HARSH, I know, but honest! [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

harsh? I don't mind honesty, and I value all opinions sincerely made, but cherise, I don't really see how your response really was about the stuff being discussed here. Much of it was philosophic and has nothing to do with anyone specifically (including thinker). Further, all I said is what many here say (in a different way), happiness comes from within it is a decision, and everyone applauds that, go figure. If such is true, no one can be "hurt" by what others do to them...correct?

Butting in here,<p>snl: <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Further, all I said is what many here say (in a different way), happiness comes from within it is a decision, and everyone applauds that, go figure. If such is true, no one can be "hurt" by what others do to them...correct? <hr></blockquote><p>Incorrect. It doesn't work that way. Of course, people can be hurt by what others do to them. That is obvious by simple observation. To deny that is to deny realty. <p>The basis for the expression that happiness comes from within is that, once hurt, the person makes a decision to react to the hurt in such a way that they restore a postive outlook toward life. They choose not to focus on the negative. It does not mean that the hurt never occurred.<p>Estes

estes...Butting in here,<p>snl...You are welcome any time.<p>(snl) Further, all I said is what many here say (in a different way), happiness comes from within it is a decision, and everyone applauds that, go figure. If such is true, no one can be "hurt" by what others do to them...correct? <p>estes...Incorrect. It doesn't work that way. Of course, people can be hurt by what others do to them. That is obvious by simple observation. To deny that is to deny realty.<p>snl..I observe the same (and was playing devils advocate)....however, those ( cali, and a few others, can address this more thoroughly) who suggest happiness is a decision have to live with what that implies, that no one can hurt you, can't have it both ways estes. If ALL your happiness comes from within, then you cannot be hurt....if not, then in fact ones spouse (and their behaviour) IS part of your happiness, and therefore you can react to that....correct? <p>estes...The basis for the expression that happiness comes from within is that, once hurt, the person makes a decision to react to the hurt in such a way that they restore a postive outlook toward life. They choose not to focus on the negative. It does not mean that the hurt never occurred.<p>snl...I disagree that is not the basis, nor can it be, cause then is a meaningless concept cause is conditional, we each now get to define when we are hurt...correct? And if I say an affair should not hurt, I am right...if you say it should, you are also right, the whole thing is back to attitude, and personal choice, not a universal principle or concept.....<p>I agree with you though, and I think it is commonsense.....you cannot be married and pretend "emotionally" your spouse does not exist, and you just choose to be happy and honor vows...is nonsensical....ones marital happiness is directly related to how you fit and are treated by your spouse.....so if that does not make you happy, instead of ignoring it, you should leave, that is what the "feeling" of unhappy is telling you, it is a truth (assuming you are of right mind, and being honest about everything). If folks maintain it does not matter cause you can love anyone, and sacrifice yourself to them, cause love and happiness is a decsion, than you cannot say an affair is hurtful, that is a decision to feel hurt..... <p>The fact of the matter is IMO estes, feelings do count, and they count alot, they are another way we um........ interpret the world and our well-being....discounting ones unhappiness, denying it, is not any different than ignoring a pain in your stomach, you will die of the stomach cancer if you don't treat it....and if you do not leave a dysfunctional marital partner, or marriage, you will suffer emotional/psychological and physical injury (unhappy people live shorter lives). That is a truth, it cannot be escaped, there are no free rides in live, and that is why pop psychology (such as just choose to be happy) is dangerous to ones well-being.<p>re your example of restoring a positive outlook when unhappy with marital issues (affairs or otherwise) I agree, and one of the means to do so is end the marriage, that's all I say, and even most seem to agree with it, I really don't know why I get so much flack...if you are not happy, you end the marriage, you don't decide to just bury your feelings and make the best of it....right?<p>I am curious estes, most of the philosophic time I am discussing the nature of love and marriage, and seem to find myself defending the notion of leaveing....yet most agree you should not stay married if you are not happy, this confuses me. It feels like people are saying you must stay married, yet you should be happy, so if you aren't happy what do you do? Tell me estes, do you think people should remain married if they cannot honestly say (radically honest, meaning no hedging about vows, and duty, and sacrifice, and all that) they want to be married? Or put another way, what possible reason is there to be married if you are not happy about the marriage?

Okay, the original question was why the BS does not (get)it! Oh, but we do, front words sidewords and in the heart. But, you DO NOT. You STILL feel that what you did was right, or OKAY! Do you discount entirely your wife's feelings? Do you not understand that your wishy-washy, I don't know what is right is killing your wife, and whatever love she ever had for you! Or do you not care! Are your feelings the only ones that count in the equation or are the people involved in your life simply maniquins who are supposed to have no feelings or emotions because they(choose to feel this way!) I had to come to a point where I had to wake up and smell the coffee, so to say. and I think you should put some serios thought into the words respect, honor and above all, respect. [img]images/icons/frown.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/frown.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/frown.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/frown.gif" border="0[/img]

cherise...You STILL feel that what you did was right, or OKAY! <p>snl..No it wasn't "right".<p>cherise...Do you discount entirely your wife's feelings? <p>snl...No, and I have gone around the block fairly to her re her feelings.<p>cherise...Do you not understand that your wishy-washy, I don't know what is right is killing your wife, and whatever love she ever had for you! Or do you not care! <p>snl...I care about everyone, sometimes too much, it is one of my problems. Are you suggesting I conceal my feelings? If I am wishy washy, it is what the truth is, what do I do, pretend otherwise? How do I not be who I am cherise? And isn't that a big problem, when people conceal who they are (feelings wise), doesn't radical honesty require me to reveal these thoughts and feelings? How can I take responsibility for thinkers response, isn't that up to her? If one wants radical honesty, one must be prepared for things they may not like to hear, things that may hurt....alot. If instead we are only radically honest and censor things that will distress our spouse, how does that make us any different than any other liar? We will be editing our revelations in order to manipulate our spouse, correct? And isn't that what lieing is all about?<p>cherise...Are your feelings the only ones that count <p>snl...Yes, they are, that is how it must be for each of us. The moment we start editing ourselves for others benefits, we have become dishonest, and concealed from them who we really are. I do not want anyone to spare my feelings EVER. Honesty and openess is more important to me than all the other needs combined and multiplied by 100 times. I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY THE UNVASRNISHED, UNEDITED, TRUTH AT ALL TIMES. That does not mean don't be civil and polite delivering it though, just do not conside my feelings at all, only yours. That way I can trust you.<p>cherise... are the people involved in your life simply maniquins who are supposed to have no feelings or emotions because they(choose to feel this way!) I had to come to a point where I had to wake up and smell the coffee, so to say. and I think you should put some serios thought into the words respect, honor and above all, respect.<p>snl...This is unclear, are you saying it is respectful to conceal thoughts, feelings, and concerns, which you can reasonably assume will distress others? This violates MB principles of radical honesty, and opens the door to self-serving behaviours of all kinds....oh dear, I didn't tell you about the affair, cause I knew it would distress you.....or H, I didn't tell you I have never really loved you cause it would have made you unhappy..... you cannot have it both ways cherise, truth is truth, or lieing is ok, motives are irrelevant.

SNL,
No, I do not believe that you should lie about ANYTHING with your lifes partner, But, you did. Is it not the time to simply apoligize for your deceptivness and either leave your wife or stay and work on your marriage? Why continue rationalizing to yourself about your actions and trying to make them right in our eyes. You know in your heart, NOT HEAD, what you need to say and do. DO IT!

SNL, you've made me think a little about what you've said about this being black and white. "PLan A for a few months, then Plan B/D". The truth of the matter is that by setting up time frames, the BS can influence the situation, or "Fence sitting".<p>I'm at the latter stages of the plan a--I'm giving it until the first of February then, if needed, will go to PLan B. I'm not going to tolerate no results and especially, CONTACT, regardless of how trivial or not.<p>Thanks for the enlightenement--<p>Guido

snl, you say here:
"And if I say an affair should not hurt, I am right...if you say it should, you are also right, the whole thing is back to attitude, and personal choice, not a universal principle or concept....."<p>Estes:
If you said an affair should not hurt YOU, then that statement may be correct. But if you said that an affair should not hurt ME that statement would be incorrect. If I said an affair should/would hurt ME, I would be correct. If I said that an affair should/would hurt YOU, that would be incorrect. That one's opinions speak for him/herself and not for others is a
universal principle.<p>snl:
Tell me estes, do you think people should remain married if they cannot honestly say (radically honest, meaning no hedging about vows, and duty, and sacrifice, and all that) they want to be married? Or put another way, what possible reason is there to be married if you are not happy about the marriage? <p>Estes:
IF none of the above considerations existed, I would say, "No. There is none" However, the fact is that they do exist. Can you give an example of a single marriage you know of personally in which none of the qualifiers existed? (I'm not sure what you mean about hedging about vows. To me a vow is a vow. Webster's: vow = a solemn promise or assertion, specif: one by which a person binds himself to an act, service, or condition. If a person's vow means nothing to him/her then there's nothing to discuss because his/her word means nothing. ) In other words, do you know of anyone whose marriage did not involve one of the qualifiers with the exception of someone whose word cannot be trusted?<p>My sister who was married for 20 years with no children decided within days of discovery of her H's affair to end the marriage. For a Christian, unrepentant, continuing adultery is a legitimate reason for the BS to end a marriage.
In this case, WH wanted the OW. BS didn't want the adulterous husband. The decision to divorce was clear for them. <p>My son is approaching a decision to divorce because his wife of 6 years and mother of their three-year-old son continues to be intimate with OM 10 months after her A began. Although losing his family has torn him apart (Yes, snl, you CAN be hurt by other people, and being told that your spouse does not want to be married to you IS terrible.), he cannot change her choices and must protect himself and his child from further damage. This damage is not optional, snl. It was imposed upon them by the choices of a very disturbed young woman. The reality of this is not open to debate. It is a fact. Unlike in my sister's case, my son's decision to divorce will be one he will makein order to protect his emotional health and that of his son. Words that you have posted in the past show that your response would be that my son chose to be divorced. If you apply your game of semantics here and really believe that my son wants/choses to be a divorced father who may never live with his little boy again, I am not capable of relating to that philosophy and will bow out of this discussion. <p>One critical thing you did not include in the list of qualifiers - children. I could write a book on this one. A divorce changes them forever. That is fact. Thankfully, most cope well. The wound heals, but the scar remains. If there are children still at home, the parents owe their children every sacrifice (yes, those cumbersome values again - duty and sacrifice) to hold the family together except in cases of abuse, addiction, or continued adultery. My opinion is based on volumes of research I have read. In the case of children, "I don't want to be married to you anymore.," won't cut it. Sorry. No way, no how. Work it out. A marriage with children must be preserved at all cost, even if the parents have to sacrifice satisfying their own needs (with the above exceptions) to protect their children.<p>Estes

estes, I am not sure you answered my question, are you saying love, and happiness, and wanting to live in intimacy are irrelevant? You do it cause of a rule? You make a vow you keep it, no matter how loveless the marriage? And are you saying kids needs always come before adults needs, that you stay married for the kids even if two people hate each other? And if hate is to strong, then just make it can't stand each other. Why would people do this estes, would you live like this? What is the point, and how do kids benefit by living in a loveless home. How do you know remarriage to a loving terrific step-mom will not be better for your grandson then a bickering loveless marriage that stayed together cause of vows.... You cannot say it shouldn't be that way, cause now you are violating your observation of reality, in the real world people do not get along and divorce, but you are suggesting they may not get along, but they still stay married, how does that work?<p>btw, many (including me) would not accept a marriage based on vows and sacrifice, even if I was in-love and wanted a marriage to continue, I would not accept a spouse who did not love me, but was willing to be dutiful....neither would a lot of others, would you? How do you deal with that circumstance, I would divorce them, whether they would or not....My spouse has to be able to look me in the eye, every day, and with radical honesty say they are in-love with me, or I do not want them, no matter how much I love them...why? Cause they are only propery, they are only staying cause I have their deed, the vows, that is why vows mean nothing, they eliminate love as the basis of marriage. I prefer a world where love is the reason we choose another, not rules, and sacrifice, and duty. I prefer marriage not be a contract. Others prefer the contractural model, is that true for you?<p>[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: sad_n_lonely ]</p>

SNL, <p>Not everyone's #1 emotional need is honesty, but it certainly is one of my most important emotional needs. <p>If I measure my husbands honesty by my standards, he comes up short. If he measures honesty by his standards, he believes he has gone 'over and beyond'. <p>If you ask my husband today why he wants to stay married, he'll tell you (in his version of honesty) that he wants to stay married because it is the 'right thing to do'. But, I happen to know, that today, a more honest answer from him would be 'because it is easier to stay married than to go through a divorce.' (we've been there and done that before.)<p>Gee! Today, knowing what my husbands 'true' feelings are, do I want to stay married to him? How does that make me feel? <p>Before I answer that question, I have to look back to just a couple of months ago. I know that a couple of months ago, he would have said that he wants to stay married - because he enjoys being married to me. And that would have been an honest response at that time.<p>Recovered relationships are like that - it is a dance. It isn't always at the top, it isn't always at the bottom. But it does hit the top sometimes, and it does hit the bottom sometimes. Sometimes we fit, sometimes we don't. We are ever-changing people, and it is because of the commitment - that helps us to understand one another and grow - and have those non-surface feelings of love with one another. <p>Love is multi-leveled, multi-layered. Sometimes the marriage thrives simply because it is too much trouble to get divorced, other times, because it is the most emotionally fulfilling relationship we have ever experienced.<p>I also believe that God instituted marriage so that it would mirror our relationship with God. We are sometimes close with God (when we are paying attention to God and not ourselves) and other times not close with God (when we are not paying attention to God, but to ourselves.) The only difference between marriage and our relationship with God, he is always faithful, and always paying attention to us.<p>Feelings are feelings, yes, they are our human ways of interpreting our relationships and ourselves. But feelings change. And feelings are many times a result of what we believe. Are feelings always equal to truth? I don't think so. On the surface maybe, but not deeply.

cherise...No, I do not believe that you should lie about ANYTHING with your lifes partner, But, you did. <p>snl...Yes, I did, but what is your point?<p>cherise...Is it not the time to simply apoligize for your deceptivness and either leave your wife or stay and work on your marriage? <p>snl..I did apologize. And we are indeed resolving the stay or leave issue, as best we can, each in our own way (as we must).... hopefully with as much honesty, compassion, and civility as possible.<p>cherise...Why continue rationalizing to yourself about your actions and trying to make them right in our eyes. <p>snl...I don't rationalize. I seek understanding, then I act, it is how I run my life, it is who I am.<p>cherise...You know in your heart, NOT HEAD, what you need to say and do. DO IT! <p>snl...IMO one needs heart and head to be in the same place, that is not so easy for human beings, but it is responsible, and one should not act until a reasonable heart/head concsensus is reached IMO. I made the mistake once of not making sure I knew what I was doing, I don't intend to make the same mistake again.<p>[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: sad_n_lonely ]</p>

Now you are trying ro patronize. I am not an unintelligent woman and will refuse all ultimate dodging of true issues, if you are truly dealing with the issue of where you feel your life should be now, why are you still trying to make your wife the one in the wrong. Why not say, hey, I ###### up, I was wrong, If I did not love you I should have left, not try to continually departmentalize, rationalize and prioritize us unto death!
The BS does not GET IT because your behavior does not fit the moral, ethical, and biblical standards of decency and humanity. You were neither honest or FAIR to either her or the OW. YOu put human emotions on the line with little or no thought to anyone but yourself, and if you say you put alot of thought into this beforehand, then all I guess there is to be said is shame on YOU! [img]images/icons/mad.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif" border="0[/img]

snl:
estes, I am not sure you answered my question,<p>Estes:
Which question didn't I answer?<p>
snl:
are you saying love, and happiness, and wanting to live in intimacy are irrelevant? <p>Estes:
That's a silly question,snl. What did I say or not say that came even close to implying that?<p>snl:
are you saying kids needs always come before adults needs<p>Estes:
Very few things are "always." For the good of the kids, adults may have to make sacrifices. And there is a difference between needs and desires. I would agree that the needs of the kids always come before the desires of the adults. For example, my DIL's desire for the thrill of her affair should never have come before the need of her son to have an intact family. My DIL does not NEED this OM. She wants him. Huge difference. To expect my DIL to forgo her relationship with this man for the sake of her son is a no brainer.<p>
snl:
You make a vow you keep it, no matter how loveless the marriage? <p>Estes:
I answered that question by referencing my sister's story. Speaking of vows, a BS who files for divorce does not break his/her vows by seeking to end the marriage. It is the adulterous spouse who broke to marriage vows. A BS who accepts divorce has not broken his/her vows any more than a person whose contract was broken by the other party has broken the contract.<p>
snl:
What is the point, and how do kids benefit by living in a loveless home. <p>Estes:
Don't take my word for it.
"The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce" by Judith Wallerstein
"Dan Quayl Was Right" by Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Atlantic Monthly April 1993
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/family/danquayl.htm<p>snl:
How do you know remarriage to a loving terrific step-mom will not be better for your grandson then a bickering loveless marriage that stayed together cause of vows.... <p>Estes:
It looks more and more that they will not stay together. And they don't bicker, rather DIL screws OM, and son weeps. (Sorry, vent.) Son has not stayed in marriage 10 months after d-day because of vows. He has stayed because he loves his wife, knows separation will be traumatic for his child, and to be convinced that his goal of keeping his family together is hopeless. Having a loving step-mom may come to pass. Unfortunately the odds are that grandson will be living with his unstable mother, not his father and any future step-mom.<p>
snl:
btw, many (including me) would not accept a marriage based on vows and sacrifice,

Estes:
Many others (including me) think that this is an integral part of a loving marriage. <p>
snl:
even if I was in-love and wanted a marriage to continue, I would not accept a spouse who did not love me,<p>Estes:
Personally, I would quickly lose the love I had for someone who did not love me. If that's not a fatal LB, what is? Loss of love does not necessarily mean you hate each other. People rarely hate each other unless some significant insult is involved. If such an insult is involved it is likely one of the three As (abuse, addition, and adultery)in which case divorce is justified. Research I've read says that even in the absence of love where parents are civil to one another, children fare better living with both biological parents than with a single parent. See references above. Hateful behavior between the parents is another matter. Continuous hateful behavior is abuse. That qualifies as justification for divorce as per the exceptions that I mentioned in previous post. In case of emotionally abusive behavior (mental cruelty), divorce may be necessary even though there are children in the home. Do I think that parents owe it to their children to put aside their hate? Yes.<p>snl:
Cause they are only propery, they are only staying cause I have their deed, the vows, that is why vows mean nothing, they eliminate love as the basis of marriage. <p>Estes:
Oh my gosh, I think I'm about to sound like you! Here goes. They are not staying because you have anything on them. They are staying because they have chosen not to go - for whatever reason. And I am in total disagreement that vows eliminate love as the basis of marriage. I am at a loss to understand why you think a vow degates love. If that were true, nobody who was married would be in love. <p>
snl:
I prefer a world where love is the reason we choose another, not rules, and sacrifice, and duty. <p>Estes:
That's what most of us would prefer, I think.<p>
snl:
I prefer marriage not be a contract. Others prefer the contractural model, is that true for you?<p>Estes:
Most definitely I prefer the contractual model. Relationships do not exist in a vacuum. They are part of society. Families are the foundation of society in virtually every culture. Families imply children. Children receive their nurturing most effectively within a family structure where both male and female role models are present and where the parents have a vested interest in the children. An intact biological family accomplishes this task most effectively. Therefore, a stable (i.e., one not easily disrupted) family is in the interest of society. Contractual marriages promote stability of families and society because they discourage the break up of the family. I believe and research shows that divorce impacts not only the two spouses but also the families and society as a whole. For the benefit of families and society, contractual marriages are important because they remind the parties involved that their union has significance beyond themselves.<p>If the desires of the individual were the only thing that mattered, marriage contracts would not be necessary, but human beings live in societies, and the desires of the individual are NOT all that matter.<p>I noticed that you posted this to cherise:
[cherise...Are your feelings the only ones that count ]
[snl...Yes, they are, that is how it must be for each of us.] <p>You and I differ fundamentally in our value systems. Unlike you, I believe that my feelings are not the only ones that count, and I am willing to sacrifice self-gratification for the good of others. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a glutton for punishment. I admit to selfish feelings and deeds. But I know that I am not the center of the universe, and I am not the only one who counts. <p>
Estes

thank you estes,
I very much agree that we MUST consider all points of veiw. After all, the human race is the only species to understand cause and effect. You cannot refuse to understand the truth of the fact that your actions will affect others, especially others that you are emotionally involved with! How can you possibly, Humanly believe that emotional devastation is by CHOICE! We did not CHOOSE to be betrayed, Have our lives and beliefs torn apart. [img]images/icons/frown.gif" border="0[/img]

estes...I noticed that you posted this to cherise:
[cherise...Are your feelings the only ones that count ]
[snl...Yes, they are, that is how it must be for each of us.] <p>You and I differ fundamentally in our value systems. Unlike you, I believe that my feelings are not the only ones that count, and I am willing to sacrifice self-gratification for the good of others. <p>snl...Then you are doing what you want...correct? Your feeling of self-sacrifice is what you act on, you are no different at all. In fact no one is different, human beings always do what they want, every time, and that is my point. I am not really being disagreed with (or chastisted) for being selfish, that is just a convienient label we use to exert power (through guilt) in a conflict. The problem is each of us determines ourt own behaviour and when it is at odds with another the other claims selfishness, just as is being done here. The fact is there are no rules estes, it is all made up, and the rules are not for societies benefit they are selfish rules designed to bind someone to you. <p>I also note that you did not really answer my questions, you took em and um....... changed them to what you want to say...I am familiar with this technique, I see it quite regularly, it makes useful discussion difficult cause it is not an open mind, my sense is your mind is made up, you are set in your ways, and that is it. No hard feelings estes, I use to think the way you did to, I understand it, and I understand why it does not work as an absolute also. But we are not really discussing, you apparently think marriage is inviolate, except when you think it is not, end of story. I also find your arguments very unrealistic, I don't think it would be a better world if somehow we could make divorce impossible, and force people to stay married. That is essentially what you are saying, ignore feelings in favor of contractural type considerations. Feelings tell us things estes, and one of the things they tell us is who to seek oneflesh with and who not to. If we erred and married the wrong person it makes no sense to spend a lifetime in that unhappy union, or trying to pretend we are happy, that is why we have feelings because they are important.<p>estes...Don't get me wrong. I'm not a glutton for punishment. I admit to selfish feelings and deeds. But I know that I am not the center of the universe, and I am not the only one who counts. <p>snl...That is a healthy, and very SELFISH point of view. (I will leave you to figure out why). One I share.<p>Let me try a coupld more streamlined questions. And DO NOT alter them, just ignore them if you do not want to answer them as I ask them. (I will return the courtesy if you would like).<p>1. Should one marry someone only if they want to (selfish?).<p>2. Should one stay married only if they want to?<p>3. If no (to #2) would you accept a spouse who told you (had to because of radical honesty) they do not "feel" like they want to be married to you (do not love you that way), and will only stay out of duty and vows until you let them go.<p>4. Back to kids, keep in mind I lived that life. I did stay married for kids, my w wanted divorce for years, I refused to participate in paperwork or we would be divorced now. It is hard to assess whether it was good or not. They never had any problems with drugs, alcohol, sex, trouble, always got A's and are doing well in college. But they have significant interpersonal problems, are selfish, and use anger as their primary coping mechanism....they are all going to have serious marital difficulties I am certain. But I guess having been exposed to what happens when 2 people shouldn't marry, but try to make the best of it, maybe they will be cautious enough to choose right, who knows. The point is my w and I have made a huge sacrifice to do that, we have been miserable (despite years of counselling, and being decent people, various efforts, church going, the whole 9 yards) for most of 30 years. <p>For me a good day was one in which I did not get yelled at or critized for something, pretty sad huh. I don't consider this a success for me or her in our personal lives, that is a whole lot of unhappiness for both of us, and I am not so sure the kids wouldn't have been just as fine if we had divorced long ago, married someone we could be happy with and given them much better examples of how relationships should work. So when folks tell me but it didn't have to be that way....that is fantasy, it was that way, we didn't want it that way, it was that way cause of who we are and trying to be intimate with someone you do not fit, it does not work, and you pay a price for trying, a large price.....the only think that keeps me sane is figuring on the whole, it was probably marginally better for the kids. Ok this wasn't a question, and I don't usually talk about my kids cause is not relevant and has nothing to do with now. I DO NOT beleive we should live our lives for our kids, we are important too, and they sure do not grow up and live their lives for us..do they? I think making kids the only standard we live by is nonsensical. But they should be motivation to be sure we give proper effort to assessing our choices, and if we divorce we have the same obligation to do a good job parenting....the problem is not the divorce, it is the lousy job the parents do, but then they were probably doing a lousy job anyways (and would continue to do so) cause being married does not make you a good parent...correct? Plenty of married people raise screwed up children, so in fact if one is married to someone who is a dyysfunctional parent, according to your criteria (childrens best interest) they SHOULD divorce for that reason alone and find a better parent....right? <p>5. You listed abuse, and addiction as reasons for divorce, was that correct? And if so, where in the Bible is divorce allowed for those reasons (using the more popular interpretations). And if we agree these things are ok, who decides? Do each of us assess for ourselves, and then can act. I feel I was emotionally abused for years, our counsellor agreed, does that mean I am free to go? Without social disapproval? Who decides?<p>Ya see estes, this is the problem with "rules" they do not work, it still always comes back to feelings.... as it should. Your basic argument seems to be you marry someone, and long as they don't abuse you you SHOULD love them, that is nonsensical, it is not how humans function. And what happens if in the ignorance of youth you make a decision you regret...a life sentence? We pride ourselves on growth and changing our circumstances in everything, even relationships, but somehow marriage is different, exempt, is a gaurantee? What about people who are not honest with you conceal who they really are, how they will treat you, and you marry...too bad? Frankly you don't make any sense estes, but I have come to understand humans have several different temperament types, one of those, and the largest (probably for good reason) is those who are more rule oriented, are less likely to be agreeable to change in societal practices, such. <p>And that is not a bad thing, is necessary for our species, but for them how one feels is not as important as what one does, this has it's good side, and it's bad side. It is better when they marry each other, cause then they fit.....but unfortuneately they often marry those of us who have different priorities, and how we fit emotionally is very important to us, far more important than a rule/vow, we are interested in the emotional welfare of people, not the "picture" of marriage. It can work out fine for disparate personalities to marry, but when it does not, the rule makers try to make their way the standard to live by, and that is part of the turmoil, and why we don't understand each other....I do think it is possible to fit in deep abiding ways, and be in-love all the time, that is cause that is how people like me are put together, we make those kinds of committments based on fit, not on promises. <p>What I didn't understand is rule makers can do the same, they can be in-love cause the rules are being followed, and emotional fit is not that important, that is not what makes them happy, it is the security of knowing the other will not leave that makes them happy....of course some of these marriages are empty emotional places, where the participants have little to do with each other....I see them all the time at 30, 40, 50 year anniversaries, being feted for their longevity..... and I look at them and see so little passion, kind of a just putting in their time till they die and it is so sad, but maybe they are happy in their success at marital longevity, who am I to say, but I will not make that my standard, I tried it, and it didn't work.<p>In any event, I am reasonably sure you will never really understand me, or the things I study, and the psychological realities I think drive all this. I just don't think people can be married to anyone and that automatically is the way to live your entire life, I do think people fit differently, and I do think the less they fit the more they suffer whether they force themselves to deny that or not. Marriage is not a prison, it is freely entered and should only continue as long as the participants want it too. Rules (no matter how we gussie it up) take away the freedom to choose who you share your heart with, a choice that must be made and renewed everyday....without coercion of any kind....and should be made by feelings, that is the language of the heart.

Hello:<p>from snl to Estes:<p>Let me try a coupld more streamlined questions. And DO NOT alter them, just ignore them if you do not want to answer them as I ask them. (I will return the courtesy if you would like). <p>1. Should one marry someone only if they want to (selfish?).
ESTES: YES; I CAN'T IMAGINE IT BEING OTHERWISE. YOU SEEM TO BE EQUATING THIS TYPE OF DECISION TO SELFISHNESS. WEBSTER: SELFISH = CONCERNED EXCLUSIVELY OR EXCESSIVELY WITH ONESELF, SEEKING OR CONCENTRATING ON ONE'S OWN ADVANTAGE, PLEASURE, OR WELL-BEING WITHOUT REGARD FOR OTHERS. DOING WHAT ONE WANTS DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY EQUATE TO SELFISHNESS. <p>2. Should one stay married only if they want to?
ESTES: NOT NECESSARILY. TOO MANY VARIABLES TO ANSWER THAT YES OR NO. I CAN IMAGINE CASES WHERE THE ANSWER WOULD BE NO AND ONRS WHERE THE ANSWER WOULD BE YES. I WOULD SAY THAT ONE SHOULD GET MARRRIED ONLY IF THEY WANT TO, AS PER #1.<p>3. If no (to #2) would you accept a spouse who told you (had to because of radical honesty) they do not "feel" like they want to be married to you (do not love you that way), and will only stay out of duty and vows until you let them go.
ESTES: SORRY, CAN'T ANSWER THIS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T APPLY TO ME, BUT PROBABLY NOT. HOWEVER, I WOULD CONSIDER IT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO TRY EVERYTHING I COULD TO MAKE THE MARRIAGE WORK BEFORE I GO. SNL, NO ONE HAS TO LET A SPOUSE GO BEFORE HE CAN LEAVE. NO ONE ELSE HAS CONTROL OVER HIS CHOICES. IF HE CHOSES TO STAY OUT OF DUTY, VOWS, WHATEVER, IT IN NOT BECAUSE SOMEONE WILL NOT LET HIM GO, IT'S BECAUSE HE CHOSE TO STAY. <p>4. Back to kids, keep in mind I lived that life. I did stay married for kids, my w wanted divorce for years, I refused to participate in paperwork or we would be divorced now. It is hard to assess whether it was good or not. They never had any problems with drugs, alcohol, sex, trouble, always got A's and are doing well in college. But they have significant interpersonal problems, are selfish, and use anger as their primary coping mechanism....they are all going to have serious marital difficulties I am certain. But I guess having been exposed to what happens when 2 people shouldn't marry, but try to make the best of it, maybe they will be cautious enough to choose right, who knows. The point is my w and I have made a huge sacrifice to do that, we have been miserable (despite years of counselling, and being decent people, various efforts, church going, the whole 9 yards) for most of 30 years.
ESTES: DIDN'T SEE A QUESTION HERE TO ANSWER. I APPRECIATE YOUR SACRIFICE AND HOPE YOUR KIDS ARE OPEN TO HIS NEEDS, HER NEEDS, ETC. ANOTHER REFERENCE: "STUPID THINGS PARENTS DO TO MESS UP THEIR KIDS" BY DR. LAURA SCHLESSINGER<p>snl:
In fact no one is different, human beings always do what they want, every time, and that is my point
ESTES: YOU EQUATE A CHOICE WITH A DESIRE TO DO WHAT ONE CHOOSES. NOT NECESSARILY SO. <p>snl:
your mind is made up, ESTES: YES
you are set in your ways, ESTES: YES, IF YOU MEAN COMMITTED TO PRINCIPLES I ACCEPT AS A RESULT OF A LOT OF THOUGHT
and that is it. ESTES: NO. I HAVEN'T STOPPED THINKING. <p>
snl:
Your feeling of self-sacrifice is what you act on,
ESTES: YOU ASSUME THAT ALL OF MY CHOICES ARE BASED ON ONE UNIVERSAL MOTIVATION.
NO SO.<p>snl:
But we are not really discussing, you apparently think marriage is inviolate, except when you think it is not, end of story.
ESTES: INCORRECT. EVEN IF I DID, WHAT I THINK HAS NO EFFECT ON YOUR CHOICE.<p>snl:
I don't think it would be a better world if somehow we could make divorce impossible, and force people to stay married.
ESTES: I AGREE. AND, IN FACT, NO ONE MAKES US STAY MARRIED. WE ARE FREE TO STAY MARRIED OR TO GO. <p>snl;
That is essentially what you are saying, ignore feelings in favor of contractural type considerations.
ESTES: I NEVER SAID OR IMPLIED THAT FEELINGS SHOULD BE IGNORED.<p>snl:
If we erred and married the wrong person it makes no sense to spend a lifetime in that unhappy union, or trying to pretend we are happy, that is why we have feelings because they are important.
And if we agree these things are ok, who decides? Do each of us assess for ourselves, and then can act. I feel I was emotionally abused for years, our counsellor agreed, does that mean I am free to go?
ESTES: YOU ARE 100% FREE TO DO WHATEVER YOU DECIDE TO DO. YOU DECIDE YOUR OWN COURSE IN LIFE BY REACTING TO SITUATIONS THAT PRESENT THEMSELVES. ONLY YOU. WHAT I OR OTHERS THINK IS IRRELEVANT TO YOUR DECISION.<p>snl:
Your basic argument seems to be you marry someone, and long as they don't abuse you you SHOULD love them,
ESTES: WRONG. NEVER SAID A WORD ABOUT "SHOULD LOVE."
<p>snl:
I just don't think people can be married to anyone and that automatically is the way to live your entire life, I do think people fit differently, and I do think the less they fit the more they suffer whether they force themselves to deny that or not. Marriage is not a prison, it is freely entered and should only continue as long as the participants want it too.
ESTES: SNL, WHAT IS KEEPING YOU FROM ACTING ON THIS CONVICTION YOU OBVIOUSLY HOLD VERY STRONGLY?<p>Ultimately, the point of this discussion should not be whose opinion is right or wrong, who is selfish and who is not, whose outlook is realistic and whose is not, what mistakes we made in the past, or what others expect of us. More to the point, what do we expect of ourselves and what are we going to do about it. <p>Estes

SNL,<p>I thought that I had read that you had a 15 year old son (as do I). Is he in college already?<p>If your kids managed to survive their teenage years without geting into trouble with drugs or alcohol, and are doing well in college, I really don't think you have anything to complain about relative to them. If being selfish, sometimes angry, and having "interpersonal problems" is the worst you can say about them, you are pretty d*** lucky. <p>Just about ALL teenagers can be pretty obnoxious, and selfishness just goes with the territory. Personally, I am very thankful that my oldest kids never had problems with drugs or alcohol, and their success in college is an added bonus. I just hope my next four manage as well. <p>What really bothers me is that it seems when you mention your children that, although you obviously feel a sense of responsibility toward them, I see no indication that you feel any affection toward them.

YUK - I just lost a big post! Life sucks!<p>Radical honesty, H has not been honest to me for a year. Also, she used our money to pay her phone bills, and she lied to me about having sex with my H. She manipulated SNL into having sex with her, and since this was her definite 2nd sexual affair, she knew exactly what she wanted. She knew exactly where this was going, she has already done it for sure once. The counselors told me this, and my H fell for it. My thought is, who is she going to do this with next? Who's family is she going to destroy next? This woman is definitely schizo!<p>I feel all WS's should wear a big red A on their forehead with the words LIAR beneath it. All WS's should have a lie detector test every month, so data can be kept, and all WS's should be accountable for money lost in their family due to their having fun with another person. If you do divorce, the OP will be brought to court. As for my H OW, she will have to fly at her own expense to come to our state and sit in court. I saw on TV on a movie that the explicit details of the sexual encounter were said in court. <p>Why do you all ask someone who is sitting on the fence to respond and give advice? Or do you like the debating issue too? SNL does not say the positive about me, just the negative. Take what he says with a grain of salt. Would be nice to see a post he writes about how terrible the OW was. But I have read most of his posts, and I am the bad person, that was mean to him, and the OW was just the most wonderful person in the world. If all of you could see a flashback of our marriage, SNL wasn't an angel. <p>Our marriage is going nowhere, divorce is in the future. Yes, I feel SNL is making me make the final decision. After the fact of my fathers upcoming death, and going through the grief. One of us has to go to the lawyer. I guess it will be me. SNL is to afraid to be radically honest with me. As you see from his posts, he doesn't want to be married to a round peg that is trying to fit with a square hole or vice versa. He had his in-love, and is looking for the in-love. Go for it SNL.<p>As far as my dad. He had a wonderful Sunday with relatives visiting. He was up for 7 hours visiting, was coherent, and ate very little. Sunday night the downhill started. Sunday night he kept mom up every 2 hours. Mom and my brother called the hospice RN out Monday and she administered 10mg morphine, and a pain patch. Gave him aggitation medication as well. Usually a person has a good day right before death. Dads, skin as changed colors, his breathing is shallow, and he is getting rigid. Dads one eye that is open rolls when he opens his eye. His beautiful blue eye seems to have no life in it. He stares and rolls his eye. He is incontinent, and doesn't seem to know who we are. He was in a lot of pain with touch, and was some this morning. Gave him more morphine. This is so hard to deal with. To see the one that created you deteriate into a vegetable. <p>I had a good talk with dad for about 2 hours Sunday, before company came, and that was wonderful. I will cherish those minutes. He asked about his death, asked how long he has, asked what is killing him, said he is ready. I told him I will meet him in heaven. We talked about his wife, his son, and talked about love, caring, dieing of his siblings, and talked about God some. It was very emotional for me, and maybe I am getting hardened now. Life SUCKS!!!!<p>Pray for peace with Dad soon, no need for one to suffer like this. Give him dignity and leave this earth and be with his family in heaven, and those friends that he knew and beable to work and work in the garden, and play cards, and fish, and enjoy no pain. I love you dad, I love you God, I love you Joseph.

Thinker,<p>If this is not too painful for you, I have a question or two. SNL said that he feels he has been supporting you through your father's illness. I am very curious about this so if you would share I have some questions.<p>
1. What does SNL do to be supportive of you at this time? And does it meet your needs?<p>2. What would you like him to do, or have done?<p>3. Has he ever asked you what type of support you wanted/needed?<p>I think I have a bit of a clue as to some of your responses but would like to make a point to SNL with your response to these questions.<p>I now this is a very hard time for you and your family. Your father obviously means a lot to you. You are in my thoughts and prayers.