Why on Earth would ANYONE EVER hold things against an ex? Why would they EVER wish ill on them, their new spouses, marriage, or anything?

There is but one reason....Selfishness. People were hurt, in whatever way, and now they seek revenge. They will revel in other's misfortunes, becuase of their own insecurity, their own lack of self-esteem, and this desire to seek out revenge.

What good will EVER come from that? NADA. NONE. ZIP.

Yet those same people feel they can cast the first stone...and they spout all the religious babble to go along. Yet, indeed, what tremendous hyprocasy, for their very lord and savior spoke most highly of forgiveness, did he not?

Yet the anger, the hurt, the selfishness that they harbor each and everyday, the turmoil that it brings to them and all those around them, somehow or other that's deemed OK by them...since they feel they CAN cast the first stone.

Amazing to me, everyday, how religion and "morality" can be dictated by the few...and yet it never seems apply to them. LOL Always a caveat, always a crutch!

Folks, people change, people grow, people want different things. It may not be good, it may not be "right", it indeed WILL nearly always bring huge amounts of pain. But if you continue the hatred and seek revenge, just think of how you continue to be "controlled" by the very person you so strongly despise!

Just let it go....

Just imagine how much better off this planet would be if people would let the ancient hatred between their people go...Just let it go. Move on. Grow up.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Amazing to me, everyday, how religion and "morality" can be dictated by the few...and yet it never seems apply to them. LOL Always a caveat, always a crutch! </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Huh?? BP you lost me man. Every person on this particular thread that *I* personally know has
said they are a Christian has been PRO what GG is saying here?

I would go back and carefully read each person's post here.

One of the strongest NAY SAYERS on this particular thread, was by Nellie1 (just making a mention of the facts Nellie not trying to call you out)

quote: Nellie1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rules then are changed. The OP is no longer the “lover” or the “mistress.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree. Second marriages that begin as affairs are forever morally invalid. "

---------

I have read in a previous post that you are a self confessed atheist is that correct Nellie? (again I am not wanting a discussion about this this was to make another point to BP)

I am sorry but I have to take real issue with the your statement here painting the "religious" folk all with the same brush.

Go back and read particularly my post, and TR's and Eudard's, and THEN tell me who is "throwin stones" on this thread!!! If this particular thread had some people on it that WERE being judgmental and critical, I would have read the your post and just moved on, because you would have been WELL within your rights to speak up and call a spade a spade.

In this case, no way! You attacked the Christians .... not the problem... you threw some pretty big stones yourself....

Speakin my mind and movin on.......

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

DZZZ

Warning - the following is a blatant temporary attempt at a threadjack. At the end of this post, we will return you to your regularly scheduled vent at the incongruency of blasting 2nd marriages between illicit affair participants and supporting the institution of marriage.

*****************************************
BP22, you once asked me what I had against you, since every time I posted to you, I was on your case about disrespect or some other issue of your inconsistency and intellectualizing.

Let me share with you the roots of religious persecution by people who smugly and self-righteously proclaim intellectual freedom as a result of their ability to mock sacred things and trash all religion as the single and foremost cause of society's ills.

The ACLU protects the rights of this hatemongers in the name of free speech, while they publically spit, spew and villify those of my faith - and they get away with this hate-speech as they disrupt weddings, conferences, etc. If you hauled a giant cross out in front of Al Sharpton's church, the ACLU would be trotting out the lawyers and charging people with hate crimes. However, with my religion, you can desecrate items sacred to us in the name of free speech in the viscinity of our sacred buildings. Those who pontificate the loudest spew the same dogma that you have.

What I have issue with regarding you personally, is that you asked a question, guised as a sincere inquiry into faith, then you trampled it on this board - which to me, lumps you with those maniacs on Main Street, screaming obscenities at brides posing for pictures on their wedding days.

Your kind of beliefs have caused great hurt and great divide in a great community. It boils down to your disrespect of the believer that I have issue with.

****************************************
This has been a threadjack. If this had been a real issue, worthy of RESPECTFUL dialogue back and forth between believer and non-believer, we would have posted our own thread. However, due to the lack of respect between said parties, it is best left to answering BP22's question this one time and leaving it alone.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion.
***********************************

I think when people are hurt, and sacred covenants of marriage are trampled and mocked by infidelity, it is very very hard for someone to accept the infidel's marriage - why not just shack up instead of mocking the sacred institution of marriage a 2nd time?

That being said, if someone repents, confesses, and then aligns themselves with their abandoned faith, which repentence includes taking responsibility for the hurts caused to the former spouse, and taking financial responsibility for offspring of that former marital relationship, then we have something to talk about.

Otherwise, the marriage is void of any meaningful bond.

When you say “void of meaningful bonds” do you mean “morally invalid” like Nellie or do you mean that from a practical standpoint there is less tying the couple together?

And could you elaborate on what you mean by the word “meaningful”? And meaningful in who’s eyes? The eyes of you, God, the couple, society or the law?

The only rebuttal I can make to your argument until I hear your definitions is this: How does repentance affect or effect the fact that two people are married?

Personally, I understand how difficult it must be to be replaced. For that is what a second marriage is. And I understand that it’s painful to accept that the OP may now be a step-parent and part of my child’s family.

What I don’t understand is how people who claim they are pro-marriage can deny that these are valid marriages (excluding Roman Catholics and others who never recognize divorce and/or second marriages). And some people go so far as to try to diminish the marriage in the eyes of their children, their friends and the world at large.

One reason I find this conversation very interesting is I’m not sure I believe in the institution of marriage any more. I think some marriages are great. I do believe if you take a vow you should do your darndest to up hold it. But, I think the marriage institution may be fundamentally flawed. Maybe marriage really is only a man-made institution created to handle the distribution of property and the up-bringing of the next generation.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by greengables:
When you say “void of meaningful bonds” do you mean “morally invalid” like Nellie or do you mean that from a practical standpoint there is less tying the couple together?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I mean, the motivation for getting "married" for a person who has turned his back on the institution of marriage to shack up is in question. It is a legal issue. It is a moral issue. In the eyes of the law, there is a little item called commitment for which the adulterer has no respect or regard. Just because there is a legal loophole for him/her to step through, doesn't make it a correct use of the institution of marriage.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">
And could you elaborate on what you mean by the word “meaningful”? And meaningful in who’s eyes? The eyes of you, God, the couple, society or the law? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">All of the above. Again, mockery of "commitment" is something we all take a bit too lightly.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The only rebuttal I can make to your argument until I hear your definitions is this: How does repentance affect or effect the fact that two people are married?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">On the "factual" premise that they are married... Are they? Does a piece of paper signify "commitment" or is it an empty promise, just like all the other empty promises they've made to others?

Regarding repentance. There are specific steps to full repentence. First recognition that someone has done wrong. 2nd - Remorse for what they have done and what that wrong has done to others. 3rd. Restitution and Atonement - Restitution where possible, and prayerful attention and reliance upon the Lord for the Atonement to not just heal the sinner but to also heal the sinned-against. 4th. Resolve to never commit sin again.

Without these steps, there is no true repentence. And there is a blight upon the new relationship as a result. If the person is truly repentent, they are responsible for doing what they can to make restitution. The X's in question that brought up this thread in the first place care nothing about making restitution, continue to harrass and deprive their former committed relations and offspring of much-needed support. There is no marital contract which can truly bind this form of human being.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Personally, I understand how difficult it must be to be replaced. For that is what a second marriage is. And I understand that it’s painful to accept that the OP may now be a step-parent and part of my child’s family.

What I don’t understand is how people who claim they are pro-marriage can deny that these are valid marriages (excluding Roman Catholics and others who never recognize divorce and/or second marriages). And some people go so far as to try to diminish the marriage in the eyes of their children, their friends and the world at large.

One reason I find this conversation very interesting is I’m not sure I believe in the institution of marriage any more. I think some marriages are great. I do believe if you take a vow you should do your darndest to up hold it. But, I think the marriage institution may be fundamentally flawed. Maybe marriage really is only a man-made institution created to handle the distribution of property and the up-bringing of the next generation.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">"Replaced" doesn't begin to cover the pain that several men and women has suffered and shared on this board. Mocked, tormented, etc. would better describe that. Most recognize that they are better off divorced from such reckless relationships that place so little value on commitments.

I'm very pro-marriage. I still am married. To my first and only husband. I am NOT pro-mock-marriage. And that is what you are asking "Christian" folk to recognize as valid. Those marriages are not "commitment" marriages. Mock-marriages from infidels only become legitimate after a test of time, where commitment can be trusted. But repentence behaviors typically show up too if the 2nd marriage is going to stick.

Wow. Those are very strong words. Mockery. But, what if those WSs don't make a mockery of their second marriage? Aren't those marriages just as valid?

In addition, what about spouses that make a mockery out of their marriage by refusing to stop LBs and refusing to meet emotional needs. I would argue that a spouse who refuses to perform marital duties makes as much a mockery of the institution as the Wayward spouse.

There are all sorts of betrayal. And if the first spouse makes a mockery of the marraige in that manner, is the marriage then null and void on moral and legal grounds?

And if commitment isn't shown by a piece of paper, then why do we need marriage at all?


No, you see what happens if some marriages are more binding, more moral, more valid than others. The whole thing starts to unravel.

KA, this isn't a rant or vent any more. It's a discussion! Harray!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by greengables:
<strong> There are all sorts of betrayal. And if the first spouse makes a mockery of the marraige in that manner, is the marriage then null and void on moral and legal grounds?

And if commitment isn't shown by a piece of paper, then why do we need marriage at all?


No, you see what happens if some marriages are more binding, more moral, more valid than others. The whole thing starts to unravel. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You're right. Lack of commitment to meet each others' needs by one of the "commiting" parties unravels the whole institution of marriage. Lack of commitment, however it is expressed.

The piece of paper is only relevant to those willing to abide by the contract written on that paper. An unfaithful party threatens the validity of the contract. A lovebuster spouse does the same.

GG, There are many ways to be unfaithful. Your husband was not faithful to you when he broke the law, and failed to disclose all liabilities that he was bringing to the relationship so that you could make a decision based on all the facts. He made tons of promises to you that he then refused to keep. He invaded your home with non-homey things. etc. etc. etc. That's making a contract in bad faith. We read a ton about it on Marriage Builders.

I hope that somewhere in all this discussion you are not tweeking any kind of guilt button on your part. You were faithful. You endured long beyond the end of your marriage. Your husband refused to live under the contractual agreement long before you ever called it quits. By staying in the marriage, he got everything. You got nothing. That's an invalid marital contract. Marriage is not one-sided.

Marrying an affair partner is immoral precisely because the relationship is based on an immoral foundation. A wrong can never just become right - only by restitution can this be done - and the only appropriate restitution for adultery would include, but not be limited to, the ending of the adulterous relationship, and the returning of the WS to the marriage relationship. If you stole money, part of the restitution would be giving back the money - it would not be ok to merely keep the money for some period of time and then suddenly the crime would no longer be a crime. That makes no sense.

This has nothing to do with Christianity, although I have been told by Christian acquaintances that repentance and restitution are essential elements to qualify for forgiveness. It is just common sense.

Marrying an affair partner is morally equivalent to bigamy, because the first marriage has been ended by invalid means. If someone marries while still married to another, the second marriage is not valid, legally or morally - no matter how long it goes on.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I don't think this is right, I think it would be a horrible thing for any child to think there parent is doing something wrong wether they are or not.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That statement is ridiculous. Is it horrible for a child to think a parent is doing something wrong if the parent is a serial killer? It is foolish to try to mislead children into thinking that their parents can do no wrong. It is also completely pointless. It is perfectly possible to love your parents, no matter how imperfect they are.

<small>[ January 15, 2004, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: Nellie1 ]</small>

nellie...and the only appropriate restitution for adultery would include, but not be limited to, the ending of the adulterous relationship, and the returning of the WS to the marriage relationship. If you stole money, part of the restitution would be giving back the money -

subdb....but part would not be returning to the employ of the person you embezzled money from. Marriage can never be about ownership, reducing another human being to being "property"....a marriage can only exist if BOTH parties, voluntarily, without coercion of any kind (including efforts to guilt one by vows) want to vest their primary psychological/emotional focus on each other. And the principle of radical honesty requires each one to be completely honest about whether they choose to be there....not out of duty (aka vows), not convienience (usually about security/money), not coercion (social/peer pressure), not legalities...but because one chooses the other. I have yet to find anyone (except you) who wants a primary/intimate relationship with someone who does not want to be with them. The concept is horrifying, actually....without (honest) voluntary choice there will never be any bonding, any intimacy, nothing but an empty sterile dutiful existence....much like a slave, or chattle.

There is no such thing as an immoral foundation...if that were true, and since lots of first marriages are immoral....what then? The morality (or not) of marriage is determined by only one thing.....the intent of the two parties. A dishonest intent is immoral....dishonest meaning marrying for ones own selfish gain, which no doubt applies to many affair related marriages, as well as many first marriages. And what about first marriages that arise out of cheating on a bf/gd...that kind of cheating is ok? People do ill-advised things, and for the most part, decieveing someone who thinks they are in an exclusive relationship with you (married or not) is a betrayal, hurtful, and immoral. But people can learn from their mistakes, and become better people, returning to a marriage is not required for this to happen....Nor does marrying any particular individual mean you are moral or immoral (whether it was an affair partner or some other random individual, or even a previous spouse). What matters is whether two people marry with the intent to nurture the other....whether that works or not is another matter, but the marriage is moral IMO.

I have not posted in a long time because some of these discussions are so ridiculous....is there no right or wrong anymore?

The affair that broke my family apart has devastated me and my kids. I am amazed at how far the damage reaches. Not to discuss the immorality of my ex with his mistress with my children? Let it go and move on? Who is in the dream world now? How do you teach your children correct, responsible, loving, committed behavior if you don't model it? Definitely NOT learning from my ex.

My ex is now married to his "mistress". He is upset because the kids don't want anything to do with him. If they don't have to see him, they don't. And I am done forcing the situation...he created this mess and he will have to finally pull his head out and realize what he has done to his family with HIS selfishness and lack of commitment.

His new marriage started with her hiding in the bathroom at their apartment when my kids went to visit. This is an affair that started when we had no idea that he was doing it again. He flaunted her in front of the kids activities, their friends, and rammed her down their throats. Is there resentment, you bet. They have a right to feel the way they feel. He has put his family, his wife of 22 years (in the military, by the way), and his children in horrible positions. He hasn't paid child support since August, he has been late on paying my daughter's tuition--so now she is having trouble registering for classes this semester.He disrupts the little kids lives with his visitation every other weekend. They don't want to spend a week of their holiday vacation up at his apt with a women they don't even like. They don't have any friends there--it disrupts their life.
All four of my kids hate how this divorce has affected them. The only thing they are happy with is that they don't have to listen to his ranting and raving anymore. They think I am better off without him.

He has ruined us finacially, we have lost all of our credit, our retirement funds, we may have to sell the house.

Last week, at my team plan, my youngest daughter was brought up on the agenda. Talk about embarassing. She needs glasses--I have known since August--but unfortunately, without child support, I don't have the funds. Now I have to go through the Red Cross to try to get glasses for my two children. Talk about humiliating. I have never had to receive assistance before.

At Christmas, my dear friend and her husband lent me money to go home to my dying mother. My brother and my uncle gave me money also. Do you know how hard that is to accept....but smile...welcome this new immoral relation as a valid relationship. He had a wife and family that always loved and supported him. He threw it away for a young piece of a**. He is almost 51 years old. She is just turning 29 or there abouts. She is only 9 years older than my oldest daughter. I don't have to accept this relationship--why would I?

I am a teacher. My check used to be chicken feed for us. We have gone from making over a hundred thousand a year-to about #30,000. Just smile and accept it and go on. However, I make too much money in MO to get any type of alimony. Amazing. I paid for his masters because he didn't want to jeopardize his ability to get out of the AF. In the process, I have lost 16 hours of my masters. We never had the time or money to send me back. Also, with our military functions and responsibilities--there wasn't time. Now, I have to put myself through school with no funds....fun, fun, fun.

My children know exactly what has caused the breakdown of this family. And they are still dealing with it three years after he moved out with his child "soalmate". It would be hilarious, if it wasn't so sick. My ex is also still trying his hardest to convince the kids that what has occured has been for their benefit, and we all have to move on and accept and be a big happy family. Definitely not reality though.


There is a right and wrong morally, and unfortunately our society is trying to forget that. And that is causing chaos with the children---I know--I deal with the result of these stupid people everyday that state that "oh the kids will be fine". They are wrong!!! I have four great kids--people comment on them all the time to me--telling me what a great job I have done with them. They are hurting, and their life has been changed forever by a selfish, self-centered, egotistical man. He didn't care about anybody but himself. How sad.

sufdb,

Obviously, you haven't met someone like my ex. I think he is immoral...and getting worse as the years go by.

For awhile, he was accidently calling our number while talking to his "mistress-wife". She is a flight attendant for Northwest by the way. Heard many conversations where he was accusing her of looking for other men..imagine that---yep, they are married, but moral...tch...give me a break. Neither one of them knows the meaning of the word. I disagree with you 100% based on what I have lived through. Revenge....just watching with amusement at what will surely happen. Will I feel good about it...I don't think I will be sad.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by miserynmissouri:
<strong> sufdb,

Obviously, you haven't met someone like my ex. I think he is immoral...and getting worse as the years go by.

For awhile, he was accidently calling our number while talking to his "mistress-wife". She is a flight attendant for Northwest by the way. Heard many conversations where he was accusing her of looking for other men..imagine that---yep, they are married, but moral...tch...give me a break. Neither one of them knows the meaning of the word. I disagree with you 100% based on what I have lived through. Revenge....just watching with amusement at what will surely happen. Will I feel good about it...I don't think I will be sad. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">pat your H behavior is reprehensible, the discussion here was about general principles, and that is what I was addressing. Your point, made indirectly, I agree with, that being each "circumstance" must be judged on it's own merits (and by most standards I would agree your H remarriage was immoral, unethical, and ill-advised....and doomed to fail accordingly).

There are plenty of people behaving immorally in first marriages too. It is not the marital status that dictates morality, it is the behavior of the people in the marriage. I have no idea why your H behaves as he does, it has completely baffled me all along, all I can presume is he never was a moral person in the first place, and you essentially carried the marriage and covered for him basically. Lots (but surely not enough) men (or occassionally women) leave marriages and willingly meet their moral responsibilties re fairplay, parenting, and such. I know you realize that, but it must be a bitter pill to realize you are not married to such an individual.

Sorry to hear things are still bad, and unfair, hope they improve and maybe someday your exH will realize his mistreatment and make amends...but in the meantime I am not going to blame you for finding some satisfaction in his marital problems.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That being said, if someone repents, confesses, and then aligns themselves with their abandoned faith, which repentence includes taking responsibility for the hurts caused to the former spouse, and taking financial responsibility for offspring of that former marital relationship, then we have something to talk about. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I heartily agree with this. I probably should have left out the word "support" on my earlier post and left it at accepting and forgiving are important.

But what if your spouse never had a faith to abandon?

If someone were a true Christian, had an A and married the OP I would accept the fact that they were M, but I'd leave the judging up to God.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">
Matthew 19:9
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

I would maintain that marriages are all valid. That marriages can’t be in and of themselves moral or immoral, but people can.

My comments were directed to the same people as GreenGables. I believe it was sufdb who pointed out the hyprocisy of many of the folks who GG was initially referring to (not even named for that matter, I don't think of anyone in particular, I think of the "type", I believe, as she did)

I agreed with sufdb's "label"...and just added my usual rant about what I see as the "ill effects" of what I believe to be the "curse on humanity", namely religion.

Sorry for those who are offened. I am referring to the same people GG was...again, genre of people, not particulars.

My marriage end, wife's decision, when she was under the influence of apparently fantasy thoughts of being with a another married man. The emotional affair. However, she claims it MADE NO IMPACTS ON HER DECISIONS. NONE. NADA.

That's just ludicrous, I think we would all agree.

But it's fine...I have no problems with it. I can accept it. I can forgive. I don't hold out for misfortune to strike. If she ever did marry this guy, I would be the very first to wish them all that life can bring. I harbor not hatred, no resentment, towards her or this guy.

I think that is what the whole point is? NO?

Yet without a doubt should I ever date anyone, I'd be called all sorts of names and no doubts when she's all hot on the collar she'll tell the kids that daddy is out boinking some bimbo. Sad part it, that's probably true.

Anyways, I'm not the one who professes the love of jesus, the forgiveness of the lord, and all the rest.

Yep, I'm a bit bitter towards what I see are the impacts of religion on people...LOL. Yes, I realize my brush may appear a bit wide...I will accept that label as well. However, I still stand by my words that I've seen very little good come from religion...but have experienced quite a bit of bad.

Sorry to those who assumed I was referring to them.

Immoral marriages.


Are people who had sex before they were married living in an immoral, illegitimate marriage?


That question is posed to those who believe people who get married to a lover/affair partner are in an immoral marriage.

Most people on the MB forums agree that marriage is an absolute state like pregnancy. You either are or you aren’t. That is the reason they give as to why adultery is always wrong even if you are physically as well as emotionally separated. That is a reason cited for why WSs should give up the pleasures of the OP and concentrate on recovering romantic love with the BSs.

Well, some, not all, of those same people then turn around and say marriages to OP’s are only half marriages, or less than real marriages. So all of a sudden, there are degrees of marriage. Some people are more married than others. This makes no sense to me. Plus, some people also say, since this marriage started in these circumstances not only are they less married, but I’m not called upon to behave as if the marriage is real. I can ignore the fact that these people have made a legal often spiritual commitment to each other because they’re only partly married.

Carrying it to the logical conclusion, any couple could be labeled “less than truly married” for a myriad of subjective reasons. That’s what we end up teaching our young.

Personally, I agree with Dr. Harley that there are emotional degrees of intimacy in a marriage. The deeper the intimacy the happier the marriage is. And I agree that intimacy can erode to such a degree that two people are emotionally divorced which makes the marriage miserable.

But, nonetheless, they are married.

I must admit that I can’t throw commitment into the equation. Commitment has come to mean doing something for which you’ll get nothing back just because you said you would. I’m not sure people can make a real commitment to each other. At best they strike a bargain, have an unspoken contract.

But, that may be my attitude since I was not committed enough to my marriage to stay in it. My H’s words which honestly I can’t argue with. If I had greater commitment to the marriage, I’d continue living miserably. I’d be willing to give up peace and contentment. Because doesn’t commitment mean holding up your end of the deal no matter whether the other person does or doesn’t?