how do you tell when you are living with someone who might kill you?
Their words and actions. If someone tells you they will kill you and how or if they are physically abusive, that's a pretty good sign.
how do you tell when you are living with someone who might kill you?
Their words and actions. If someone tells you they will kill you and how or if they are physically abusive, that's a pretty good sign.
:noid:I think you were already confused
Well I have good news for you then. You can cheer up because no one is denying the importance of that, nor are they risking children being raised in a bad environment. If I recall correctly, a while back you admitted that gay marriage doesn't put any children in danger.and
what saddens me is that most here do not seem to appreciate the importance of bringing children into this world
and
providing them a decent home
Do you subscribe to the understanding that locks mostly keep out honest people, if along the margin?
Else, why would I? Do you deny that there is a reason we congregate? Or that there is an added benefit in our congregation? We are creatures of ceremony. We respond to it. It enhances. A contract is a ceremony with bite. That bite is a bit like the old lock. It gives pause where pause might not come otherwise. That enhances stability in relationships, which benefits the compact.
Well, I can give you a number of examples of people who salvaged marriages in the long run after being held in place by the idea of the process of divorce.It would be interesting to know how many marriages are "saved" because the couple doesn't want to go through the trouble of getting a divorce.
If I recall correctly, a while back you admitted that gay marriage doesn't put any children in danger.
Another point you haven't established beyond the breath needed to make the claim.it already has
you may have noticed how many here do not think the purpose of marriage is to protect the child and many do not even think it does
Well, I can give you a number of examples of people who salvaged marriages in the long run after being held in place by the idea of the process of divorce.
To which I'd add that the ceremony invests us in a way that the absence of one cannot, which I meant to have as part of my "we are creatures of" set out in the last. Rites have gravitas and alter our valuation of things. That's why they're historically observable tools of nearly any institution that desires stability and longevity.
Rather, it demonstrably, rationally isn't and for the actual reasons and reasoning set out prior.
Actually, here the one doesn't exist without the other. It's only a matter of degree. Even a purely civil affair takes place before a magistrate and has a certain amount of ceremony/rite.I don't equate the ceremony with the contract.
You don't have to be an attorney to be rational...but it helps.you might consider the fact that you are not talking to other lawyers
Actually, here the one doesn't exist without the other. It's only a matter of degree. Even a purely civil affair takes place before a magistrate and has a certain amount of ceremony/rite.
it already has
you may have noticed how many here do not think the purpose of marriage is to protect the child
and
many do not even think it does
you might consider the fact that you are not talking to other lawyers
You might consider the fact that everyone else has pointed out that your assertion is incorrect on this thread in addition to TH.
Children are part of the purpose, not its entirety.
I don't care if I am the only one saying it
it must be said
Why? It's blatantly not true as has been repeatedly pointed out.
if there are no children involved and two people agree that they should be divorced,
can you give me one reason why they should stay together?
do you understand the significance of a woman staying home with her child?