| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67714
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Two sided coin. I don't think staying together in a dysfunctional marriage for the sake of the children is the way to go. As DMR mentioned they may be harmed by this.
IMO it's possible for two ADULTS to separate and work together on raising their children with success. They have to get the separate households on the same page when mentoring the children.
That takes a maturity many don't possess. I've know divorced parents who raised successful children. Many time the parents get into new relationships and this can sometimes help.
Children first is key, your reasons for divorcing are there, don't allow them to interfere with mentoring the kids. Be large enough to put your petty differences aside.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Reflexx wrote: | It's better for parents to stay together for the kids.
When parents staying together doesn't work, and hurts the kids, it's due to the parents being selfish. They told themselves they were staying together for the kids, but they were only going through the motions instead of really committing.
Staying together for the kids means more than just staying together. It means also committing to the spousal relationship and working out differences. It means letting go of ego and pride. It means a commitment to respect and love each other and putting that above any personal differences. It's an understanding that differences are ok, and that you learn to live with it and still love.
It requires 100% commitment from both spouses. It requires that commitment to be ingrained as a part of their moral fiber. A part of their being.
I think that it's a disservice to society and to children to become a parent without that level of maturity and commitment.
With that said, I think humans in general lack discipline and our society is pretty selfish. So it's tough to expect people to do this when society doesn't support it. |
Outstanding post and hits to the point of my argument completely. You and AP have done a great job on this issue IMO.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67714
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Staying together for the sake of the children requires both to agree. Sometime one wants to stay for selfish reasons, they still love their mate. If that mate is not "in love" with them I don't see how staying together "for the sake of the kids" is going to be benificial to all concerned.
Swallow pride, move on. Split up, grow up. He/She doesn't love you anymore. Accept it.
It's a arduous chore that calls for gargantuan sacrifices. It's not about you, it's about the children.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Last edited by jodeke on Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:02 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52657
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | Staying together for the sake of the children requires both to agree. Sometime one wants to stay for selfish reasons, they still love their mate. If that mate is not "in love" with them I don't see how staying together "for the sake of the kids" is going to be benificial to all concerned.
Swallow pride, move on. Split up, grow up. He/She doesn't love you anymore. Accept it. |
Disagree with this completely. Not in love anymore? Swallow your pride and stay together. THAT is grown up approach. While one may not still be committed to their mate, there is still an important commitment to one's children which is FAR more important than the one to marriage. Suck it up and put on a brave face. Not being completely happy is a selfish and bogus reason to split a marriage when kids are involved.
Splitting up should be reserved for an actually toxic environment where there is open and uncontrolled anger or abuse.
Splitting up simply because you aren't into it anymore, is a horribly selfish approach when kids are involved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67714
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Staying together for the sake of the children requires both to agree. Sometime one wants to stay for selfish reasons, they still love their mate. If that mate is not "in love" with them I don't see how staying together "for the sake of the kids" is going to be benificial to all concerned.
Swallow pride, move on. Split up, grow up. He/She doesn't love you anymore. Accept it. |
Disagree with this completely. Not in love anymore? Swallow your pride and stay together. THAT is grown up approach. While one may not still be committed to their mate, there is still an important commitment to one's children which is FAR more important than the one to marriage. Suck it up and put on a brave face. Not being completely happy is a selfish and bogus reason to split a marriage when kids are involved.
Splitting up should be reserved for an actually toxic environment where there is open and uncontrolled anger or abuse.
Splitting up simply because you aren't into it anymore, is a horribly selfish approach when kids are involved. |
You're confusing me. You wrote: | Quote: | The generalization in the "stay together for the sake of the kids" idea is no less cliched.
Again, the point is not that kids are better off if their parents divorce, and that should be obvious. I'm the child of divorced parents, so I know what's involved with the process and the life of being in a single parent home.
The point is that every case need be evaluated on it's own circumstances, which is why I stated that KBCB can't make that assessment for others. I share his dedication to his children, and I married and had children with the very distinct purpose of doing so and staying with those two commitments. I'm avowed to myself to not getting divorced and chose my mate accordingly.
Others have not made that kind of assessment about entering into those two commitments. There can be nothing more toxic than two parents who grow to despise each other and harbor contempt for the person they are living with. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by the children in that type of environment via "sticking through it" for their sake.
What I am addressing in regards to this case is the father's absolute detachment from his son, which would clearly be the case whether he was still married to the child's mother or not. His kind of complete lack of responsibility has nothing to with commitment to marriage. |
One post indicated divorce is the right option. The other says staying together is the adult thing to do.
A very old adage "You can't have your cake and eat it too." I may not be understanding what you're really saying.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Staying together for the sake of the children requires both to agree. Sometime one wants to stay for selfish reasons, they still love their mate. If that mate is not "in love" with them I don't see how staying together "for the sake of the kids" is going to be benificial to all concerned.
Swallow pride, move on. Split up, grow up. He/She doesn't love you anymore. Accept it. |
Disagree with this completely. Not in love anymore? Swallow your pride and stay together. THAT is grown up approach. While one may not still be committed to their mate, there is still an important commitment to one's children which is FAR more important than the one to marriage. Suck it up and put on a brave face. Not being completely happy is a selfish and bogus reason to split a marriage when kids are involved.
Splitting up should be reserved for an actually toxic environment where there is open and uncontrolled anger or abuse.
Splitting up simply because you aren't into it anymore, is a horribly selfish approach when kids are involved. |
Ok, we're not as far apart on the issue as it originally appeared.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52657
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | | DaMuleRules wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | Staying together for the sake of the children requires both to agree. Sometime one wants to stay for selfish reasons, they still love their mate. If that mate is not "in love" with them I don't see how staying together "for the sake of the kids" is going to be benificial to all concerned.
Swallow pride, move on. Split up, grow up. He/She doesn't love you anymore. Accept it. |
Disagree with this completely. Not in love anymore? Swallow your pride and stay together. THAT is grown up approach. While one may not still be committed to their mate, there is still an important commitment to one's children which is FAR more important than the one to marriage. Suck it up and put on a brave face. Not being completely happy is a selfish and bogus reason to split a marriage when kids are involved.
Splitting up should be reserved for an actually toxic environment where there is open and uncontrolled anger or abuse.
Splitting up simply because you aren't into it anymore, is a horribly selfish approach when kids are involved. |
You're confusing me. You wrote: | Quote: | The generalization in the "stay together for the sake of the kids" idea is no less cliched.
Again, the point is not that kids are better off if their parents divorce, and that should be obvious. I'm the child of divorced parents, so I know what's involved with the process and the life of being in a single parent home.
The point is that every case need be evaluated on it's own circumstances, which is why I stated that KBCB can't make that assessment for others. I share his dedication to his children, and I married and had children with the very distinct purpose of doing so and staying with those two commitments. I'm avowed to myself to not getting divorced and chose my mate accordingly.
Others have not made that kind of assessment about entering into those two commitments. There can be nothing more toxic than two parents who grow to despise each other and harbor contempt for the person they are living with. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by the children in that type of environment via "sticking through it" for their sake.
What I am addressing in regards to this case is the father's absolute detachment from his son, which would clearly be the case whether he was still married to the child's mother or not. His kind of complete lack of responsibility has nothing to with commitment to marriage. |
One post indicated divorce is the right option. The other says staying together is the adult thing to do.
A very old adage "You can't have your cake and eat it too." I may not be understanding what you're really saying. |
Not sure why you would be confused. The distinction is laid out pretty clearly. There's a big difference between "I'm bored with you, so I'm moving on" and "We can't stand each other and the only thing that fills this house is anger and animosity".
It's a matter of degree, as the bolded indicates.
There's no having one's cake and eating it too in any sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Theseus
Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 14208
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't think anyone has said this, but I don't think those kids should have murdered that guy. I mean so what if he was walking his dog, I don't think that is a good reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vanexelent wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | It's better for parents to stay together for the kids.
When parents staying together doesn't work, and hurts the kids, it's due to the parents being selfish. They told themselves they were staying together for the kids, but they were only going through the motions instead of really committing.
Staying together for the kids means more than just staying together. It means also committing to the spousal relationship and working out differences. It means letting go of ego and pride. It means a commitment to respect and love each other and putting that above any personal differences. It's an understanding that differences are ok, and that you learn to live with it and still love.
It requires 100% commitment from both spouses. It requires that commitment to be ingrained as a part of their moral fiber. A part of their being.
I think that it's a disservice to society and to children to become a parent without that level of maturity and commitment.
With that said, I think humans in general lack discipline and our society is pretty selfish. So it's tough to expect people to do this when society doesn't support it. |
How do you 100% commit to someone you don't love? You can't just lie to yourself and things will get better.
I'm not sure what the statistics are, but I'd bet that the majority of single-parent households include a parent (mostly women) who were never married to their child's father. There was no loving relationship to save. Just unprotected sex and the results. |
I understand it happens. I just think that it's irresponsible to have a child with someone that you're not committed to. It's not close to being ideal. It's a bad situation to be in. At that point, you do the beat you can. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Reflexx wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | It's better for parents to stay together for the kids.
When parents staying together doesn't work, and hurts the kids, it's due to the parents being selfish. They told themselves they were staying together for the kids, but they were only going through the motions instead of really committing.
Staying together for the kids means more than just staying together. It means also committing to the spousal relationship and working out differences. It means letting go of ego and pride. It means a commitment to respect and love each other and putting that above any personal differences. It's an understanding that differences are ok, and that you learn to live with it and still love.
It requires 100% commitment from both spouses. It requires that commitment to be ingrained as a part of their moral fiber. A part of their being.
I think that it's a disservice to society and to children to become a parent without that level of maturity and commitment.
With that said, I think humans in general lack discipline and our society is pretty selfish. So it's tough to expect people to do this when society doesn't support it. |
How do you 100% commit to someone you don't love? You can't just lie to yourself and things will get better.
I'm not sure what the statistics are, but I'd bet that the majority of single-parent households include a parent (mostly women) who were never married to their child's father. There was no loving relationship to save. Just unprotected sex and the results. |
I understand it happens. I just think that it's irresponsible to have a child with someone that you're not committed to. It's not close to being ideal. It's a bad situation to be in. At that point, you do the beat you can. |
I think most rational people believe this. Unfortunately there are alot of irresponsible people out there. 70% of black children now live in single parent homes. 42% Hispanics and 25% whites.
That arrangement puts kids economically behind, are more likely to have a poorer education, and be exposed to more crime and violence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13731
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
EDIT: wrong thread.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Last edited by Wilt on Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:11 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilt wrote: | I thought it was a decent episode until that over dramatic fight.
Two things stood out:
- Rosita actually spoke, and she was hot.
- The woman Rick's protecting is a MILF. |
Wrong thread? LoL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oliver Reed
Star Player
Joined: 28 Sep 2014
Posts: 2626
Location: Globo Gym
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nordvader wrote: | | The White lives matter meme/movement is just as ridiculous as the people that advocate for straight pride parades. |
Then the term "Equality" needs to be removed from the movements. Equality means all people. Not, I need to get mine because the other guy has had it for 100s of years and now he cant have it and I can.
_________________
Because we're better than you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13731
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Reflexx wrote: | | Wilt wrote: | I thought it was a decent episode until that over dramatic fight.
Two things stood out:
- Rosita actually spoke, and she was hot.
- The woman Rick's protecting is a MILF. |
Wrong thread? LoL |
 Yes.
So inappropriate to post that in a thread like this.
Please continue as if I never posted it.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32754
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilt wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | Wilt wrote: | I thought it was a decent episode until that over dramatic fight.
Two things stood out:
- Rosita actually spoke, and she was hot.
- The woman Rick's protecting is a MILF. |
Wrong thread? LoL |
Yes.
So inappropriate to post that in a thread like this.
Please continue as if I never posted it. |
This is the type of moral depravity that has destroyed the American family. Two fifteen year olds commit murder, and Wilt reviews the snuff film. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67714
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilt wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | Wilt wrote: | I thought it was a decent episode until that over dramatic fight.
Two things stood out:
- Rosita actually spoke, and she was hot.
- The woman Rick's protecting is a MILF. |
Wrong thread? LoL |
Yes.
So inappropriate to post that in a thread like this.
Please continue as if I never posted it. |
What are you watching? Sounds interesting.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | | Wilt wrote: | | Reflexx wrote: | | Wilt wrote: | I thought it was a decent episode until that over dramatic fight.
Two things stood out:
- Rosita actually spoke, and she was hot.
- The woman Rick's protecting is a MILF. |
Wrong thread? LoL |
Yes.
So inappropriate to post that in a thread like this.
Please continue as if I never posted it. |
What are you watching? Sounds interesting. |
"Another downward spiral to depravity, degradation and insanity" thought Wilt, his hand absently tracing the length of his belt, searching for space to add one more notch. "jodeke" he breathed as the tip of his steel touched leather. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67714
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If I read JMK correctly Wilt you got me.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PROPHET
Star Player
Joined: 05 Jul 2001
Posts: 4356
Location: Oxnard, CA - The Nard
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Oliver Reed wrote: | | Nordvader wrote: | | The White lives matter meme/movement is just as ridiculous as the people that advocate for straight pride parades. |
Then the term "Equality" needs to be removed from the movements. Equality means all people. Not, I need to get mine because the other guy has had it for 100s of years and now he cant have it and I can. |
Wholeheartedly agree. If you want equality then the title should be changed to two black youths kill innocent man or whatever race he was. You can't cherry pick topics and have it slanted one way or another or claim that its ridiculous for white people to be proud, I'm not even white myself but you can't say it's ridiculous.
Last edited by PROPHET on Tue Mar 24, 2015 12:28 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WTF did they get that gun? If it's owned by the parent, then the parent needs to be charged with recklessness. If it wasn't owned by the parent, then where did they get it? Again, another crime that the kids committed.
Lastly, I know I'm not like others who are labeled as "Progressive", but I say to just execute them. End of story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tlim wrote: | what the heck did they get that gun? If it's owned by the parent, then the parent needs to be charged with recklessness. If it wasn't owned by the parent, then where did they get it? Again, another crime that the kids committed.
Lastly, I know I'm not like others who are labeled as "Progressive", but I say to just execute them. End of story. |
That's just insane. You can't go around executing people for crimes committed when they are 15 years old. That would be no different whatsoever than executing a 9 year old or a 6 year old. The judgement centers in the brain that control higher function such as required to act civilized for example, don't complete their development until we are 25 or so. I'm not saying let them off or keep them out of confinement in some institution, but to just execute them, without them even having the chance to see who they will become is just insane and heartless.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Oliver Reed wrote: | | Nordvader wrote: | | The White lives matter meme/movement is just as ridiculous as the people that advocate for straight pride parades. |
Then the term "Equality" needs to be removed from the movements. Equality means all people. Not, I need to get mine because the other guy has had it for 100s of years and now he cant have it and I can. |
More like the hundreds of years of white privilege has created a system so overwhelmingly skewed towards whites that virtually every moment not celebrated or protective towards a minority is a priori a white lives matter moment.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67714
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tlim wrote: | what the heck did they get that gun? If it's owned by the parent, then the parent needs to be charged with recklessness. If it wasn't owned by the parent, then where did they get it? Again, another crime that the kids committed.
Lastly, I know I'm not like others who are labeled as "Progressive", but I say to just execute them. End of story. |
"Now imagine they were White." Jake Tyler Brigance
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
