We don't need to know any more than what he presented. All he needs to know is that they promote affairs and don't possess traits that most folks would want in a friend. That says it all.

And I don't know if I would forbid my kids from seeing his kids. That was not the issue. Maybe not, but if he ends his relationship with this couple, it may not be convenient to continue. Different issue entirely. The issue was associating with these people as a family.


Being "honest" about wrongdoing does not right that wrong, it often just means the person has no shame. That should not impress you.


It is a parents JOB to teach children to judge right from wrong. Children have to be taught what constitutes a person of CHARACTER and choose their friends accordingly. This is WHAT ADULTS do in real life, so I have no idea what you mean when you say they will "be in for a rude awakening" when they grow up. Do you imagine that exposing them to crack wh*res and drug dealers will somehow help their maturity? sheesh They will be PREPARED for adult life if they are taught how to choose friends WISELY and avoid nefarious people. That is a PARENTAL obligation. One does not PREPARE children for life by allowing them to hang out with crack wh*res and drug dealers and other bad influences. Bad influences cause great harm to children.

As much as you abhor Christians? Your religious bigotry is coming through, GBH. Perhaps you should actually PRACTICE some of that "acceptance and diversity" you blather about. Or does that not apply to Christians? Your intolerance and hatred of Christians is quite scary.

NS,

This is an excellent topic. My FWH two older sister's had affairs with MM. I found out during my FWH's last A that he overheard his 3 older sisters speaking when he was around 13/14 yrs old and they were discussing that MIL had an A. FWH also brought out that his dad woke him up when he was about 5 yrs old and held him crying (while drunk) saying no matter what anybody says, you are my son and don't believe them. He was confused but this obviously made a huge impression on him. When he heard his sister's speak, he put things together and wondered if FIL was his biological dad. FIL passed on from Alzheimers when FWH was 28, FIL was 68.

Thus, FWH FOO made it seem acceptable to him, even though he knew it was wrong, to have A's. Also, 3 of his four sisters have been divorced, one was D'd twice, M'd 3 times. FWH also recently admitted to me that this lead him to think that M's were disposable and didn't last.

On my side one of my older sister's won't admit to it, but it certainly appears that the break-up of her 1st M (25 yrs) is due to a A with her now 2nd H. FWH also uses this example of something he saw and saw our families slow acceptance of the 2nd M as rationalization for his A. (Eventually in his fantasy OW and him would get M'd, I don't really know how my family fits in as I'm sure they wouldn't have anything to do with him if he was an Ex!).

So while I can't change the fact that one of the situations above is my sister, I can say that since this happened about 7 years ago, she has been re-married 5 years, she has distanced herself from the family. And this second marriage has been rocky from the start, no one would be surprised if it ended. I also can't change my in-laws, although I don't have to hang with them. My MIL is 77 and I'm certainly not going to pass judgement on her and I do t encourage our 3 sons to visit with her. That being said, the lack of moral compass and values on my FWH side bothers me, the A's aren't the only outcome of this lack. I didn't really know his family prior to getting M'd, FWH kept it that way on purpose he admits. Thus, I assumed it was a similar background to mine, we were both from Catholic middle-class families. Never assume!

I couldn't knowingly be friends with two people who had an A, this stuff is so hurtful that I wouldn't have any respect for them. You can't choose your family but you can choose your friends.

ML... I can't think of ANYONE who twists my words more than you do.


The part of my post that you refused to acknowledge was where I said "I can understand wanting to shield children from dangers like drug dealers or sexual preditors." You even included it in the quote but won't give me credit for that caveat!!! Of course no rational parent would want to expose kids to crack ****** and drug dealers. But there's a big difference between crack ******/drug dealers and people who once made a poor choice in life but may have reformed themselves into a life of greater integrity -- not that J&J fall into that category as we have yet to see any remorse shown -- but it is possible to recover from poor choices and go on to live a moral life. At least I think so; perhaps you disagree.


Where in my post did I say I hate/abhor Christians? Show a post from GBH where I come out and say that. For your benefit, I have bolded the modifier some that appears before "Christians" in that post to prove I was not referring to ALL people of that religion. I have friends and relatives who are Christian and I love them all. But they do not claim to have a monopoly on morality as certain Christians here have. They also have considerable tolerance for people of different backgrounds.

If you don't think there are Christians out there practicing hate and intolerance, then I suggest your look up Westboro Baptist Chruch On Google or in Wikipedia. Those people call themselves Christians. My own home state has a Christian Civic League that is very active politically and wishes to limit the basic human rights of people who do not embrace the league's own ideals. Those are just two examples of how some Christians practice hatred and intolerance.

I am using the principles that you are PROPOSING here, GBH, but you don't seem to understand that. A bad influence is a bad influence. If you throw out standards, you must throw them ALL out. And a GOOD PARENT does not expose his children to bad influences. He protects him from them and teaches him to AVOID THEM. That is not putting him in a "cocoon," that is being a RESPONSIBLE PARENT. That is something that adults practice in their OWN LIVES.


This is not the issue.


GBH, yet you don't practice tolerance yourself. Strangely, you demand it of others. And apparently believe that you have the "morality" necessary to judge them. Where is your "tolerance" for "certain" Christians who "claim to have a monopoly on morality?" How come YOU can practice this and they can't?

If you are going to blather on about "tolerance," "acceptance and diversity" then you need to PRACTICE THAT yourself if you want to be taken seriously. Where is the ACCEPTANCE and diversity of those folks, huh? Practice what ya preach, GBH, lest you just end up looking like a hypocrite. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

How is this helping Notsleeping???

GBH and ML, many people look to you two for wisdom to help them make it through a day. You two have lots to give and I for one am very glad you both are still around. You help me, pushed me and held my hand when needed so please stop this - you are both better than this.

M2L

M2L, I beg your pardon?

M2L, there is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning GBH's sarcastic challenge to others on this thread. If she is going to challenge others on this forum, as she did, she should be prepared to defend those remarks. And rather than being "unhelpful," it is very helpful for others to see her challenge questioned. There is nothing less than "better" about that. This is how people LEARN.

In order to not expose your children to any bad influences, ML, you'd basically have to keep them at home and watch over them 24/7/365. Surely you don't expect to do that.

Bad influences are everywhere - at school, at the mall, at sporting events, at community "teen centers" established to give kids a "good" place to hang out instead of the streets. Heck, I bet there are even bad influences at church - we all know of affairs that happen between church members, right?

The point I've been trying to make is that kids need to know how to identify a bad influence and respond appropriately. If they're never exposed, they might not know how to respond. Obviously, if there are real grave dangers like a crack dealer or pedophile around, then you try to keep their distance -- you don't even want them exposed to that.

But regarding NS's dilemma, I don't necessarily put all the people who once had affairs (whether they're J&J or anyone else) in the same category as a crack ****** or drug dealer. I'm not saying the A was right because it clearly was not. But like an earlier poster said, if we were to cut off contact with anyone who's had an A, then a lot of us would have a lot fewer friends, doncha think?

Regardless of the outcome of this, I think that NS might be able to turn this into an opportunity to teach his children right from wrong when it comes to marriage relationships. Just like my parents gave me an opportunity to learn right from wrong by sending me to public school. Through public school, I was exposed to a wide range of students and activities -- those activities included everything from wholesome stuff like drama club and band (school sanctioned). But through friends met at school, I was also exposed to not-so-wholesome stuff like beer drinking and pot smoking. Amazingly enough, I think I turned out okay.

I don't think NS's decision is as cut and dried as you do. But like I said, regardless, he might be able to turn it into an opportunity to teach his kids something, and that would be a good thing.

I should probably stay out of this discussion, but it's "hit home" on a couple of points, and I feel I need 2 speak my mind.

I'm an "atheologist": Not an atheist, because I'm very spiri2al, but definitely not a supporter of organized religion. That's not a slight against others who are. I'm just not. Some of my best friends are Christians/Jews/Budhists/Church of the Subgenious... Well, never mind...

Personally, I'd have 2 distance myself from "friends" in an A marriage. But I've had a closer-2-home experience with this kind of thing that leaves me, still, somewhat confused.

Up until a 2ple years ago, I coached with an MB-trained marriage coach, specializing in infidelity recovery, whom I learned during the coaching was married 2 their former A-partner, who cheated on them for the 2nd time during their A-marriage. I stopped coaching with this person a 2ple months later.

Don't get me wrong. This person has some amazing qualities, and some hard-won insight. But I found myself wondering a 2ple of things:
*number A: What business do I have knowing that kind of intimate detail of my coach's personal life?
*letter 2: Why is this person a coach for people suffering from infidelity?

I haven't been able 2 satisfactorily answer my own 2uestions, except 2 stop coaching. But I stopped coaching as much (probably more) because it was a waste of my time and money 2 unilaterally try 2 save my marriage, than because I had "issues" with my coach's moral choices.

Fast-forward 2 2day:
*We're in some sort of recovery, dealing with a preposterous lawsuit from my SIL, which has both rallied us 2 support one another, and threatened 2 split us apart (the insanity of the whole si2ation I won't go in2 here, but it's at least AS CRAZY as my experience dealing with my W's A was).

*I'm 53 years old, about 2 2rn 54. I'll be dead soon enough.

LOVE IS A CHOICE, it's NOT a FEELING.

We should all make our choices based in our sense of morality - from the head, not the heart (though that cliche gives undue credit 2 feelings, and I believe that the heart can speak from a foundation of morality, which is choice-based).

I chose not 2 continue coaching with the A-marriage coach. I wish them well, I just don't have much time left in my life 2 want 2 spend it working with someone of that moral background. If I were in an A-marriage, I certainly wouldn't advise others on surviving infidelity (what could I advise, after all - tolerance??), and I would probably "require" myself 2 end the A-marriage as a matter of principle.

But I would likely never enter in2 an A-marriage because of my beliefs around morality.

After all, I'm almost 54, and I'll be dead soon.

-ol' 2long

You are doing a better job at making ML's point than your own. Your child could not identify this bad influenece if it was befriended by his parents. The way the child is able to learn the moral lesson in this is by his parents setting the example so that he can recognize and act accordingly when the time comes.

Also... no one here has said anything about a remorseful person that has had an A. There is no reason to keep those people out of our lives. Heck, i am friends with my ex-wife.... but be certain that I would NOT have befriended her and her new H if she married her A partner. That shows a lack of remorse... plus these people have no shame about their actions... they came right out and told their little.. "how we met" story. YOU, GBH have made this discussion about something it was not.

But, this doesn't mean that you PURPOSELY send your children into bad influences, thereby seeming to condone them. Sure, children will see bad influences, that is a FAR CRY from condoning them. A responsible parent PROTECTS their child from bad influences as much as possible. Doesn't mean that every bad influence can be avoided, but the parent has a moral obligation to TRY. Exposing children to bad influences is irresponsible, it does not make them stronger adults, but leaves them vulnerable.


Children do not have to go to a CRACK HOUSE and hang out with crack heads in order to know how to RESPOND. Just as I don't have to hang out with murderers in order to know how to handle that. The way you "respond" is to avoid them. Again, being exposed to bad influences does not HELP a child, but harms them.


I would hope so. Because that is certainly not the caliber of person I would have for a "friend." I have cut off all contact with friends/acquaintences who are actively carrying on affairs and/or CONDONE affairs. And I seriously question the judgment of those who DON'T. I think they are WORSE than crackheads. Crackheads usually only harm themselves, adulterers always harm others.

On the other hand, I proudly count as my friends, those who had an affair and CHANGED THEIR LIFE and made amends to their victims. Those are honorable people of character who had the courage and honor to do the right thing. But, I will not have anything to do my friend, Theresa, who is actively destroying her marriage and her family with her sleazy, filthy affair. She is not friend material as long as she engages in destructive, cruel behavior.


Oh, I don't think it's a complicated situation at all if you just apply a little simple common sense to it. It all comes down to using some common sense and good judgment when choosing our friends. If we want friends who are loyal, trustworthy and decent, we should make sure they practice those principles in their own lives. If they don't, then they are not friend material. This is not rocket science.

Threadjack to 2Long: I have missed you, my friend! Excellent post! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Which begs the question, just how many children have you raised?

Wow...for a change, it's not me creating a ruckus here! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

**snort** <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Hehehe, thought you'd get a kick out of that, ML. This is one of those situations where I'm just glad I'm not IN that boat.

Mel:

About this:

We don't need to know any more than what he presented. All he needs to know is that they promote affairs and don't possess traits that most folks would want in a friend. That says it all.


DOES IT?

Jane says her Ex-H is a "Loser"

We do not know anything else about Ex-H. But according to the above, it would be ok to hang out with the "Loser" but not Jane. The "Loser" could have been lazy, spent her money, drank all night long and been abusive, etc., but at least he DIDN"T SLEEP AROUND!

Jane may be justifiying her actions. Jane may be scum of the earth. As a Wayward, how could they ever be thought of as anything else?

Jane could have waited for M to end before finding John. Sometimes things get out of order. But Jane got off the fence quickly it sounds like.

Like I said before, not MB rules. But Jane and Ex-H didn't come here. NotSleeping did, and asked a good question.

Most of the betrayed spouses around here are good folks stuck with lousy Waywards. Some Waywards get it, some never do. But not all Betrayed Spouses are a pure as the driven snow. And some Wayward, although wrong, just want an out of a bad situation. Yes, us WW may be hard-wired to take the easy way out, thus it is a defect. But for some, we earn the F. And our Betrayed Spouses change a little too.

And MEDC:

Your line to me:

It has nothing to do with the scripture that LG likes to throw around at times.

The only thing remotely scripture I used was about casting stones. And outside of that, scripture is rather foreign to me.

Another thing Mel:

Because that is certainly not the caliber of person I would have for a "friend." I have cut off all contact with friends/acquaintences who are actively carrying on affairs and/or CONDONE affairs. And I seriously question the judgment of those who DON'T. I think they are WORSE than crackheads. Crackheads usually only harm themselves, adulterers always harm others.

On the other hand, I proudly count as my friends, those who had an affair and CHANGED THEIR LIFE and made amends to their victims. Those are honorable people of character who had the courage and honor to do the right thing.

I think this statement sums it all up. We accept them for what they do. Good or bad. We throw the bad out of our life and make the good comfortable.

Just my lousy .02 <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

BTW: I am not picking on your MEL! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

"Jane could have waited for M to end before finding John. Sometimes things get out of order. But Jane got off the fence quickly it sounds like."

You got that right LG. Jane got off the fence so quickly that John was F'ing her while she was carrying her husband's child.

Repentant FWS = Friend Material

Non-repentant WS = Not Friend Material