There have been three responses so far. All of them are reductionist and basically say 'If you get divorced and/or stop attending church, you are a bad person.'

I still attend church, but I also recognize that much of the advice that we were given is incomplete, overly simplistic, and does not address all situations. It's mostly good and works out for most people, but if you don't recognize the shortcomings, you are making a serious error that costs some people dearly. I'll add that I think much of this is cultural, not strictly biblical, but people tend to have it wound up altogether.

I understand. That's very sad and I suppose it's because of our fallen human nature.

But that's the people doing that, not the Church.

Divorce isn't easy. I'm blessed that it is not my cross to bear. I have many other crosses in my life that I shoulder that many here wouldn't get.

My parents divorced when I was about 10. My dad moved back home to Waco and my mom followed about a year later to be closer to family.

For many years, my siblings and I bounced between my dad's house on Sat - Sun and my mom's on Mon - Tue, my dad's on Wed, and back to my mom's on Thu - Fri. This was well before cell phones. My friends had to know my schedule to reach me at one of their houses.

Because kids are malleable and adaptable, I never knew the stress that this caused until my mom remarried after my high school graduation. I only had ONE place that I need to be. It was like a huge weight was lifted off my shoulders.

I guess I liken it to a scared-straight program, but I knew as early as my junior year in HS that I only wanted to marry ONE time.

I've been blessed and fortunate that it has been the case. I thank God everyday for my wife.

Robert Wilson said:

---

There have been three responses so far. All of them are reductionist and basically say 'If you get divorced and/or stop attending church, you are a bad person.'

I still attend church, but I also recognize that much of the advice that we were given is incomplete, overly simplistic, and does not address all situations. It's mostly good and works out for most people, but if you don't recognize the shortcomings, you are making a serious error that costs some people dearly. I'll add that I think much of this is cultural, not strictly biblical, but people tend to have it wound up altogether.

---

They also imply that "that doesn't happen at my church". It does, they just don't see it or know about it because it isn't happening to them.

I firmly believe that judeo Christian values are mostly correct. I think the church is great at providing community. I also think it's insular, judgmental and extremely hypocritical.

Agree. Most people feel like they need to understand or be able to control for everything, and when you suggest there are gaps their framework does not address, it's funny to see how they react.

So far, just on this thread as an example, the reaction to that is 'people just don't honor the sanctity of marriage' and/or 'they are narcissistic.' And they don't understand how the pattern they are showing in this thread would isolate people. 'That is just self-imposed…'

I have found that we typically see what we look for.

If you want to see, or are looking for investment opportunities, you will see investment opportunities.

If you want to see, or are looking for witnessing opportunities, you will see witnessing opportunities.

If you want to see, or are looking for oppression, you will see oppression.

If you want to see, or are looking for shaming, you will see shaming.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

I have found that we typically see what we look for.

If you want to see, or are looking for investment opportunities, you will see investment opportunities.

If you want to see, or are looking for witnessing opportunities, you will see witnessing opportunities.

If you want to see, or are looking for oppression, you will see oppression.

If you want to see, or are looking for shaming, you will see shaming.

---

Or
The sky really is blue
The grass really is mostly green
Stop lights are really red

And we see what we are seeing and you're an ostrich who has buried their head in the sand and said "the sky is brown".

historian said:

---

No. Paul is referring to sex between two people of the same sex. It's not the least bit ambiguous and attempts to reinterpret it into something else are dishonest. That's a very dangerous thing to do with God's holy word.

---

We can't interpret the Bible? Don't agree with you there!

KaiBear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.R. said:

---

That is not how it works. I am divorced unfortuanlly and there was no Infidelity on either side. It just isn't that simple. Life can be hard.

---

Those were Jesus' words, not mine. We are called to live by them, no matter how tough it gets.

I am sorry to hear about your divorce. I hate to hear when any couple separates.

This is NOT an indictment of you, but rather our contraceptive-culture that has prevailed over the last 50 years. We, as a society, do not value the sanctity of marriage. According to research, about 39% of Protestants get divorced and about 28% of Catholics get divorced.

The Catechism paragraph 1606 states the following, "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

The Catholic Church takes marriage very seriously because we believe that Jesus elevated it to a sacrament.

The Church requires the couple to have 6 months of wedding prep with the priest or representative of the parish. This prep work is still NO guarantee of a lifelong marriage. It does take considerable amount of work.

Interesting fact, in the eyes of the Church, the priest does NOT marry the couple. When the couple exchange the vows, they marry each other. The priest (bishop or deacon) is merely the witness for the Church.

I've been lucky to be married to my wife for over 29 years. She's put up with a LOT from me. God Bless her. I've never wanted to leave, but i have felt that I should leave for her sake. Fortunately, I never did. We've been blessed to power thru our issues and some really rough years.

---

These are nice posts, but it often is more complicated. Say you marry someone who becomes mentally ill, personality disorder, abusive, etc and there is just no fixing it. We tell people how to power through and build a lasting marriage, but sometimes it just isn't within the capabilities of either party. A failure to acknowledge that often leaves people tethered to an abuser or someone just using them up. It's not a real marriage. That's just one example, and the church's failure to properly acknowledge those situations except in hindsight causes a lot of problems - both for people stuck in bad marriages and for the survivors of bad marriages. Lots of former churchgoers who won't go back because of how they were treated trying to leave a bad marriage.

---

In my view people most often stop attending Church due to a decreasing amount of humility and a corresponding increase in narcissism.

Same often applies to failed marriages.

Forgiveness is always found in the teachings of Jesus Christ. One benefits in accepting and providing that forgiveness to your spouse and others

My wife and I have been married for 44 years. Without question it is due to her devotion to God, the Church and our family.

---

God bless you both!

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

That's going to be super unpopular here but you're right. And the responses show exactly what you would expect. Are there marriages that can be saved by humility and counseling and the church? Yes, absolutely, 100%.

Should every marriage be saved? Absolutely not. Does the church ostracize people because of that? 100%. Is the church complicit in women staying in terrible relationships? Yeah, no doubt about it.

---

I have NEVER seen anyone in our Church get ostracized for being divorced.

Or for being gay for that matter.

Isn't it possible people sometimes anticipate being ostracized and bail before it actually occurs ?

---

social justice narratives tell some people they are being ostracized without even realizing it, and others that they are doing the ostracizing without even realizing it.

---

But those narratives are often lies. "Social justice" often is just a smokescreen for socialism.

Coke Bear said:

---

I understand. That's very sad and I suppose it's because of our fallen human nature.

But that's the people doing that, not the Church.

Divorce isn't easy. I'm blessed that it is not my cross to bear. I have many other crosses in my life that I shoulder that many here wouldn't get.

My parents divorced when I was about 10. My dad moved back home to Waco and my mom followed about a year later to be closer to family.

For many years, my siblings and I bounced between my dad's house on Sat - Sun and my mom's on Mon - Tue, my dad's on Wed, and back to my mom's on Thu - Fri. This was well before cell phones. My friends had to know my schedule to reach me at one of their houses.

Because kids are malleable and adaptable, I never knew the stress that this caused until my mom remarried after my high school graduation. I only had ONE place that I need to be. It was like a huge weight was lifted off my shoulders.

I guess I liken it to a scared-straight program, but I knew as early as my junior year in HS that I only wanted to marry ONE time.

I've been blessed and fortunate that it has been the case. I thank God everyday for my wife.

---

May God bless both of you as well.

That goes for everyone in a successful marriage and for those who have gone through a divorce.

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

No. Paul is referring to sex between two people of the same sex. It's not the least bit ambiguous and attempts to reinterpret it into something else are dishonest. That's a very dangerous thing to do with God's holy word.

---

We can't interpret the Bible? Don't agree with you there!

---

I did not say that. I said we should not "reinterpret" the Bible into something that is not there. We interpret it all the time and it's often easy. But it's also difficult quite often and we must be careful. Interpretation must be consistent with scripture. Taking a passage out of context or defining words in new ways to mean what we want instead of what they say are common errors. The results can be dangerous and misleading.

nein51 said:

---

They left because their "friends" stopped talking to them, they left because the groups they were part of no longer include them, the left because the "judge not lest ye be judged" crowd is judging them.

Or they left because they are ashamed they couldn't make it work, if they had only been better Christians and better wives or husbands things would have been ok.

---

its not dont judge.. its dont use self righteous judgement.

We are allowed to judge others using Gods righteousness as a standard.

Matthew 7:1 We ought to find fault one with another, but we must beware we do it not without cause, or to seem holier than they, or in hatred of them.

4th and Inches said:

---

nein51 said:

---

They left because their "friends" stopped talking to them, they left because the groups they were part of no longer include them, the left because the "judge not lest ye be judged" crowd is judging them.

Or they left because they are ashamed they couldn't make it work, if they had only been better Christians and better wives or husbands things would have been ok.

---

its not dont judge.. its dont use self righteous judgement.

We are allowed to judge others using Gods righteousness as a standard.

Matthew 7:1 We ought to find fault one with another, but we must beware we do it not without cause, or to seem holier than they, or in hatred of them.

---

That is what they tell each other! Rather than minding their own business or helping friends to get through it, they prefer to use God's righteous as a standard. I wonder how Jesus would respond to that... After all, he reacted so kindly to those in the Bible using God's righteousness as a standard on others.

historian said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.R. said:

---

That is not how it works. I am divorced unfortuanlly and there was no Infidelity on either side. It just isn't that simple. Life can be hard.

---

Those were Jesus' words, not mine. We are called to live by them, no matter how tough it gets.

I am sorry to hear about your divorce. I hate to hear when any couple separates.

This is NOT an indictment of you, but rather our contraceptive-culture that has prevailed over the last 50 years. We, as a society, do not value the sanctity of marriage. According to research, about 39% of Protestants get divorced and about 28% of Catholics get divorced.

The Catechism paragraph 1606 states the following, "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

The Catholic Church takes marriage very seriously because we believe that Jesus elevated it to a sacrament.

The Church requires the couple to have 6 months of wedding prep with the priest or representative of the parish. This prep work is still NO guarantee of a lifelong marriage. It does take considerable amount of work.

Interesting fact, in the eyes of the Church, the priest does NOT marry the couple. When the couple exchange the vows, they marry each other. The priest (bishop or deacon) is merely the witness for the Church.

I've been lucky to be married to my wife for over 29 years. She's put up with a LOT from me. God Bless her. I've never wanted to leave, but i have felt that I should leave for her sake. Fortunately, I never did. We've been blessed to power thru our issues and some really rough years.

---

These are nice posts, but it often is more complicated. Say you marry someone who becomes mentally ill, personality disorder, abusive, etc and there is just no fixing it. We tell people how to power through and build a lasting marriage, but sometimes it just isn't within the capabilities of either party. A failure to acknowledge that often leaves people tethered to an abuser or someone just using them up. It's not a real marriage. That's just one example, and the church's failure to properly acknowledge those situations except in hindsight causes a lot of problems - both for people stuck in bad marriages and for the survivors of bad marriages. Lots of former churchgoers who won't go back because of how they were treated trying to leave a bad marriage.

---

In my view people most often stop attending Church due to a decreasing amount of humility and a corresponding increase in narcissism.

Same often applies to failed marriages.

Forgiveness is always found in the teachings of Jesus Christ. One benefits in accepting and providing that forgiveness to your spouse and others

My wife and I have been married for 44 years. Without question it is due to her devotion to God, the Church and our family.

---

God bless you both!

---

Thank you.

FLBear5630 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

nein51 said:

---

They left because their "friends" stopped talking to them, they left because the groups they were part of no longer include them, the left because the "judge not lest ye be judged" crowd is judging them.

Or they left because they are ashamed they couldn't make it work, if they had only been better Christians and better wives or husbands things would have been ok.

---

its not dont judge.. its dont use self righteous judgement.

We are allowed to judge others using Gods righteousness as a standard.

Matthew 7:1 We ought to find fault one with another, but we must beware we do it not without cause, or to seem holier than they, or in hatred of them.

---

That is what they tell each other! Rather than minding their own business or helping friends to get through it, they prefer to use God's righteous as a standard. I wonder how Jesus would respond to that... After all, he reacted so kindly to those in the Bible using God's righteousness as a standard on others.

---

sounds like they were using Gods standard to be self righteous and doing it to seem holier than thou

I think this verse applies more often, yet is ignored too often:

"For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

Matthew 7:2

I think a failing marriage is a crisis on many levels for anyone experiencing it. There may be some who will marry without accepting their responsibility for making the marriage work, but I have never met one like that. Instead, I have seen marriages fall apart for reasons of sexual infidelity, money problems, household duties, and of course pride. I mean, I have seen couples break up because they get into a disagreement and it gets ugly because neither will back down and let the other person win.

Aside from anything else, I believe when we discover a fellow Christian is struggling in their marriage, we have a duty to help as the Holy Spirit directs us. That is, in some cases it's serious enough that I would find a good professional marriage counselor for the couple, but in others I might speak to the one who reaches out to me and suggest ways to lower the tension and find ways to just talk through the problem.

At no point would it be my place to counsel divorce, unless there was a threat of physical violence. In my book someone who physically attacks their spouse is guilty of infidelity by any sane definition of the word. But in any other case, even where someone has cheated, I would hold back from telling someone what to do, but also try to help find a way for the couple to talk through the situation and hopefully find a way to move forward.

The best thing any beloved can do when someone close to them has a troubled marriage is to pray for them. Of course, that might be only the first step.

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

I have found that we typically see what we look for.

If you want to see, or are looking for investment opportunities, you will see investment opportunities.

If you want to see, or are looking for witnessing opportunities, you will see witnessing opportunities.

If you want to see, or are looking for oppression, you will see oppression.

If you want to see, or are looking for shaming, you will see shaming.

---

Or
The sky really is blue
The grass really is mostly green
Stop lights are really red

And we see what we are seeing and you're an ostrich who has buried their head in the sand and said "the sky is brown".

---

People can be separated without being divorced. In the case of an abusive marriage, that's a good place to start (yes, I said start. It may lead to divorce and I'd be good with that but my opinion doesn't carry a great deal of weight in God's economy) But, let's talk about mental illness.

How is a mental illness different than cancer? Does cancer get the nein51 divorce exemption and anxiety disorder does not? Or is it the other way around? Anxiety disorder is hard.

How is a mental illness like bipolar disorder different than dementia, a disorder of the brain? The causes of both are not fully understood. Does bipolar disorder get the nein51 exemption? Bipolar disorder can be hard.

If you lose a leg or your eyesight to diabetes and she views you as not being the man she married, does that give her the nein51 exemption? The effects of diabetes can be hard.

Is addiction a life-style choice or a disease? Does one get the exemption while the other dos not. Addiction is hard on everyone connected. Heck, with an addicted son, the father wouldn't even need to look down the road each day waiting on His son's return. He could apply the exemption, shut the gate and turn his back. Is nein good with that?

Is a chemical imbalance worthy of divorce and brain plaque is not? How does nein51 rule here?

Indeed, life is hard.

Divorce, like water, seeks the path of least resistance.

Who said life should be easy? Was it nein?

Did you just say that an abusive relationship is not a reason for divorce?

This is why I can't even take your position seriously.

IIRC, the Church would allow for civil divorce in cases of abuse (case by case basis) for the safety of the spouse and/or children; however, in the eyes of the Church, they are still married until death of one of the spouses unless they were able to obtain a declaration of nullity (an annulment).

My heart breaks for these people and anyone going thru a divorce.

If couples spent more time on marriage prep than wedding prep, divorce might be less common.

I'm not blaming anyone here. It's thru the grace of God that my marriage has held together. My wedding prep was not the best. We may have met with my priest once or twice, but he knew us so I guess he didn't feel the need to meet more. I wish we would have.

My diocese also requires a weekend of Engaged Encounter where couples spends a weekend in retreat preparing for the marriage.

Coke Bear said:

---

IIRC, the Church would allow for civil divorce in cases of abuse (case by case basis) for the safety of the spouse and/or children; however, in the eyes of the Church, they are still married until death of one of the spouses unless they were able to obtain a declaration of nullity (an annulment).

My heart breaks for these people and anyone going thru a divorce.

If couples spent more time on marriage prep than wedding prep, divorce might be less common.

I'm not blaming anyone here. It's thru the grace of God that my marriage has held together. My wedding prep was not the best. We may have met with my priest once or twice, but he knew us so I guess he didn't feel the need to meet more. I wish we would have.

My diocese also requires a weekend of Engaged Encounter where couples spends a weekend in retreat preparing for the marriage.

---

You'll catch no disagreement that pre marriage counseling is really important.

Should probably also be noted that only something like 50% of people say they go to church so it's likely that 50% of marriages have nothing to do with the church or God.

Coke Bear said:

---

IIRC, the Church would allow for civil divorce in cases of abuse (case by case basis) for the safety of the spouse and/or children; however, in the eyes of the Church, they are still married until death of one of the spouses unless they were able to obtain a declaration of nullity (an annulment).

My heart breaks for these people and anyone going thru a divorce.

If couples spent more time on marriage prep than wedding prep, divorce might be less common.

I'm not blaming anyone here. It's thru the grace of God that my marriage has held together. My wedding prep was not the best. We may have met with my priest once or twice, but he knew us so I guess he didn't feel the need to meet more. I wish we would have.

My diocese also requires a weekend of Engaged Encounter where couples spends a weekend in retreat preparing for the marriage.

---

Legacy Family Ministry in the Baylor area (run by Byron and Carla Weathersbee) does a ton of marriage prep classes and annual retreats for the first 5 years of marriage. They could always use a referral or a donation to keep up their good work.

That's so reductionist it is just plain silly, and it well illustrates why people who have had to leave a bad/toxic/abusive relationship would not feel comfortable coming back to church.

historian said:

---

No. Paul is referring to sex between two people of the same sex. It's not the least bit ambiguous and attempts to reinterpret it into something else are dishonest. That's a very dangerous thing to do with God's holy word.

---

Homoerotic behavior in power relationships is indeed a sin. Educate yourself on this behavior in the 0-100 AD

nein51 said:

---

Did you just say that an abusive relationship is not a reason for divorce?

This is why I can't even take your position seriously.

---

reread my first paragraph. It's not hard.

In fact, the part you are referring to is right here

"yes, I said start. It may lead to divorce and I'd be good with that but my opinion doesn't carry a great deal of weight in God's economy"

Remember when I said people see what they want to see? You completely turned a blind to what I said. In the original, I even put it in parentheses.

You found one thing you wanted to argue about, ignored what I actually said about it and then totally ignored what I wrote multiple paragraphs on.

You see what you want to see and ignore what you want to ignore.

Try again

Robert Wilson said:

---

That's so reductionist it is just plain silly, and it well illustrates why people who have had to leave a bad/toxic/abusive relationship would not feel comfortable coming back to church.

---

from what I posted, give me an example.

Here it is again regarding abuse.

"yes, I said start. It may lead to divorce and I'd be good with that but my opinion doesn't carry a great deal of weight in God's economy"

Neither you nor nein have chosen to address mental illness, a subject that nein opened the door to with an earlier statement but now, will not address.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

That's so reductionist it is just plain silly, and it well illustrates why people who have had to leave a bad/toxic/abusive relationship would not feel comfortable coming back to church.

---

from what I posted, give me an example.

Here it is again regarding abuse.

"yes, I said start. It may lead to divorce and I'd be good with that but my opinion doesn't carry a great deal of weight in God's economy"

Neither you nor nein have chosen to address mental illness, a subject that nein opened the door to with an earlier statement but now, will not address.

---

What do you want to address? Ask a direct question

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

That's so reductionist it is just plain silly, and it well illustrates why people who have had to leave a bad/toxic/abusive relationship would not feel comfortable coming back to church.

---

from what I posted, give me an example.

Here it is again regarding abuse.

"yes, I said start. It may lead to divorce and I'd be good with that but my opinion doesn't carry a great deal of weight in God's economy"

Neither you nor nein have chosen to address mental illness, a subject that nein opened the door to with an earlier statement but now, will not address.

---

What do you want to address? Ask a direct question

---

this was directed at Robert. Your questions are further up. You addressed a statement I made and ignored the questions.

Try again

Waco1947 said:

---

historian said:

---

No. Paul is referring to sex between two people of the same sex. It's not the least bit ambiguous and attempts to reinterpret it into something else are dishonest. That's a very dangerous thing to do with God's holy word.

---

Homoerotic behavior in power relationships is indeed a sin. Educate yourself on this behavior in the 0-100 AD

---

Yes, educate yourself.

47, who do you use for your homoerotic classes? Is it at the public library or an elementary school?

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

That's not marriage.

---

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people is better or worse than two married people who are completely committed to each other but the man beats the woman in front of their kids? And…go!

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people openly are more or less married than the people in your church this very morning who are sleeping with other people but keeping it a secret? And…go!

---

a gun shot to the left knee cap it better or worse than a gun shot to the right knee cap? And…go!

---

He said it's not marriage. I'm just trying to ascertain if a good marriage where people sleep with other people is worse than a bad marriage where they don't.

Yours is a false equivalency.

However, I realize this is a Baylor forum where even the very most liberal members are not going to have a positive outlook on an open marriage.

---

A paraphrase: There is no right or wrong. Everyone will do what is right in their own eyes.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

That's not marriage.

---

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people is better or worse than two married people who are completely committed to each other but the man beats the woman in front of their kids? And…go!

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people openly are more or less married than the people in your church this very morning who are sleeping with other people but keeping it a secret? And…go!

---

a gun shot to the left knee cap it better or worse than a gun shot to the right knee cap? And…go!

---

He said it's not marriage. I'm just trying to ascertain if a good marriage where people sleep with other people is worse than a bad marriage where they don't.

Yours is a false equivalency.

However, I realize this is a Baylor forum where even the very most liberal members are not going to have a positive outlook on an open marriage.

---

A paraphrase: There is no right or wrong. Everyone will do what is right in their own eyes.

---

I know this will come as a shock to you but only 31% of the population identifies as Christian so when you fall back on scripture you've lost your argument with 69% of the world's population.

And that's not what I said.

But I get it. Your church view is that two people can be absolutely miserable and hate each others guts but as long as they only sleep with each other (though let's be fair they probably aren't having sex at all) that's a better marriage than two people who love each other but sleep with other people.

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

That's not marriage.

---

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people is better or worse than two married people who are completely committed to each other but the man beats the woman in front of their kids? And…go!

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people openly are more or less married than the people in your church this very morning who are sleeping with other people but keeping it a secret? And…go!

---

a gun shot to the left knee cap it better or worse than a gun shot to the right knee cap? And…go!

---

He said it's not marriage. I'm just trying to ascertain if a good marriage where people sleep with other people is worse than a bad marriage where they don't.

Yours is a false equivalency.

However, I realize this is a Baylor forum where even the very most liberal members are not going to have a positive outlook on an open marriage.

---

A paraphrase: There is no right or wrong. Everyone will do what is right in their own eyes.

---

But I get it. Your church view is that two people can be absolutely miserable and hate each others guts but as long as they only sleep with each other (though let's be fair they probably aren't having sex at all) that's a better marriage than two people who love each other but sleep with other people.

---

If a person loves his or her spouse they won't cheat on them. That's not love. Infidelity is betrayal.

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

That's not marriage.

---

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people is better or worse than two married people who are completely committed to each other but the man beats the woman in front of their kids? And…go!

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people openly are more or less married than the people in your church this very morning who are sleeping with other people but keeping it a secret? And…go!

---

a gun shot to the left knee cap it better or worse than a gun shot to the right knee cap? And…go!

---

He said it's not marriage. I'm just trying to ascertain if a good marriage where people sleep with other people is worse than a bad marriage where they don't.

Yours is a false equivalency.

However, I realize this is a Baylor forum where even the very most liberal members are not going to have a positive outlook on an open marriage.

---

A paraphrase: There is no right or wrong. Everyone will do what is right in their own eyes.

---

I know this will come as a shock to you but only 31% of the population identifies as Christian so when you fall back on scripture you've lost your argument with 69% of the world's population.

And that's not what I said.

But I get it. Your church view is that two people can be absolutely miserable and hate each others guts but as long as they only sleep with each other (though let's be fair they probably aren't having sex at all) that's a better marriage than two people who love each other but sleep with other people.

---

And in your secular view, everything is transactional/contractual. The concept of covenant doesn't exist-it's nonsensical.

by the way, you still haven't answered the questions I asked.

There's really no need to. Neither of us are going to change our mind. Just wasting "breath" on each other at this point.

historian said:

---

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

That's not marriage.

---

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people is better or worse than two married people who are completely committed to each other but the man beats the woman in front of their kids? And…go!

Two married people who love each other but sleep with other people openly are more or less married than the people in your church this very morning who are sleeping with other people but keeping it a secret? And…go!

---

a gun shot to the left knee cap it better or worse than a gun shot to the right knee cap? And…go!

---

He said it's not marriage. I'm just trying to ascertain if a good marriage where people sleep with other people is worse than a bad marriage where they don't.

Yours is a false equivalency.

However, I realize this is a Baylor forum where even the very most liberal members are not going to have a positive outlook on an open marriage.

---

A paraphrase: There is no right or wrong. Everyone will do what is right in their own eyes.

---

But I get it. Your church view is that two people can be absolutely miserable and hate each others guts but as long as they only sleep with each other (though let's be fair they probably aren't having sex at all) that's a better marriage than two people who love each other but sleep with other people.

---

If a person loves his or her spouse they won't cheat on them. That's not love. Infidelity is betrayal.

---

It's not cheating if all parties consent. That's what an open marriage is. It's not cheating on your partner.