There are only three ways a marriage can be made null:
Adultery, abandonment, or death.
Good luck seeing that respected in our now Babylonian society- and among those who have the biblical understanding of a rock
Cool story.
When putting some sense back into an out of control person, in your own home no less, warrants a criminal prosecution, then there is an oppressive nature within the law.
You can sit there with your frankly elementary morals all you want, but in the end I've always been right on this and you all are just desperate to conceal reality. That's why you all do as you do- like on that thread when you thanked Cruciform on a debate pertaining to papal infallibility.
You thanked him because he was against me, not because you believe in the damn infallibility of Francis.
I'm not imagining a thing, so stop acting as if I am- you few hate the truth, and therefore make it a point to go against me despite having no real argument.
There are only three ways a marriage can be made null:
Adultery, abandonment, or death.
There are only three ways a marriage can be made null:
Adultery, abandonment, or death.
Good luck seeing that respected in our now Babylonian society- and among those who have the biblical understanding of a rock
And as with so many things, you're wrong.I consider 'battery' as doing actual, purposeful harm to a person.
People are actually prosecuted over violations of laws that aren't hard to understand, over conduct that isn't hard to object to.The shenanigans that go on in those court rooms is enough to make a reasonable person's blood boil- people being prosecuted on ridiculous semantics.
No, it's just not about excusing someone for breaking the law and dumping blame on an entire gender because you have a grudge and redefining statutes and dictionaries to manage it.But you all aren't reasonable- that much is clear. It all comes down to dumping whatever blame you can on a man who makes the slightest mistake.
A neat circle, logically speaking.I don't need to justify that, because it justifies itself.
Said the fellow as his wife went to cast a vote.We are in a relatively recent age of insanity that never existed in the 'law' before- it used to be sensible, now it is absurd.
lain: Are you sure you don't want to go with 'uppity'?two rebellious women
Right ... so you agree that whoever commits adultery is in the wrong ...
Those are laws for 'the dead'.
. . . and Jesus instructed, 'let the dead bury their dead'.
Christians are instructed to leave you guys to your own kind.
People are actually prosecuted over violations of laws that aren't hard to understand, over conduct that isn't hard to object to.
No, it's just not about excusing someone for breaking the law and dumping blame on an entire gender because you have a grudge and redefining statutes and dictionaries to manage it.
Said the fellow as his wife went to cast a vote.
lain: Are you sure you don't want to go with 'uppity'?
Right ... so you agree that whoever commits adultery is in the wrong ...
Only among the dead who bury their dead.
You are insanely wrong, sitting here saying that adultery is okay as long as you believe in Jesus.
What drug are you on, seriously? The New Testament is very clear on adultery, and it is utterly against your nonsense.
Uh huh. My comment wasn't about dead people, but rather LIVING, MARRIED individuals who cheat on their spouses.
This ... from the guy who always makes excuses for men for committing adultery by placing the blame on women. You have no authority to lecture anyone.
I've never said adultery is okay,
Which of course isn't what happened or ever happens, except in the illustrations of people who have to attempt to make a thing look absurd that really isn't in order to deride what they really shouldn't.When you turn throwing a wet tissue paper at someone into a nailed bat swung to the face, of course that dramatized account sounds like something to prosecute.
Not if you understand or mean to understand the law, which you've amply demonstrated is the case with you...I mean, if you bothered to know what you were talking about you'd have to change your opinion.'Breaking the law', as in 'battery' meaning a slight wind brushing a cheek.
It's not ... and IF you truly believed that, it's where the discussion would end.
Interesting that you criticise the understanding of others, yet misuse the language of marriage nullity.
A marriage cannot be made null, since a declaration of nullity means that the marriage was not ever a valid one, that there was never a marriage. Death 'ends' a valid marriage, while adultery and abandonment are grounds for 'ending' a valid marriage, but don't cause it to be annulled.
Uh huh. My comment wasn't about dead people, but rather LIVING, MARRIED individuals who cheat on their spouses.
This ... from the guy who always makes excuses for men for committing adultery by placing the blame on women. You have no authority to lecture anyone.
You don't want to respond to the rest of the post because
It's irrelevant. There is never an excuse to cheat.
I never cease to be amazed by what passes for wit in some circles. Or how some circles pass for wit.Cool story.
You have a peculiar sense of humor...but one heck of an imagination. Now try to prove that "observation" of yours.Always found it funny that when a woman files for divorce, they typically have another man right around the corner before the separation even begins. Nothing dubious about that, right?
He probably thinks semantics has something to do with the Jews. lain:It's nothing but technicalities and semantics with you people
Cool story.