still doing far better than its same-sex counterpart.
If men and women would give each other the extraordinary care they promise at the time of marriage, our society would not be so disillusioned with marriage, and as a result we wouldn't even be considering same-sex marriage these days. And we wouldn't be seeing much infidelity or divorce either. If our marriages were to be characterized by extraordinary care, the other three elements of marriage would be easy for everyone to understand and accept.
But since we've come so far in destroying three of the essential elements of traditional marriage, I'm delighted that the risk of losing the fourth element has finally drawn the public's attention to traditional marriage. Perhaps this effort to stop further erosion in marriage will eventually help restore the other elements that been missing. If that happens, we will have helped create the quailty of marriage that will make our children happier, healthier, and more successful than we could have ever imagined." Can Gays and Lesbians Become Heterosexual?
I've heard most of the arguments used by gays and lesbians against the possibility of changing their sexual orientation. But I know from my counseling experience that it is possible. I've seen many who were same-sex oriented. It's possible for these individuals to be just as attracted to and just as much in love with someone of the opposite sex.
The reverse is also true. Those who are attracted to the opposite sex can become attracted to the same sex. In fact, most of us can become sexually attracted to almost anything or anyone under certain conditions. Eliminate attractive opposite-sex alternatives, and people find that they can respond sexually to whatever happens to be available.
That's why I'm so concerned about educational programs in schools that teach children that we are born to be either same-sex oriented or opposite-sex oriented. In those early years when children are very impressionable, they may be influenced to believe they are gay or lesbian simply because they experience some same-sex interest.
Quite frankly, most children at one time or another will find themselves sexually attracted to members of their own sex. If, as a result, they begin to focus their sexual attention on those of the same sex and create skills and neural pathways that make same-sex relationships far more satisfying than opposite-sex relationships, it's easy for them to think they were born to be gay. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. On the other hand, if they recognize such same-sex attraction as a natural response to certain circumstances but remain open to opposite-sex attractions that will also develop, they'll likely go on to pursue opposite-sex relationships that ultimately will provide the stability and fulfillment they're looking for.
Sexual orientation is not determinded by birth but rather by choice. The truth is that we are all capable of expressing our sexuality in ways that we haven't even considered yet.
People can become sexually oriented to just about anyone or anything. And they can change that orientation if there is good reason to do so. In the case of gays and lesbians, a change to opposite-sex orientation can help them achieve more fulfilling relationships for themselves. And it provides the best opportunity to raise happy and successful children as well. Mrs. W
FWW ~ 47 ~ MeFBH ~ 50 ~ MrWonderingDD ~ 17 Dday ~ 2005 ~ Recovered
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 554
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 554 |
Thank you MyRev! Believe me, I understand why a black and white view of these things is sometimes easier and sometimes better, but especially in matters of personal choices, there is much gray in the world, and I think personal freedom needs to be upheld more than laws designed to make choices for us.
I can’t convince anyone that my moral compass is a good one, but I don’t think the degree of bad decision-making involved with being with Coho means that I’m without morals or unfit to be a father. I simply don’t accept that. I have asked for forgiveness, I have been granted forgiveness, and I have paid and paid and paid for any moral ambiguity I allowed myself in that decision. I will learn from it. I think this is a different issue, but there is some moral ambiguity here too and I need to listen to that. I think it has much more to do with not hurting someone else unnecessarily and not healing my wounds than betraying my non-existent marriage.
These arguments against gay marriage based on gender role models is probably the strongest one, I agree with many of those reasons. Under that logic though, do we make divorce illegal, or out of wedlock childbearing illegal? The world is not black and white. I whole-heartedly agree that it stinks that children only learn about familial values through their parents, good or bad. I would hope that a gay couple raising children would see the importance of including strong role models of both genders for their children. I'm sure many do. I would maintain that a dedicated gay couple is 100 times more qualified to raise kids than the crack wh*re who has babies every other year. Nobody stops her from being married or popping out as many kids as she wants.
I think marriage is what the couple agrees to. It's not a blanket standard that forces everyone to conform or you cannot partake.
Anyway, we could make strong arguments for either side until we're blue in the face. I think this issue is divisive when it doesn't need to be. There are other debates that make much more sense to me, like abortion. I think the shades of gray involved in that issue are very very difficult and SHOULD be debated. Gay marriage? It's a no brainer to me. Trying to force people to be good parents is no more effective with gay couples than it is with straight couples. Keeping the simple privilege of marriage out of reach to a whole segment of our society is simple bigotry in my opinion.
Last edited by ZenWolf; 05/05/09 12:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 543
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 543 |
ZW, FWIW, I totally agree with you.
Two of mine and my H's greatest friends are in a same sex marriage. They are good loving people who live good lives have never hurt anyone and both are loved by many. I refuse to believe that their love is wrong and I can also say that I wouldn't change either of them. They are both wonderful kind people who should not have to change. There are no children in the R but they are both Godparents to many of their friends' children.
It is my belief that LOVE is a great gift, they share a genuine committed love and it is not my place to judge their love. I also do not believe that it is necessary to condemn someone because of their sexuality. What goes on in the privacy of a bedroom, so long as no-one is being hurt in any way is not mine or anyone elses business.
That is my belief and other people are perfectly entitled to their own beliefs. NO-ONE can tell another that they KNOW their beliefs are WRONG, surely that is a disrespecful judgement.
Oh and to get back on topic, I too think it is too early in your healing to start dating again. Not for any moral reason but just because you need to be fully recovered before you put yourself out there again. You don't need to get hurt again and you certainly don't want to be the cause of someone elses hurt.
No harm though in having loads of good platonic friendships with emotionally healthy people. When the time comes to start dating again, you'll be a much wiser person, more able to spot the damaged women who are not good for you or anyone.
Good luck to you ZW.
Me - BW
FWH - BB -(PA Jul 08 - Aug 08)
D-Day - 8 Aug 2008
Recovering nicely
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,772
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,772 |
The only thing black-and-white to me is that we were discussing when/if you, ZW should date at this point. How we got sidetracked into gay marriage is beyond me!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 554
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 554 |
Aaaaaaah, Coho is being a scary monster again today. Asking me to be friends. Saying I am being silly. Disgusting monster.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,249
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,249 |
I think it is important to be civil for the sake of the children but I wouldn't describe it as friends. JMO
Over it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,772
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,772 |
I agree with SS2. It's possible to be civil--preferable even. But friends? Nope.
Tell her that 'silly' is her inability to keep her clothes on around OM.
Last edited by OurHouse; 05/05/09 02:53 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 543
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 543 |
Aaaaaaah, Coho is being a scary monster again today. Asking me to be friends. Saying I am being silly. Disgusting monster. Ask her to define friendship? See what she says... Fir me, this is a good definition..... One who multiplies joys, divides grief and whose honesty is inviolable
Me - BW
FWH - BB -(PA Jul 08 - Aug 08)
D-Day - 8 Aug 2008
Recovering nicely
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025 |
Aaaaaaah, Coho is being a scary monster again today. Asking me to be friends. Saying I am being silly. Disgusting monster. How intolerant you're becoming. As you said yourself, the "commitment" in your relationship is over. You've even dated others yourself. She (and OM) are consenting adults no longer hurting anyone else. They aren't breaking any laws and the marriage is over, despite lacking the piece of paper saying so. Heck...OM is doing no more than what you did with Coho...dating a woman that's separated from her husband. Why is she to be held to a black and white standard and not you???? Didn't Coho's first husband forgive you??? Monster, indeed.  Mr. Wondering
Last edited by MrWondering; 05/05/09 04:11 PM.
FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering)
DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered
"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 642
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 642 |
Aaaaaaah, Coho is being a scary monster again today. Asking me to be friends. Saying I am being silly. Disgusting monster. How intolerant you're becoming. As you said yourself, the "commitment" in your relationship is over. You've even dated others yourself. She (and OM) are consenting adults no longer hurting anyone else. They aren't breaking any laws and the marriage is over, despite lacking the piece of paper saying so. Heck...OM is doing no more than what you did with Coho...dating a woman that's separated from her husband. Why is she to be held to a black and white standard and not you???? Didn't Coho's first husband forgive you??? Monster, indeed. Mr. Wondering Your implication that ZW is a monster on the order of Coho is I think is a stretch, and that is what you are implying. ZW was duped into his original relationship with Coho and expressed sincere remorse for the origins of their relationship. He is now seriously questioning his position of even having a coffee with another female and is asking for advice here. His questioning and asking for advice has apparently caused him to see and appreciate the advice and wisdom of those telling him to wait before dating others until he can fix himself. Yes, he has posed hypotheticals back and forth as he sought answers. One of his primary concerns is his unwillingness to endanger the feelings of those he might form friendships with. That is not what Coho did. You may be one of the real vets here Mr. W, and I am indeed happy that you and Mrs. W are healed and recovered. I am sure ZW can benefit from your advice, but adding sarcastic smiley faces and implying that his having coffee with another woman and then having serious internal conflict over the whole thing is on a par with his near-psychopathological WW is a bit too much I believe. And I am a pretty much black and white kind of guy when it comes to what is right and what is wrong. I also think the piece of paper from the state and church is important but maybe we just disagree on the approach.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686 |
He's married.
And dated.
That makes him a WS.
End of story.
[I'm verryyy black and white]
One year becomes two, two years becomes five, five becomes ten and before you know it, you've wasted your whole life on a problem you can't solve. That's one way to spend your life. -rwinger
I will not spend my life this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 642
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 642 |
He's married.
And dated.
That makes him a WS.
End of story.
[I'm verryyy black and white] And I agree with your assessment. Just glad you neither called him a monster nor added smiley faces.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 11
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 11 |
Seems to me Zens Marriage is over and hes just waiting for the paper work to get sorted out.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686 |
Thank you.
I'm still pretty young, so getting out of the habit of using smilies galore is hard to manage.
Frankly--he's been both an OM and a WS...and justifying his WS-ness.
I don't see much hope for this marriage or any other HEALTHY relationship for ZW of any sort.
One year becomes two, two years becomes five, five becomes ten and before you know it, you've wasted your whole life on a problem you can't solve. That's one way to spend your life. -rwinger
I will not spend my life this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025 |
"I" am not calling him a monster. His thinking on Coho's behavior is right on...according to MY beliefs. What I'm asking him to consider is that pursuant to his stated standards and beliefs...is he actually being a monster? Zen said above: I think I am speaking with folks who have a very conservative Christian legalistic view of the world. That is fine, your beliefs are yours and there is much good in them. I don't share many of those beliefs and I ask you to respect that. I was asked to respect his beliefs and in so doing I'm questioning his seemingly rigid and intolerant attitude towards his wife's current behavior. Why is what she is doing TODAY, morally wrong and unacceptable according to Zen, not me?? Since HE said and behaved as though the marriage is over, I'm guessing the first defense is the children are being hurt...but what about Coho's now 14 year old son from her first marriage...wasn't HE just as hurt? His "hurt" didn't matter the first time around for Zen so why does it get put into the equation this time. You see...the only real authentic objection I can see Zen having pursuant to his stated beliefs is that it's wrong now because it's happening to him. Morality based strictly upon individual "feelings" doesn't amount to much else. Mr. Wondering
FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering)
DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered
"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 554
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 554 |
Here we go again. I'm glad that all the wonderful things I've gotten from this forum can be screwed up by a few smug preachers. I guess I'll just try to ignore you guys before I completely give up and go elsewhere which I'm sure would make your day.
Fine, some of us are black and white types, some are shades of gray types. Some of us are republicans, some are democrats. Some of us are insulting and legalistic, others try to help and learn and accept other points of view.
I need to grow a thicker skin. Wonderings and Karmarose, I'm officially ignoring you. Hope some of the more tolerant will continue to be helpful to me. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108 |
Zen, Just because Coho is a ding bat please consider the confusion you are subjecting your children to if you start dating. How can you explain to young children that what Coho is doing vs what you are would be doing by dating is any different? You really expect young children to understand your fine line rationale of what qualifies as adultery?  If you are having a cup of coffee with a woman and that's all there is to it then I would not qualify that as a date to begin with. If you are looking for something with romantic intention then that's another story. Think about the example you are setting for your children. They already have a monster mother to deal with and don't need the added confusion of trying to figure out if you mean what you say.
BW - me
exWH - serial cheater
2 awesome kids
Divorced 12/2011
Many a good man has failed because he had a wishbone where his backbone should have been.
We gain strength, and courage, and confidence by each experience in which we really stop to look fear in the face... we must do that which we think we cannot.
--------Eleanor Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686 |
MORE TOLERANT?
If you are looking for support for your lack of action and your justifying your dating you are not going to find it here!
One year becomes two, two years becomes five, five becomes ten and before you know it, you've wasted your whole life on a problem you can't solve. That's one way to spend your life. -rwinger
I will not spend my life this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 642
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 642 |
Here we go again. I'm glad that all the wonderful things I've gotten from this forum can be screwed up by a few smug preachers. I guess I'll just try to ignore you guys before I completely give up and go elsewhere which I'm sure would make your day.
Fine, some of us are black and white types, some are shades of gray types. Some of us are republicans, some are democrats. Some of us are insulting and legalistic, others try to help and learn and accept other points of view.
I need to grow a thicker skin. Wonderings and Karmarose, I'm officially ignoring you. Hope some of the more tolerant will continue to be helpful to me. Thanks. Put people on ignore because you disagree? If the W's weren't trying to be helpful they would not bother to post. I just disagreed with the tone and tenor of the help at the time. Listening to people that agree with you all the time won't give you the proper perspective to make good decisions.
Last edited by sickwithworry; 05/05/09 05:51 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108 |
You see...the only real authentic objection I can see Zen having pursuant to his stated beliefs is that it's wrong now because it's happening to him. Morality based strictly upon individual "feelings" doesn't amount to much else. Because it's worth repeating: You see...the only real authentic objection I can see Zen having pursuant to his stated beliefs is that it's wrong now because it's happening to him. Morality based strictly upon individual "feelings" doesn't amount to much else.
BW - me
exWH - serial cheater
2 awesome kids
Divorced 12/2011
Many a good man has failed because he had a wishbone where his backbone should have been.
We gain strength, and courage, and confidence by each experience in which we really stop to look fear in the face... we must do that which we think we cannot.
--------Eleanor Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
1 members (1 invisible),
465
guests, and
59
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
