Joe_Cool, I don’t think you’re an adulterer. I think you’re a hypocrite.
The most important thing, IMHO, that we must all try to share with the world, in whatever way we can, is this:
There is nothing wrong with being gay.
There is nothing wrong with being gay.
There is nothing wrong with being gay.
There is nothing wrong with being gay.
Let that be a fitting legacy to the tragedy of Daryl.
FTR, Joe, I don’t think you’re guilty of adultery, I was trying to make a point about narrow Biblical literalism. If you’re going to use the Bible as a weapon it can be turned right back on you.
I would, in a heartbeat. I’d ask him if he disowned his son just before he killed himself. If he said “yes”, I’d say to his face that he was responsible. ( Assuming I knew the parties involved ) If he answers “yes” to the frst question, what he did was reprehensible, and I’ll twist the fucking knife until it spins.
Amen to that, Weirddave.
Well, if you guys want to play stealth games, then you might get misunderstood. Don’t whine about it when it happens, OK?
We had a good idea of how andygirl knew what she did: she and Daryl were both gays at a fairly small and isolated college.
OTOH, where did this apparently smartassy comment about “working on a universal language for mathematics and science? Quite an impressive goal” come from? Out of BFE, as far as anyone here could tell at the time. Did any of us know this had made the newspapers? No. Did your beloved have the kindness to provide a cite? No. Was there any reason to believe he knew anything about the deceased that he hadn’t read here? No.
Don’t, I repeat don’t, go out of your way to set up a misunderstanding, and then gripe that someone made inaccurate assumptions from your post. I can tell you whose ass I’d pin the tail on.
I’m not going to get into an argument with you over whether the Bible can be trusted. I don’t accept andygirl’s report. Period. If you think she’s more reliable than the Bible, worship her if you want, for all I care. Maybe you can write down her words yourself, and start a world religion, with you as her high priest.
I’ve seen nothing that convinces me that her report is accurate or should be assumed to be so. If you disagree, then perhaps you should initiate a civil action against his parents. After all, since you have such reliable evidence of their maltreatment of their son, go for it. You’ll be unbeatable.
Hey-remember the Church of the AndyChrist?
Oh boy, we’re back to the old “SDMB clique” business again.
After nearly four years here, I’ve still got no idea whether I’m a member. :rolleyes:
[quoe]After all that, everyone was saying, “how come you can’t just take andygirl’s word for it, she’s trustworthy?”.
Joe found more info on the tragedy, Someone asked for a cite, just like UnuMondo did. The point was, why should he have to give a cite, but andygirl doesn’t.
[/quote]
I posted about this earlier in the thread. Things that you know through personal associations, you can’t cite. What’s she going to do, copy texts of emails in here?
Like I said in my last post, we knew how andygirl knew Daryl. OTOH, we had every reason to doubt that your hubby had known him, or knew anything about him. If you don’t see the difference, I give up.
In that case, I’ll stop needling you. 
My claim that accusations of that nature shouldn’t be made without firm evidence is using the bible as a weapon?
I was referring to your series of quotes about putting “God” ahead of your family, as well as your generally moralistic attitude about having “rules” for your wife and children.
Diogenes, I’d love to answer your question truthfully if only to let you know that I have a happy, loving, sharing marriage that i know for a fact people are jealous of. However, the problem has never come up that my husband and I are so parallel on an issue that it would result in him putting his foot down.
We got married because we agree on things and have things in common. Like I said, he’s only played the marriage card ONCE, and that was in regards to buying a car.
Even the decision to start a family was discussed for YEARS if not months. The man being the head of the household does not mean he RUNS the household, it means he has a slightly higher position of authority. Why? Because this is what we were both taught in our families growing up, and we witnessed happy, glorious affectionate marriages that are some 35 years strong on each side.
Ever been out with a group of people and there’s eight of you trying to decide what restaurant to go to and the argument goes on forever? Then someone stands up and says “LET’S GO TO THE WILD GOOSE AND BE DONE WITH IT”
That’s what my husband does. Sorry I can’t provide you with a more in depth answer.
On putting “God” ahead of your families-that’s not it. You’re putting “RULES” ahead of your family.
When you put PEOPLE first, you are putting God first then. Because God is not rules. God is people.
jarbabyj,
Thank you, but you still haven’t answered my essential question: what if the woman simply refuses to go along with what the husband says?
I’m guessing that the question doesn’t make sense to those you’re asking- they’re answering honestly from the basis of what their own relationship is, and simply cannot see a possability of some event where there’d be a large strong disagreement between them, and the husband pulled the ‘marriage’ card.
So, if they have no expectation/belief that the spouse would ever insist on doing something that they found repugnant, hostile, horrible, offensive etc, and that generally they didn’t disagree much on big issues, only on minor points (where do you want to spend Christmas this year???), it’d be as impossible to answer as to expect a blind from birth person to describe a color.
So, your question about ‘but what if they insisted you quit the job/ move some horrible place’ whatever, was something they couldn’t foresee happening , it’d be tough to answer.
To respond to your last question and your question to me of half a page of hijack ago, Diogenes, the question won’t come up. Because it’s assumed to be a Christian marriage as that term is understood by conservative Christians – and since you read my link, you’ll see that they found the “headship” concept on Paul’s writings on marriage – in which He compares husband and wife to Christ and Church. This means that he is the final authority, to be sure, but in a role that means he takes his wife’s wishes into major account – he is to cherish her as Christ cherished the church, even to laying down his life for her if that becomes necessary. And in token of this she is to make herself subservient to him on those rare occasions that his “casting vote” is called for – the presumption being that two people who love each other and wish to please each other can arrive at a solution to a problem between them that is satisfactory to both 99.99% of the time, and his head-of-the-household authority is something that she is to give in to only when their discussions are at an impasse. Note further that this is something they both agree on at the time of their marrying with eyes wide open – it’s not a mandate on all marriages everywhere, just those engaged in by two Christians who agree that the Pauline strictures will guide their marriage. Let me reemphasize the key point: he is to cherish her and make every effort to fulfill her needs, as Christ does the Church. The parallel is very important – without it, it becomes just another case of patriarchal male domination of female, and Christians were to be free from that sort of historical accretion of authority-without-accountability. In the last analysis, she is ahead on the deal, because his interest is commanded to be in pleasing her – only on the rarest of occasions will his “headship” require to be invoked. (I cannot count the number of times we’ve done something or refrained from doing it because it was something Barb wanted to do; we discussed at length the decision to move here, which was my idea, and finally did it when she agreed that it was something that I needed and she was more interested in filling my needs in that regard than in the reasons why she was reluctant to move.
I dunno if that makes it any clearer, but it’s at least an attempt.
I think one of the problems is this idea that a husband has “a slightly higher position of authority.” It just seems so antithetical to a relationship of equals.
That being said, glad to hear it works for you. If it works, and you’re happy, and you don’t feel demeaned in any way, then good.
OOC, does anyone have any opinion on my psychobabble re: Joe_Cool’s emotional investment in the deniability of this story?
(Back on page 3, do a find for “psychobabble”)
robertliguori, I think you’ve nailed it.
It’s sad, when you think about it. Perhaps I was too harsh and rabid at first, but the whole thing just makes me so angry. Of all the things that could end up happening with your children, is it really worth it to disown someone over being gay?*
I mean, my god, if that’s the WORST thing that any child of mine would ever tell me, that they’re GAY, I’d drop to my knees and thank God.
*Note-I know Joe said he would not disown a child of his for being gay. I just meant anyone in general who would. That’s all. However, I still find his denial of what andygirl told us more about wishful thinking. It’s sticking his fingers in his ears and pretending otherwise.
spot on, robertliquori.
Then, I beleive, this would be known as *Talk To The Hand *.