This is directed at women, even if he’s abusive and literally a killer, you have to stay married. If you get divorced you commit adultery, which obviously is worse than murder, and so if you do separate from him physically, you cannot pursue a relationship with another man. This is about cuckolding other guys more than it is about maintaining the sanctity of marriage.
This type of talking is getting more popular lately. Telling women that even if he’s abusive, you can’t divorce. There is also another conversation that happens, a little quieter and with fewer ears, that tells men that if their wives are unfaithful, be it cheating or not providing for his needs, men can divorce their wives. There’s scripture to back up this position, though I’m not one to memorize Bible verses. It’s most certainly a double standard based on the biblical worldview of women being chattel for men.
Look at Steven Crowder, he’s fighting no-fault divorce while his wife is fighting to get away from his abusive, controlling self. There are lots of folks in his circle that are targeting no-fault divorce because it is mainly utilized by women to get away from men. It allows women to take control over their lives, whereas before men had all the control, they could leave wives on a whim and the wives would be stuck begging for help. There’s a push to get back to traditional marriage that goes beyond not allowing LGBT people to marry whomever they love. They’re pushing for women to go back to being completely dependent on men, to be unable to provide financially for themselves, to purchase big ticket items without a man to sign off, to plan their families, and such. It seems like fringe thinking now, but the right is devious in that they don’t need immediate wins. They chip away, and chip away, until the dam breaks, like they did with Roe. It doesn’t matter that their plans are unpopular, they are popular with the right people. Abortion is something that has majority support, but we can’t protect it by being the majority (or even being right) because there are people high enough in our government to wipe it away with a stroke of a pen, so too is the rights of women to buy houses, hold credit cards, get divorced, live alone if they decide to deny these things. The Equality Act would have protected women from this ages ago, but we haven’t been able to enshrine our humanity into the law of the land because some powerful people do not agree that we are human.
Okay, sorry for the rant. I’m sure I have more to say but I have to get to work.
Yes I agree, this is absolutely about misogyny. Separated men don't generally have to pay child support, or alimony, and don't have their parental rights and responsiblities outlined in a court agreement.
Not to say that in every case a divorced dad should have all three. Every divorce is different, every set of spouses is different, and some friendly separations may not need all of that stuff dictated by the courts in an antagonistic manner. But I'd be willing to bet dollars vs. donuts that men like Urbanek are paranoid of 'worst case scenario' (to them) cases precisely because of the type of people they are. This is projection logic: I know what my spouse could say about me in a court, I know she'd be able to access my real financial records (the ones I lie about to my congregation), and I know how the courts would respond, so I'm going to oppose divorce.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the timing of this sermon coincides with his own marital troubles, either.
Last thought: IIRC the bible supports divorce in the case of adultery. So best way forward, ladies, is to hire that private eye to collect info on his mistress (or rentboy). Because most of these preachers probably have one.
Haven’t thought about the Crowder situation in a minute and damn it’s upsetting. The leaked ring footage of him is absolutely appalling. Religion does crazy things to people. So glad his wife is away from him now.
I just did a quick search on biblegateway.com for "divorce." A good number of hits came up, from Leviticus all the way to the new testament. And every single one of them was about MEN: when they can divorce their wives, when they can't, what "the Law" says about it, and on and on. There's not one word in the "Good Book," as far as I can tell (I admittedly only did a quick, cursory search) about WOMEN divorcing their husbands. I guess that makes sense, at least in Bibleland; after all, how could a piece of property possibly divorce its owner?
This was directed at women. These types of folks do not have issue with men divorcing or leaving women. It is straight up about controlling women and keeping them submissive to men at all times. Bobbitt could have left his wife any time he wanted to, Mrs. Bobbitt was forced into staying in a marriage of rape and abuse, which led to her lashing out. What she did wasn’t right, but it was not out of nowhere or nothing.
Your own Jesus said that sexual immorality was grounds for divorce. So you are WRONG. What's the matter? Don't you read your own bible? Not even the gospels?
Hopefully they're going to tell me when they are doing the cataract surgery in the left eye and even out my vision. This is the office with the no cash sign.
And Numbers says if a woman is unfaithful her husband can force and abortion. But hey, what's more important, what the bible says or what christians want it to say?
As much à coté de la plaque he is, he involuntary has a point. DM never divorced from my asshole deadbeat father for two reasons who have nothing ro do with her being raised catholic. First she tried to press charge for abuse when I was very young (80's), she was told she needed a document signed by a doctor. She went to one and "Madame, I have no proof you didn't do that to yourself to slander your husband". The second reason was after we left his sorry ass for good when I was about 20 and got my second diploma* from my high school. She learned something since her first try, had she left him and filed for divorce not only he would have had our adress** but if I was a minor and she attempted to protect me from him she could have been arrested for kidnapping. His whole family would have said he was the wronged party because men are ALWAYS right.
* Not a typo I was in a high school where you learned a trade and could have a diploma every two years (BEP, Bac pro, BTS).
** What could go wrong with your abuser knowing where you live ?
Well hell, she should live here, where we have the purported "greatest medical system in the world"--where I once had a doctor tell me "Migraines are all in your head."
I would be worried if he told you Migraines are all in your duodenum".
When your system will allow patients to take taxis* free of charge I will consider it.
* Taxis conventionnés for keeping the ambulances, private or public, for patients who really need it. You ask for a "bon de transport" to a doctor and then book one (not all taxi drivers volunteer).
For a popular pastor it's troubling. They always brag about their perfect families. Could he be a gay man who couldn't force himself to marry a woman ?
Completely bonkers. An agreement against the urge of biology, cooked in the boiling morass of ancient beliefs of supernatural beings, contrary to even common sense must be kept...for what? Because of textualism?! I take it back; it's not bonkers, it's childlike. This preacher is a child, a toddling baby. Yes, he dangerous, like a fully grown three year old hopped up on Pixie Sticks throwing a tantrum because nobody is following daddy's rules. But he's still a baby. Unable to grasp his own or any other's independence in this universe, his own personhood without reference to tracts plagiarized from other religions founded by scared, hut dwelling, barely civilized people, to separate himself from Dad/God because he's scared. Like a baby would be scared.
Babies have the excuse/reason of just beginning to figure out how the world works, to explain their behavior. This so-called man flat-out refuses to grow up.
The preachers can talk about their loving Jesus and the glorious afterlife from now on, but there is nothing they crave so much as power and control in this world. In my view, his enablers in the pews are every bit as bad as he is. They keep him funded. If you want to see what genuine persecution looks like, hand power to the preachers.
Just as a reminder, this is the same twist that prayed for “every homo that exists” to suffer “a slow, painful death.” You may remember him from back in February of this year:
Even gay people who are Christians, Urbanek? Let's see what your bible says about Christians who hate other Christians...
"If someone says "I love God," but hates a fellow believer, that person is a liar; for if we don't love people we can see, how can we love God, whom we cannot see?"
Wanna bet Urbanek would be the first to yell PERSECUTION! if someone said the same hateful thing about deserving a slow, painful death to Christians preachers?
Yeah but everybody knows that no vile, stinking, smelly old sodomite could ever be a christian, much less his type of christian. (If he's happy to exclude me, believe me I'm even happier to be excluded. Deliriously happy, in fact.)
Do Urbanek and his wife (if any) ever engage in oral sex? That's sodomy, as well.
Given the fact that the bible belt is the biggest consumer of porn in the US (including gay porn), I'm thinking Christians not only practice sodomy, they like to see it practiced.
Has Hemant been following the news about the serial killer that recently got arrested in New York? Because that murderer's wife recently filed for divorce...
OT : news about DM. She received antibiotics by I.V. The needles caused so many bruises/hematoma on her arm that it was switched with pills. She is still battling her infections but she is getting better physically. Morally she is depressed since she has no idea when she will be discharged.
I had an infection on my back which took weeks to heal for good and it was less severe than hers 😒
I suspect we're all pulling for DM here. Being in the hospital is awful and I hope she's well enough to leave soon. Last time I had a hospital IV, they refused to remove it for any reason, telling me it was the hospital's policy to keep it in for emergency use; I hope they've removed DM's under the circumstances. Take care.
They did, she takes oral antibiotics now. She has a genetic condition (like hemophilia but less severe) worsened by her diabetes who make her bruise easily and prevent her blood to clot normally.
And Christians wonder why the religion is being devastated by falling attendance and disgruntled former worshipers abandoning a sinking ship.
Take a look at this guy, Christians. Listen to what he's saying, the ideas expressed. The mindset. Do you begin to grasp the magnitude of the problem? Now multiply that across the country. Because Christian pastors like him are a franchise, like McDonald's. These anti-social maniacs represents your religion. They represents YOU.
"Even in that extreme situation, you still don't have the ability to get divorced. ...And that's why you young people, you had better be very, very cautious who you decide to marry…"
Yeah, so make sure you learn all about their religious views before the first date. Religious? Bye.
"I also noticed he didn't actually say a man couldn't file for divorce"
Well, if he's an ax murderer there's no way to get a divorce. But if it's something really important like her boobs aren't big enough, she doesn't bring beer and sammiches fast enough, or he just wants to upgrade to the newest model wife, that's totally fine.
A lot of these guys espousing the preacher’s line also know that Jesus condones divorce for cheating, but they only apply it to woman cheating on man, not the other way around. So, women have no opportunity for divorce, but men do. And since this guy was only talking to the women in his sermon, he probably thinks the same.
IANAL, but I believe that as long as you are married, you are (partly?) responsible for your partner's debts. That would be another good reason to get a divorce.
Years ago, a friend of mine discovered that she was still legally responsible for her ex-husband's debts even AFTER the divorce was final - at least in Florida, and this was back in the 90's, IIRC.
The Ex disappeared with his loads of expensive electronic toys and camera equipment, and then promptly ceased making payments on them. When the merchants and collection agencies couldn't find his ass, they came after her, telling her that "We do not recognize divorce in the state of Florida" and that she was on the hook for something like $40K. She tried to fight it, but lost.
I don't know if Florida divorce laws have changed in the intervening years or not. Probably have - for the worse.
So yes, even if you're not in a fucked-up purity-culture woman-hating religion, be very very careful who you marry. The wrong kind of person, in the wrong state with the wrong kind of laws combined with unlucky circumstances can screw up your life for years after you call it quits.
Currently in a relationship (poly on paper, monogamous in practice because we've both got stuff going on), but if we ever broke up it would take a lot of convincing for me to join the dating world. And yet more to get me to consider marriage.
Along with eliminating permanent alimony, the measure will set up a process for ex-spouses who make alimony payments to seek modifications to alimony agreements when they want to retire.
It will allow judges to reduce or terminate alimony, support or maintenance payments after considering a number of factors, such as “the age and health” of the person who makes payments; the customary retirement age of that person’s occupation; the "economic impact” a reduction in alimony would have on the recipient of the payments; and the “motivation for retirement and likelihood of returning to work” for the person making the payments.
The bill will set a five-year limit on what is known as rehabilitative alimony.
Under the plan, people married for less than three years will not be eligible for alimony payments, and those who have been married 20 years or longer will be eligible to receive payments for up to 75 percent of the term of the marriage.
The new law will also allow alimony payers to seek modifications if “a supportive relationship exists or has existed” involving their ex-spouses in the previous year. Critics argued the provision is vague and could apply to temporary roommates who help alimony recipients cover living expenses for short periods of time.
This is directed at women, even if he’s abusive and literally a killer, you have to stay married. If you get divorced you commit adultery, which obviously is worse than murder, and so if you do separate from him physically, you cannot pursue a relationship with another man. This is about cuckolding other guys more than it is about maintaining the sanctity of marriage.
This type of talking is getting more popular lately. Telling women that even if he’s abusive, you can’t divorce. There is also another conversation that happens, a little quieter and with fewer ears, that tells men that if their wives are unfaithful, be it cheating or not providing for his needs, men can divorce their wives. There’s scripture to back up this position, though I’m not one to memorize Bible verses. It’s most certainly a double standard based on the biblical worldview of women being chattel for men.
Look at Steven Crowder, he’s fighting no-fault divorce while his wife is fighting to get away from his abusive, controlling self. There are lots of folks in his circle that are targeting no-fault divorce because it is mainly utilized by women to get away from men. It allows women to take control over their lives, whereas before men had all the control, they could leave wives on a whim and the wives would be stuck begging for help. There’s a push to get back to traditional marriage that goes beyond not allowing LGBT people to marry whomever they love. They’re pushing for women to go back to being completely dependent on men, to be unable to provide financially for themselves, to purchase big ticket items without a man to sign off, to plan their families, and such. It seems like fringe thinking now, but the right is devious in that they don’t need immediate wins. They chip away, and chip away, until the dam breaks, like they did with Roe. It doesn’t matter that their plans are unpopular, they are popular with the right people. Abortion is something that has majority support, but we can’t protect it by being the majority (or even being right) because there are people high enough in our government to wipe it away with a stroke of a pen, so too is the rights of women to buy houses, hold credit cards, get divorced, live alone if they decide to deny these things. The Equality Act would have protected women from this ages ago, but we haven’t been able to enshrine our humanity into the law of the land because some powerful people do not agree that we are human.
Okay, sorry for the rant. I’m sure I have more to say but I have to get to work.
Women are people.
Do not apologize for your rant. This is something that needs to shouted from the rooftops over and over again.
I'm sure you find it even more depressing than I do how many times you have to say that last line.
Yes I agree, this is absolutely about misogyny. Separated men don't generally have to pay child support, or alimony, and don't have their parental rights and responsiblities outlined in a court agreement.
Not to say that in every case a divorced dad should have all three. Every divorce is different, every set of spouses is different, and some friendly separations may not need all of that stuff dictated by the courts in an antagonistic manner. But I'd be willing to bet dollars vs. donuts that men like Urbanek are paranoid of 'worst case scenario' (to them) cases precisely because of the type of people they are. This is projection logic: I know what my spouse could say about me in a court, I know she'd be able to access my real financial records (the ones I lie about to my congregation), and I know how the courts would respond, so I'm going to oppose divorce.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the timing of this sermon coincides with his own marital troubles, either.
Last thought: IIRC the bible supports divorce in the case of adultery. So best way forward, ladies, is to hire that private eye to collect info on his mistress (or rentboy). Because most of these preachers probably have one.
Haven’t thought about the Crowder situation in a minute and damn it’s upsetting. The leaked ring footage of him is absolutely appalling. Religion does crazy things to people. So glad his wife is away from him now.
When a man gets religion, the thing he usually does first is claim the right to control women.
I just did a quick search on biblegateway.com for "divorce." A good number of hits came up, from Leviticus all the way to the new testament. And every single one of them was about MEN: when they can divorce their wives, when they can't, what "the Law" says about it, and on and on. There's not one word in the "Good Book," as far as I can tell (I admittedly only did a quick, cursory search) about WOMEN divorcing their husbands. I guess that makes sense, at least in Bibleland; after all, how could a piece of property possibly divorce its owner?
What about men married to a Sada Abe or a Lorena Bobbitt ?
This was directed at women. These types of folks do not have issue with men divorcing or leaving women. It is straight up about controlling women and keeping them submissive to men at all times. Bobbitt could have left his wife any time he wanted to, Mrs. Bobbitt was forced into staying in a marriage of rape and abuse, which led to her lashing out. What she did wasn’t right, but it was not out of nowhere or nothing.
IIRC Mr Bobbitt deserved something. Maybe not that, but he wasn't innocent.
Weird Al said so.
But my point was what would the "good" pastor would say in their case ? Would divorce still not be an option ?
Oh, I'm sure this pastor would be happy to say that Bobbitt was entitled to divorce his wife after she "turned him from a rooster to a hen".
That was such a great line. Need to watch the movie again.
That was a great movie.
What did Jeffrey Dahmer say to Lorena Bobbitt,?
...
Are you going to eat that?
And WHY aren't women allowed to divorce their husbands? Because that would mean that 𝗔 𝗪𝗢𝗠𝗔𝗡 𝗜𝗦 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗤𝗨𝗔𝗟 𝗢𝗙 𝗔 𝗠𝗔𝗡 𝗜𝗡 𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗠𝗦 𝗢𝗙 𝗥𝗜𝗚𝗛𝗧𝗦.
And Duncan Dipshit just COULDN'T deal with that (poor baby).
Hey, Duncan "Pure Turds" Urbanek...
Your own Jesus said that sexual immorality was grounds for divorce. So you are WRONG. What's the matter? Don't you read your own bible? Not even the gospels?
As I was typing.
Gotta be fast around here. I think A. Belsey might have beaten me to it (though they worded it differently).
I'm on a phone waiting on a doctor, so it's hunt and peck
Hope it's nothing serious.
Hopefully they're going to tell me when they are doing the cataract surgery in the left eye and even out my vision. This is the office with the no cash sign.
I was recently in a dentist's office that had a "No cell phone usage in the office" sign next to a sign with the WiFi password.
Surgery is scheduled. New resident I saw was cute. Unfortunately an odd looking ring on his left hand.
So, you're ahuntin' pecker? I think I know where you can find some. 😃
And Numbers says if a woman is unfaithful her husband can force and abortion. But hey, what's more important, what the bible says or what christians want it to say?
Numbers 5:11-31 is one of the biggest examples of the lie that is the bible being anti-abortion/"pro-life."
As much à coté de la plaque he is, he involuntary has a point. DM never divorced from my asshole deadbeat father for two reasons who have nothing ro do with her being raised catholic. First she tried to press charge for abuse when I was very young (80's), she was told she needed a document signed by a doctor. She went to one and "Madame, I have no proof you didn't do that to yourself to slander your husband". The second reason was after we left his sorry ass for good when I was about 20 and got my second diploma* from my high school. She learned something since her first try, had she left him and filed for divorce not only he would have had our adress** but if I was a minor and she attempted to protect me from him she could have been arrested for kidnapping. His whole family would have said he was the wronged party because men are ALWAYS right.
* Not a typo I was in a high school where you learned a trade and could have a diploma every two years (BEP, Bac pro, BTS).
** What could go wrong with your abuser knowing where you live ?
Well hell, she should live here, where we have the purported "greatest medical system in the world"--where I once had a doctor tell me "Migraines are all in your head."
Funny. Unless your experiencing a migraine. Then rage inducing.
My mom had them for 20 years. Not good.
Mine had them for 40. I have them occasionally. Definitely not good.
"Migraines are all in your head."
Well, kind of?
I would be worried if he told you Migraines are all in your duodenum".
When your system will allow patients to take taxis* free of charge I will consider it.
* Taxis conventionnés for keeping the ambulances, private or public, for patients who really need it. You ask for a "bon de transport" to a doctor and then book one (not all taxi drivers volunteer).
The last time I looked, my insurance provides eight free rides a year.
DM would have used all in less than 3 months.
Welcome in women's world.
Is this guy married? If so, I fear for his wife's well-being. It's a headline waiting to happen.
His daughters too.
Daughters, you say.....?
Daddy, what do you want for your birthday?
Why, kittens, you know the Good Book has all the answers. (Hint, try Genesis 19:30-38. Oh, and an ice cream cake would be nice.)
German chocolate. And Chris Evans.
No coconut and Esther Povitsky for me.
I don't know this song 🤔
It was on the Visible Touch album, I think.
Is that for me or cdbunch ?
cdbunch.
If he was a real man, he'd have sons, dammit!
You think they'd be safe?
I tried looking him up. Got nowhere.
For a popular pastor it's troubling. They always brag about their perfect families. Could he be a gay man who couldn't force himself to marry a woman ?
Anyone wanna bet that his wife looks like something that came straight out of Stepford, Connecticut?
Completely bonkers. An agreement against the urge of biology, cooked in the boiling morass of ancient beliefs of supernatural beings, contrary to even common sense must be kept...for what? Because of textualism?! I take it back; it's not bonkers, it's childlike. This preacher is a child, a toddling baby. Yes, he dangerous, like a fully grown three year old hopped up on Pixie Sticks throwing a tantrum because nobody is following daddy's rules. But he's still a baby. Unable to grasp his own or any other's independence in this universe, his own personhood without reference to tracts plagiarized from other religions founded by scared, hut dwelling, barely civilized people, to separate himself from Dad/God because he's scared. Like a baby would be scared.
Babies have the excuse/reason of just beginning to figure out how the world works, to explain their behavior. This so-called man flat-out refuses to grow up.
You got my point. It's almost sad.
Still believes in faerie tale beings and realms long past childhood.
The preachers can talk about their loving Jesus and the glorious afterlife from now on, but there is nothing they crave so much as power and control in this world. In my view, his enablers in the pews are every bit as bad as he is. They keep him funded. If you want to see what genuine persecution looks like, hand power to the preachers.
Just as a reminder, this is the same twist that prayed for “every homo that exists” to suffer “a slow, painful death.” You may remember him from back in February of this year:
https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/christian-hate-preacher-prays-that/
What I wouldn't give to see someone confront him about this crap.
Even gay people who are Christians, Urbanek? Let's see what your bible says about Christians who hate other Christians...
"If someone says "I love God," but hates a fellow believer, that person is a liar; for if we don't love people we can see, how can we love God, whom we cannot see?"
-- 1 John 4:20
To add:
Wanna bet Urbanek would be the first to yell PERSECUTION! if someone said the same hateful thing about deserving a slow, painful death to Christians preachers?
Nah. Christians have faith healers, so they couldn't possibly die a slow, painful death. After all, faith healing does work, doesn't it?
Sure. Why, it even has the same efficacy as prayer.
Both works in favor of funeral homes.
Yeah but everybody knows that no vile, stinking, smelly old sodomite could ever be a christian, much less his type of christian. (If he's happy to exclude me, believe me I'm even happier to be excluded. Deliriously happy, in fact.)
Do Urbanek and his wife (if any) ever engage in oral sex? That's sodomy, as well.
Given the fact that the bible belt is the biggest consumer of porn in the US (including gay porn), I'm thinking Christians not only practice sodomy, they like to see it practiced.
Yes, but that's the right kind of sodomy, not like that icky stuff gays do.
Had to redo my post. Thought I could get it in before you saw the deleted one.
Has Hemant been following the news about the serial killer that recently got arrested in New York? Because that murderer's wife recently filed for divorce...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gilgo-beach-serial-killings-suspect-rex-heuermann-wife-files-divorce/
Gasp! She's going to hell! He'll be fine, if he isn't a Christian now he'll become one in prison. But her, man, she's boned.
When Hollywood turns this story into a movie 14 years from now, will she have rights to the royalties? Inquiring Christians want to know.
14 years? I give it 14 months.
With a different movie less than a year later.
And then a docudrama, and maybe after that, a miniseries.
No one gonna say it? OK, I will. This Duncan is a real yo-yo.
No one wanted to insult yo-yos.
I went with the slang rather than the noun. 😊
The North American Yo-Yo League would like a word with your lawyer.
I used to have a yoyo that glowed from within when it spun. It showed far more spark than this guy does.
But there were strings attached.
I got caught up in those strings when I was out walking the dog.
Were you in the State of Yo?
No, A state of Yo.
"North American Yo-Yo League "
GOP?
Nope. Competitive Yo-Yo. Not the batshit crazy league.
Pro-Yo?
Put a Go Pro on your Yo-Yo.
Set it for slo-mo.
Can we do it at a Go-Go, then go for a Fro-Yo?
You lolo.
"If it isn't Duncan, it isn't yo-yo!"
You would. Harumph! 😡
https://youtu.be/jLO7VrRij_M
You asked for it https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rKOup6j8B34
Maybe they asked for it, and maybe I shouldn't have clicked on it – but Jesus Christ, that's something I cannot un-see.
You can now declare war to Belgium 😁
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAbHGe9b0_Y
I'll see your Belgium and raise you a Germany.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tIWtlhI84kQ
I quite liked Boney M. 😄
What does the host have on his head??
Is the category bad music videos? I wanna play:
https://youtu.be/Q5GaEvzjgiw
Reminds me of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9OO0S5w2k
DM loves them.
Remember VPs "New Romantic" phase? Here they are:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkpZQL0kR6k
Is Dschinghis Khan German for The Village People?
She's trying to mix Carmen Miranda with Minnie Pearl.
Maybe a little Cyndi Lauper, too.
Mimiper ?
OT : news about DM. She received antibiotics by I.V. The needles caused so many bruises/hematoma on her arm that it was switched with pills. She is still battling her infections but she is getting better physically. Morally she is depressed since she has no idea when she will be discharged.
I had an infection on my back which took weeks to heal for good and it was less severe than hers 😒
Many virtual hugs for both of you.
Ditto. Big time ditto.
https://images.app.goo.gl/eWWCjEbyk6gpUVTw8
I suspect we're all pulling for DM here. Being in the hospital is awful and I hope she's well enough to leave soon. Last time I had a hospital IV, they refused to remove it for any reason, telling me it was the hospital's policy to keep it in for emergency use; I hope they've removed DM's under the circumstances. Take care.
They did, she takes oral antibiotics now. She has a genetic condition (like hemophilia but less severe) worsened by her diabetes who make her bruise easily and prevent her blood to clot normally.
He says: "𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘦𝘯."
I hear: "𝘐'𝘮 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘪𝘴𝘯'𝘵 𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘢𝘨𝘴 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘸."
Unfortunately she has to make the leap, all those who care about her can do is catch her afterwards.
And Christians wonder why the religion is being devastated by falling attendance and disgruntled former worshipers abandoning a sinking ship.
Take a look at this guy, Christians. Listen to what he's saying, the ideas expressed. The mindset. Do you begin to grasp the magnitude of the problem? Now multiply that across the country. Because Christian pastors like him are a franchise, like McDonald's. These anti-social maniacs represents your religion. They represents YOU.
"Christian pastors like him are a franchise, like McDonald's. "
Would you like lies with that?
"Even in that extreme situation, you still don't have the ability to get divorced. ...And that's why you young people, you had better be very, very cautious who you decide to marry…"
Yeah, so make sure you learn all about their religious views before the first date. Religious? Bye.
This man has gone extra-biblical. Jesus said you could divorce if your spouse committed adultery.
I also noticed he didn't actually say a man couldn't file for divorce
"I also noticed he didn't actually say a man couldn't file for divorce"
Well, if he's an ax murderer there's no way to get a divorce. But if it's something really important like her boobs aren't big enough, she doesn't bring beer and sammiches fast enough, or he just wants to upgrade to the newest model wife, that's totally fine.
A lot of these guys espousing the preacher’s line also know that Jesus condones divorce for cheating, but they only apply it to woman cheating on man, not the other way around. So, women have no opportunity for divorce, but men do. And since this guy was only talking to the women in his sermon, he probably thinks the same.
IANAL, but I believe that as long as you are married, you are (partly?) responsible for your partner's debts. That would be another good reason to get a divorce.
A good ax sharpener is hard to find and ain't cheap.
Years ago, a friend of mine discovered that she was still legally responsible for her ex-husband's debts even AFTER the divorce was final - at least in Florida, and this was back in the 90's, IIRC.
The Ex disappeared with his loads of expensive electronic toys and camera equipment, and then promptly ceased making payments on them. When the merchants and collection agencies couldn't find his ass, they came after her, telling her that "We do not recognize divorce in the state of Florida" and that she was on the hook for something like $40K. She tried to fight it, but lost.
I don't know if Florida divorce laws have changed in the intervening years or not. Probably have - for the worse.
So yes, even if you're not in a fucked-up purity-culture woman-hating religion, be very very careful who you marry. The wrong kind of person, in the wrong state with the wrong kind of laws combined with unlucky circumstances can screw up your life for years after you call it quits.
And yes, this advice goes for men as well.
With purity culture warrior Ron DeSantis in charge, what could go wrong?
Yes, what? The man who turned Floriduh into Floridistan.
Makes me not want to get married at all.
I do. Just waiting for my Prince Charming. He's only 25 years late.
You know guys. We have trouble with commitment. ;)
Better be a happy single woman than a miserable married/with a partner one. It didn't prevented me to have boyfriends and fuck buddies.
Currently in a relationship (poly on paper, monogamous in practice because we've both got stuff going on), but if we ever broke up it would take a lot of convincing for me to join the dating world. And yet more to get me to consider marriage.
𝐃𝐞𝐒𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐡𝐚𝐮𝐥 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐲. 𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞'𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥
Along with eliminating permanent alimony, the measure will set up a process for ex-spouses who make alimony payments to seek modifications to alimony agreements when they want to retire.
It will allow judges to reduce or terminate alimony, support or maintenance payments after considering a number of factors, such as “the age and health” of the person who makes payments; the customary retirement age of that person’s occupation; the "economic impact” a reduction in alimony would have on the recipient of the payments; and the “motivation for retirement and likelihood of returning to work” for the person making the payments.
The bill will set a five-year limit on what is known as rehabilitative alimony.
Under the plan, people married for less than three years will not be eligible for alimony payments, and those who have been married 20 years or longer will be eligible to receive payments for up to 75 percent of the term of the marriage.
The new law will also allow alimony payers to seek modifications if “a supportive relationship exists or has existed” involving their ex-spouses in the previous year. Critics argued the provision is vague and could apply to temporary roommates who help alimony recipients cover living expenses for short periods of time.
https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/desantis-signed-a-controversial-measure-that-will-overhaul-permanent-alimony-heres-what-to-know-about-the-bill/3064740/
From my brother's experience even after. (As part of the agreement he had to pay off the credit cards she had run up.)