Good point.<P>As an analogy, I think the reason all the churches are empty these days (it's not the astounding lack of evidence, most people don't need or want evidence), is because they spend so much time childishly describing all the pain and suffering God is going to deal out to all the sinners. Suddenly everybody wakes up and says, wait a minute, I'm a sinner too. Try forgiveness. It does you more good than them.<P>In the words of the big J.C. himself, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." We'll be seeing a lot of us walk away from the party right about now I bet, just like the stoning party did back then.<P>The desire to see someone else suffer is always childish. It is the fruit of anger, jealousy, and insecurity. The desire to see someone grow is of a mature heart. That is the fruit of generosity, love, and forgiveness.<BR>

Mitzi<P>My intention was not to insult or hurt anyone by this post. To be very honest I didn't even think of the people who post here, who have committed adultery, as being included in that group since they are here trying to work on their marriages.<P>I was NOT looking at ways to *punish* aduterors. I was looking at deterants.<P>I would think anyone who has committed adultery might have excellent input into what would have kept them from crossing that line.<P>I was under the impression the folks who post here are trying to work on their marriages using Dr. Harley's methods, at least in part. Am I wrong in this belief? I would think anyone who is here, that has committed adultery, understands what they did is wrong and most likely feel terrible about their actions, and are trying to reverse the situation. These are not the people this post applies to. It is more so the people who have an affair, boast about it, leave their families, and do NOT return.<P>If I offended anyone I do apologize. <P>FC<P><BR>nonplused<P>Again, punishment was not my motivation. <P>I was hoping to get some ideas as to what would be good deterants be they, social, economic, or moral. Grass roots campaigns have started in stranger places than web sites. <P>Years ago OW/M were ashamed of their actions and affairs with married people were kept in the closet. Today OW/M have their own web sites to brag about their conquests. When fault was present in divorce law the adulterous spouse paid dearly finacially and generaly lost custody of their children. Today many walk away leaving their spouse in emotional and financial ruin and have the kids for overnight visitation while they sleep with their lover in the next room, while still married to their children's other parent. These things tell me there is something VERY wong in our society and our judicial system. <P>No, one cannot make people have morals. However society as a whole and the courts can do things to encourage people to think twice by the way their actions are percieved and dealt with.<P>I meant no harm to anyone.<P>Again I apologize for stepping on any toes.<P>FC<P><BR>

A friend of mine had his first W cheat on him,and take half of everything(community property state).When he married his second W,he had a pre-nup written up that states whoever cheats on who,only gets 10% of their assets.Sounds fair to me,and a good deterrant. --Murph

exellent point K it is that simple.<P>------------------<BR>BB<BR>

FC,<P>I didn't think the original intention was to hurt anyone's feelings. It was worded as basically a question about society. I know that alot of the betrayed who post here have feelings of anger about the OP. I'm one of them. <BR>I do know that some of the posts have been upsetting to some of the betrayers that read and post here. And that's understandable too. <P>I just thought that the tone of some of the posts was a little harsh. And could be taken the wrong way by some. I didn't mean to imply that the question couldn't be asked. It is a very thought provoking question. <P>And I agree with K. Instead of blaming anyone for the infidelity in marriages, I think an MB course or something similar needs to be a requirement for anyone who wants to get married. It would save a lot of pain.<P>No hard feelings at all, FC!<P>Mitzi

I wish fingers crossed was the judge in my up-coming divorce!

Don't worry about offending someone by what you say-it will inhibit you from saying what you think, expressing how you feel and keep you from giving your opinions.<P>This forum is to help us repair broken marriages and to help us heal ourselves and each other, to give comfort, support and advice to others. It is also here to allow us to vent and rage. None of us want to hurt or offend other MB Members. And I know it is not anyone's intent to do so simply by expressing their thoughts and feelings.<BR>Don't worry about it! Say what you think and feel. Rage and vent if you must. that's what the board is all about...to help us get through this and to find comfort and answers from each other.<P>None of us should have to walk on eggshells scared to say what's on our minds for fear of offending or upsetting someone. We're all grown ups here and we can take it. it's just someone's opinion and they are entitled to it. We're not delicate little flowers. We are more like warriors surviving the battle.<P>Unless someone has been vicious and to harm someone was the intent, no one need apologize for what they think or feel.

Hi K!<P>As usual, your advice is sound. Ya gotta be careful about that pre-wedding counseling, though. If it's TOO realistic, no one would ever get married!<P>Ooops! 'Cynical Doug' got loose again!<P>"Bad Doug! Bad boy! Now, get back in your cage!... Bad Dougie!..."<P>There. I'm OK now.

There are some truly terriffying suggestions here...<BR>I am very glad we do not deal so harshly with people for there mistakes as many of these posts would suggest. I would not like to see people pay for thier mistakes by not being able to get employment, destroying thier ability to function fiscially in the world, or by tieing a permanent yoke around their neck. People make mistakes. Repeat offenders? I think these people build up enough bad karma that they get it hard in the end anyhow.<P>------------------<BR>"Remeber that every now and then you need to stop and eat the roses."<BR>-Bill The Cat

FC - Just to answer your question. Some statistics I've read indicate that adultery is a factor in over 90% of marriages that have lasted 5 years or longer. And based on the stories I've read on this and other forums, I'm inclined to agree. This means there's something seriously wrong with the institution of marriage itself, and that it needs to change radically. (I have a lot of ideas that I'm not going to go into right now.)<P>The problem with the "scarlet letter" approach is that, in most cases, the adultery remains a secret. The few adulterers who are exposed becomes scapegoats and the problem is, effectively, swept under the rug. (Probably the person sewing the letter on an adulteress is sitting on just as bad a secret.)<P>Anyway, my $.02. Regards and blessings,<P>--Wex

All of the methods described above presumes that a person having an affair is actually in their right mind and is always thinking about the consequences before hand. From what I've seen, people having affairs are not thinking. <P>The death penalty has done little or nothing to stop murder, for instance. <P>Also, infidelity is just one of many risks one undertakes when getting married, along with bankruptcy, serious illness, and so on. That is life,unfortunately. You roll the dice, you take your chances. With all of the information I've gleaned from this website, I'm surprised anybody gets married anymore.<P>I just heard the news that tests on Thomas Jefferson's DNA proves that he was the father to at least one (and maybe six!) of a slave woman's children. Infidelity is not a new thing but our access to information (worldwide) probably makes it seem like it is much more prevalent.

Hi Guys,<P>Youre not going to like this. I have a serious answer for once.<P>The question asked was what methods would decrease adultery?<P>1. Honest comunication between H and W.<P>2. Understanding completely what your S is trying to convey to you.<P><BR>Val says she tried to tell me she was starting to stray. I didnt get it. If she would have said I'm going to start seeing a contractor, I believe I may have had a better clue as to what was about to occur and might have had a chance at fixing things then. <P>It seems the thread is taking off to a point where some are dragging a cross out ready to "nail" the betrayers.<P>"They" do not get off scott free. They do finally realize what they have done to us, our children and other family members.<P>Reality may not hit them today, tomorrow, or next week. But, it will hit them.<P>It's time to heal and not to hurt. I know it's tough. There are a fews days where I would like to have my cousin [the Pagan] and his gang drag the OM for a long ride on a short chain behind a pick up truck. The only problem with that is it probably would not help my situation and no one has a pick up in the gang. It would be more than obvious if I loaned then one of my ambulances to drag him.<P> <P>------------------<BR>"It's not over till we say it's over! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? H*ll no!" Blutto...Animal House 1984<P>Wishing us all the Best.<P>Medic<P>

OK, I'm baited enough to give my two cents worth of an opinion on this <P>I think that the marriage institution has been sufficiently devalued in the last 50 or so years, to the point where it ranges with other consumer goods, marriage is no longer a sacred institution. It's too easy to get out of a marriage, even without a good reason, and society is in a way too accepting about divorces. Well, it didn't work, why try to fix it there is plenty of oppotunity to find happiness elsewhere, kind of thinking.<P>Many newly weds do not take the wows that they make seriously enough, since there's always an easy way out (unless you happen to marry the Catholic way). Do not misunderstand me, I think that it's reasonable to be able to get a divorce, I just think that it shouldn't be so easy and that people would have learned from childhood, that once they marry they owe to themselves, their spouse, their kids (if any) and to God to try the utmost to keep their wows and work on the marriage, instead of wanting out at the least sign of trouble. IMHO it's all about moralty both in each individual and in society at large, that need to change.<P>Maybe it's also too easy to get married, nobody gets to drive a car without a driver's license, but anybody can just enter a marriage ... Maybe what is needed is an obligatory marriage course, before being allowed to enter into matrimony.<P>------------------<BR>SadMan, who's not so sad anymore, but in a recovery<p>[This message has been edited by SadMan (edited January 27, 2000).]

Fingers Crossed,<BR>Get the Bible taught in school as it was when this country was formed.<P>We have veered away from the absolutes that exist in the Bible. That is where adultery is defined as wrong. From both sides we now konw why He said that it is wrong. <P>We need to focus on Him rather than ourselves. Serving others rather than being served.<P>Yes, I am passionate about what is going wrong in the world. However, it must all come to pass before it is all over. It's all in the Bible.<P>Someone posted about the punishment. In the OT the punishment was death by stonig for BOTH parties. That would be very painful and somewhat slow unless they got a good head shot early on during the stoning.<BR>------------------<BR><B><I>God Bless,<BR>Rob</I></B><P><p>[This message has been edited by professorg (edited January 27, 2000).]

The Bible? As a deterrent to adultery? I suppose David's 1500 wives and 3000 concubines doesn't constitute adultery technically. Well, the wives don't any way. The concubines probably do. But I don't think we should be teaching polygamy as an alternative to adultery. In the Bible, you've got daughters sleeping with their father, fathers secretly marrying off the wrong daughter so Isaac (I think it was him) has to work another 7 years to get the one he wanted (how would you feel if you were the first daughter by the end of that story?), David and Bathsheba, Samson and Delilah, prophets marrying prostitutes just to make a point, on and on. That would be like using the Bible to argue against war. Stay out of the Old Testament!!!!<P>If we use the New Testament we mostly have Paul as the authority on the subject, and he states clearly any really serious Christian wouldn't marry in the first place. Families have a nasty habit of interfering with full time dedication of your life to God. Besides, it's all giving in to temptation and weakness of the flesh and all that. But if you can't resist your urges, better to marry than be damned. I kind of like Paul's implication there. Marriage is a better alternative than going to hell. I know many married people who rank it about the same.<P>The purpose of separation of church and state in the US constitution was to get religion out of the government. Years of European history had shown that religion and despotism always tend to work as powerful allies to the detriment of freedom. Many of the founding fathers were not professing Christians, although most were religious. "Deism" was quite popular.<P>Anyway, if you want to put the Bible in the schools, then why not the Koran? And probably the Buddhist Tao as well. These people are just as entitled to their religion as anybody else. I don't know why anyone who believes in "Scientology" would go to school, they don't like thinking anyway, but you can bet they will want to be part of the new curriculum too. Then you have all the "New Age" followers, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, heck, probably an endless list of religions (2500 at last count) who would love to get at those young and impressionable minds. And the many agnostics out there who prefer their children not be infused with other people's speculations on the nature of God of course would rather no religious instruction at all.<P>My point is that, as there is no consensus what so ever in religious matters, introducing a religious program in the school system will always involve sacrificing the constitutional rights of one or more groups to please the majority. Religion is a personal matter based on faith and it has no place in public institutions dedicated to the instruction of fact.<P>Also, it is quite likely that at some point Christianity will not be the most common religion in the US, mostly due to immigration and a general "turning away" by US citizens. That day is a long way off but probably inevitable. If we imagine that day, do you want the dominant non-Christian religion stuffing their books into your kid's mind? Fair is fair.<P>I think there is only one solution to the problem of adultery: Get used to it. It is a family matter between a man and a woman, and the state doesn't have any interest in legislating bedroom behavior. Property matters and such are not intuitively connected. If you don't want your partner to cheat on you, it is your responsibility to choose your partner wisely and form a mutual agreement about the problem. But, in the end of the day, it is impossible to control another person, or to know them fully. People change and times change, and the person you are married to today may not be the person you married 15 years ago. Life is full of risk.<P>The real solution is to decide for yourself whether or not you want to be an adulterer, and then live up to your own standards. Running around forcing those standards on to other people isn't going to do any good. They have to see it for themselves. <P>Let's face it. The use of deterrents to prevent adultery is selfishly motivated so we can protect ourselves and control the behavior of another person, namely our spouse. If you were the adulterer, you would want rules to prevent vengeful behavior on the part of your spouse. Also you would want laws that prevent manipulation and control. Both parties remain equally entitled to their rights, so how do we solve this?<P>The so called "war on drugs" is probably the best recent example of the successful use of deterrents to enforce morals. We have people in the US being sentence to longer terms for simple marijuana possession than the guy in the next cell will actually serve for murder. So the deterrents are there. I think everyone would agree that the because of these deterrents, drug use in the US is in severe decline.<P>All contracts require a shotgun clause to bring about an equitable termination in the event of failure. Without the right to leave a marriage, there is just too much potential for the "non-adulterous" party to abuse their higher moral ground and manipulate their partner in a "power over" relationship. The dissolution of a marriage needs to be fair and equitable. This involves appropriate provisions for the care of any children, and a fair division of assets.<P>This 10% if you get caught thing is just going to give the private investigators the other 90%. Besides, it probably wouldn't hold in court anyway. And when you get caught, (it can happen to anybody), you are going to think it really sucks.<BR>

Okay here is my two cents worth. Society could decrease adultery. Now let me explain. We have become a society where there is no true consequences for doing things. We have been so concerned about hurting or damaging ones self esteeem but we have forgotten what self esteem really is. We slap the hand of people who do wrong tell them not to do it again because we are so worried about damaging their self esteem. Making one feel good about themselves does not allow them to hurt some one else. There is a need for consequences for our actions.<P>I will always feel that had the OW not come on to my H an affair would not have entered his mind and somewhere down the line our marraige would had gotten better. There is a reason for this that I will not go into. She has no respect nor felt any consequences for actions all of her life. Her parents have stated that they could not control her when she was a teen ager. I have problems with this. I am sure there were no rules or guidelines for her she was never made to feel that any action of hers had any consequences, there fore what ever she wanted to do was okay. She had ruined her marriage, her children, and now my marriage because she did or went after what ever she wanted with no thought but to waht made her feel good. Of course this never works because a person never really feels good about themselves until they are able to accept that there actions can and will cause hurt. And when they discover this they stop those actions. <P>I like some of the suggestions I have read here but most of them stem from the point that people need to take responsibility for their lives and realize for everything they do there is a consequence good or bad. Once we teach our children this then we will see a change.<P>Time to get off my soap box.<P>------------------<BR>di<P>

Oh, come on, Rob, you're smarter than that.<P>Just because you're spiritual doesn't mean you can't use your brain. Just because you're spiritual doesn't mean you have to come up with pat answers like that.<P>I know you're capable of better.<P>When I was a kid in the early 1960's, we still said the Lord's Prayer in school. And President Kennedy was boinking everything in sight, and my mother's best friend was being cheated on.<P>Let's not even get into whose prayer we're going to say. Sheesh, it was bad enough then, when all you had to worry about was the Jews (and I am one). Now you've got Buddhist, Hindus, Ba'hai, Taoists, Sikhs, Muslims, etc.<P>Oh yeah. I forgot. They don't count because they don't follow the One True Way.<P>And by the way, Rob, if Christian prayer is such a foolproof safeguard against infidelity, than how come there are so many Christian betrayers? Seems to me we have a new poster who's a betrayed -- and a pastor's wife.<P>Anyway, don't mean to be inflammatory, but this kind of pat answer just bugs me.<P>Now back to the subject at hand.<P>The bottom line: There are no easy answers. Everything people have come up with -- punishment, scarlet letters, whippings, canings, death penalty; and everything people are blaming it on -- Clinton, a secular society, hippies, television, movies (guilty as charged), the Bavarian Illuminati, you name it -- are all tainted by reductio ad absurdam. Oversimplified, pat explanations and answers to a complex problems.<P>Infidelity has been around as long as there have been people, and probably before. Only ducks mate for life instinctively, folks. The rest of us have to work harder. Marriage is many things, and it hasn't evolved as society has. It's a structure for ensuring the passing of property...a structure for ensuring that children will be taken care of. It's a means of companionship, regular sex, prepared meals, you name it.<P>It's easier to get married than it is to drive a car. And maybe it shouldn't be. <P>A friend just wrote me that she'd been to a wedding where the groom was crazy about the bride, but the bride married the groom because he was an OK guy and it seemed the right thing to do.<P>You know as well as I do where THAT'S heading. <P>We go into marriage with unrealistic expectations. We think it's "romantic." It isn't. We think it's easy. It isn't. We think it just "happens." It doesn't. <P>A successful marriage is a JOB. It's a good job, a rewarding job, but a job nonetheless. It DOESN'T just happen.

wow Dazed that was good<BR>Lesa<P>------------------<BR>"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and<BR> lean not unto thine own understanding." -Proverbs 3:5<BR>Take care and God Bless.<P> lms20ish@jobe.net

nonplused:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>The Bible? As a deterrent to adultery? I suppose David's 1500 wives and 3000 concubines doesn't constitute adultery technically. Well, the wives don't any way. The concubines probably do. But I don't think we should be teaching polygamy as an alternative to adultery. In the Bible, you've got daughters sleeping with their father, fathers secretly marrying off the wrong daughter so Isaac (I think it was him) has to work another 7 years to get the one he wanted (how would you feel if you were the first daughter by the end of that story?), David and Bathsheba, Samson and Delilah, prophets marrying prostitutes just to make a point, on and on. That would be like using the Bible to argue against war. Stay out of the Old Testament!!!!<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>The multiple wives and the concubines were MAN's idea, not God's idea. To populate the earth, incest was okay until it was banned by the laws that God gave Moses. Don't know which book it is in but it is there. Though I used the OT for the punishment, I was not saying that was the solution. We must take the Bible in it's entirety to solve the problem. God's plan was one man for one woman. The rest was MAN's idea which is related to man's perversion. Sin is the problem. God directed Hosea, the prophet, to marry a harlot to show MANKIND that He, God, would be kind and forgive if we, MANKIND, would repent and come back to Him.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>If we use the New Testament we mostly have Paul as the authority on the subject, and he states clearly any really serious Christian wouldn't marry in the first place. Families have a nasty habit of interfering with full time dedication of your life to God. Besides, it's all giving in to temptation and weakness of the flesh and all that. But if you can't resist your urges, better to marry than be damned. I kind of like Paul's implication there. Marriage is a better alternative than going to hell. I know many married people who rank it about the same.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>God is the one who bestows the gift of singleness and marriedness. Because our nature is sinful, all that which Paulwrote aboutis true. But if God is directing your path, it is possible to devote every aspect of your life to worshipping God. Every aspect of our lives MUST be given over to Him so that He is edified. In doing so, we edify ourselves because He blesses us as the result of being obedient children.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>The purpose of separation of church and state in the US constitution was to get religion out of the government.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Not true. It was to keep government from dictating how one is to worship the one true God. The Europeans system wanted one or the other: catholic or protestant.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Years of European history had shown that religion and despotism always tend to work as powerful allies to the detriment of freedom. Many of the founding fathers were not professing Christians, although most were religious. "Deism" was quite popular.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>There were few Diests. The majority were Christians. Diesm is well known because of Jefferson and Franklin who were the least religious of them all but most well known by most Americans.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Anyway, if you want to put the Bible in the schools, then why not the Koran? And probably the Buddhist Tao as well. These people are just as entitled to their religion as anybody else. I don't know why anyone who believes in "Scientology" would go to school, they don't like thinking anyway, but you can bet they will want to be part of the new curriculum too. Then you have all the "New Age" followers, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, heck, probably an endless list of religions (2500 at last count) who would love to get at those young and impressionable minds. And the many agnostics out there who prefer their children not be infused with other people's speculations on the nature of God of course would rather no religious instruction at all.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>All the documents written by the framers of our Constitution support Christianity. We have liberalized our beliefs to include these other religions. No, I am not knocking them because the final court of arbitration is God's word. It is not mine or anyone elses. It is His. He is the one who will say well done my good and faithful servant or get away from Me, I never knew you. These others can be taught as well. But to know the truth, you must study the truth. Satan is very cunning and knows significantly more than any human. He can trip us up but he can't trip up God; thus, we must allow God to direct our paths.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>My point is that, as there is no consensus what so ever in religious matters, introducing a religious program in the school system will always involve sacrificing the constitutional rights of one or more groups to please the majority. Religion is a personal matter based on faith and it has no place in public institutions dedicated to the instruction of fact.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Christianity is personal because it doesn't exist unless you have a person relationship with Jesus. Just as having a wonderful marriage requires work so does having a relationship with Jesus. This relationship is not religion. Religion is a term that is used to muddy the issue which has led to us being here on this forum. It boils down to MANKIND being sinful.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Also, it is quite likely that at some point Christianity will not be the most common religion in the US, mostly due to immigration and a general "turning away" by US citizens. That day is a long way off but probably inevitable. If we imagine that day, do you want the dominant non-Christian religion stuffing their books into your kid's mind? Fair is fair.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You are right because this is what the Bible says is going to happen though not directly. Yet, God says that Christianity is going to rule in the end. What happens between now and then is the path that must be trod by those who chose it. Who defines what is fair. If we leave it to each individual, then it is only what benefits the individual regardless of who gets hurt in the process. When you do as Jesus did, then you are always in a serving mode rather than a receiving mode. It is not about what you get in return, it is about doing what is best for everyone else. It requires us to be selfless.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I think there is only one solution to the problem of adultery: Get used to it. It is a family matter between a man and a woman, and the state doesn't have any interest in legislating bedroom behavior. Property matters and such are not intuitively connected. If you don't want your partner to cheat on you, it is your responsibility to choose your partner wisely and form a mutual agreement about the problem. But, in the end of the day, it is impossible to control another person, or to know them fully. People change and times change, and the person you are married to today may not be the person you married 15 years ago. Life is full of risk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><B>I agree with this only because we are sinful.</B> But, I also have to disagree because the Bible says that such things will cease. We won't be able to see this come about in this part of life. But in the rest of our existence we will get to see it. We ALL exist forever. As long as Satan has power, this will be true. But once that power is removed then no it will not for those who are one with God. Those who choose not to be with God will probably endure it forever.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>The real solution is to decide for yourself whether or not you want to be an adulterer, and then live up to your own standards. Running around forcing those standards on to other people isn't going to do any good. They have to see it for themselves.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>They are not my standards. they are God's standards. We have gotten awya from what He has said because we want to be bigger and better than God. It is a pride thing for all of us. I suffer from this as well because my flesh is weak. <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>Let's face it. The use of deterrents to prevent adultery is selfishly motivated so we can protect ourselves and control the behavior of another person, namely our spouse. If you were the adulterer, you would want rules to prevent vengeful behavior on the part of your spouse. Also you would want laws that prevent manipulation and control. Both parties remain equally entitled to their rights, so how do we solve this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Apply the rules set forth by God. If you don't do what the creator of your car says that you should do then your car won't last very long. It won't last as long as the creator of the car says it will last unless you follow the manual for the car.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>The so called "war on drugs" is probably the best recent example of the successful use of deterrents to enforce morals. We have people in the US being sentence to longer terms for simple marijuana possession than the guy in the next cell will actually serve for murder. So the deterrents are there. I think everyone would agree that the because of these deterrents, drug use in the US is in severe decline.<P>All contracts require a shotgun clause to bring about an equitable termination in the event of failure. Without the right to leave a marriage, there is just too much potential for the "non-adulterous" party to abuse their higher moral ground and manipulate their partner in a "power over" relationship. The dissolution of a marriage needs to be fair and equitable. This involves appropriate provisions for the care of any children, and a fair division of assets.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>This all results from each trying to set their own rules which always entails one person getting a bigger peice of the pie.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>This 10% if you get caught thing is just going to give the private investigators the other 90%. Besides, it probably wouldn't hold in court anyway. And when you get caught, (it can happen to anybody), you are going to think it really sucks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Yes, it does suck. And the solution is to use the manual. We have to look at it in its entirety. When you take scripture out of context, you change its meaning. It would be like you happen to be sitting in the car that your friend decided to use as their get away car unbeknownst to you when they robbed the bank.<P><BR>------------------<BR><B><I>God Bless,<BR>Rob</I></B><P><BR><B>It won't happen for us. It takes a long time change it for everyone. It starts with teaching the children. If they actually think about it and don't follow the example of their parents and the rest of the significant adults in their lives. Because God got to me early enough, I have not done this. He keeps getting in my face daily to keep me from going down that path. I choe to do His will rather than my will.</B><p>[This message has been edited by professorg (edited January 27, 2000).]

Dazed and Confused:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>Oh, come on, Rob, you're smarter than that.<P>Just because you're spiritual doesn't mean you can't use your brain. Just because you're spiritual doesn't mean you have to come up with pat answers like that.<P>I know you're capable of better.<P>When I was a kid in the early 1960's, we still said the Lord's Prayer in school. And President Kennedy was boinking everything in sight, and my mother's best friend was being cheated on.<P>Let's not even get into whose prayer we're going to say. Sheesh, it was bad enough then, when all you had to worry about was the Jews (and I am one). Now you've got Buddhist, Hindus, Ba'hai, Taoists, Sikhs, Muslims, etc.<P>Oh yeah. I forgot. They don't count because they don't follow the One True Way.<P>And by the way, Rob, if Christian prayer is such a foolproof safeguard against infidelity, than how come there are so many Christian betrayers? Seems to me we have a new poster who's a betrayed -- and a pastor's wife.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Just because you profess it with your mouth does not make you a Christian. There are loads of professed Christians who really are not saved. The Bible says that there is only one way. God said it. I didn't. It still is man's idea to d these things that are against God. When we sin, we sin against Him. That is the definition of sin, going against God's will.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Anyway, don't mean to be inflammatory, but this kind of pat answer just bugs me.<P>Now back to the subject at hand.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I understand it upsets everyone. Yet, God's plan is the only solution to the problem. He is the designer and knows what is best.<P>------------------<BR><B><I>God Bless,<BR>Rob</I></B><P>