No, what people are saying is not that "possession is 9/10 of the law." They are saying that MARRIAGE is 100% of the law.

A person might get married with any number of mistakes in their past, but if they have never been married, they now owe all of themselves (past warts and all) to their spouse. Hopefully they learn from their past mistakes (hopefully we all do!) and practice good marriage building behavior such as extraordinary precautions.


Oh, good grief. Why bring morality into the picture when talking about premarital shackup situations? Much of the world would call those immoral in the first place. Is it low down and dirty to cheat with someone you have a relationship with? Absolutely. But this site is about building MARRIAGES. A marriage is a formal, public, permanent commitment. "Having a relationship" is not formal, not permanent, and not what this site exists to build and defend.

I don't much like the Beatles, either, for a number of reasons. (I'm sorry, MelodyLane, Pepperband, and all you other Beatles lovers out there!) I've seen some pretty scary wayward stuff as I've read through bits and pieces of their history. But none of that changes the original point that seems to have set you off, which is that not spending the night apart is a great Marriage Building idea.

Nobody said "shining example"!!!!

This is patently offensive. If you do not have the patience to read alis's posts for comprehension, I think you should just let this drop.

We all get that you are bothered by the Beatles' moral behavior, drug use, leaving their spouses and girlfriends, etc. I don't blame you, I pretty much agree with you.

But it has nothing to do with what alis was saying.

Huh?

I was cheated on by a boyfriend when I was 19 years old. I didn't even meet my husband until I was 23 and I certainly am not a wayward wife (I came to MB based on trying to resolve UA issues, not infidelity).

I don't think I can make a valid point here if you are going to draw such assumptions like me being a wayward wife (I can assure that is the farthest from the truth) by me stating that Paul & Linda's practice of not spending the night apart is a good example of an extraordinary precaution.

Past history is an indication of future history, but it is not an absolute when one commits themselves and applies MB principles. If past history EQUALS future history, then everyone in the SAA forum might as well just give up now as there is zero hope of any marriage recovering. What's the point of having MB then? WHY ARE ANY OF US HERE IF CHANGE IS NOT POSSIBLE?

I said nothing offensive. Alis made a point to bring up she was cheated on before marriage. I don't know and ask if she was the WW in her marriage. Either she was or was not.

I think she was wrong to use linda and paul as shinning examples.

I am not aware of them ever admitting what they did was wrong. Just like any other entertainer because their famous their opinion on who to vote for and to be societies moral compass for the most of them they are not equiped to handle this job.

Just as Hanoi Jane has gone from not being sorry to her sort of apologizing though still has never apologized without saying I apologize, I was wrong, and for every time she has addressed her trip to Hanoi she always gives a reason for her actions that she now this and that always followed by many buts.

Such as I did this but, When I did that but.

Hanoi Jane has never stopped qualifying her actions every time she has tried to get forgiveness for her actions.

All she has done is talk like a politician putting a spin on things, or before that was called damage control, before that lying.

Again my complaint is that she using linda and paul as examples to counter the actions of the first cheating musician named on this thread.

"**edit**

Sorry, I don't see this as having any sort of resolution.

Yes, I can personally admire a 30 year marriage until death did them part with no nights apart (except 10 days in jail) despite massive travel and tour commitments. And I will. No matter what these two did before they were married, who they slept with, what other stuff went on. I personally don't care. They were young and they weren't married. So what. If they changed those promiscuous/unfaithful behaviors once they committed to being married, then okay. I don't see the issue.

The issue here is that I don't see Linda as an "OW". Paul was not married. The "OW" in my previous relationship was not an "OW", she was just another choice, a commitment that as my BOYFRIEND and not my HUSBAND he was free and available to make. Did I like it at the time? Of course not. But that is not unusual of 'young love', to change their minds before marriage.

Let's stop nitpicking other posters and making snide comments about Marriage Builders. Please remember you are a guest here!