Audience and judges can ask their questions please...

TV01:

Where? Please show us.

TV

Matthew 5:32

Read it carefully, it says sexual immorality is enough justification tto terminate a marriage

TV01:

True.
But consider the dynamic. Children are often bitter when their parents get divorced. It often cause estrangement. Even where it does not, it's hard to seek certain types of advice from someone who cannot model marriage, who in your eyes have lived a lie or betrayed someone you love dearly.

TV

By Betrayal....do you mean getting divorce? I.e a child would find it difficult to take advice from divorced parent.

So basically you are saying a child who watches one of his parent threat the other badly is more likely to still seek advice from them if they remain married than if they are divorced? He is more likely to see their marriage as a model regardless of what kind of model it is as long as they remain in the union?

It seems to me that we are more concerned about "keeping the vows" than whether the right message is being sent or the right lesson being learnt.

Please correct me if I have in someway misunderstood your point.

Children are often bitter when their parents get divorced. It often cause estrangement

I still don't understand the correlation between divorce and estrangement. It's not like the parents have gone into exile. They are still accessible to the child so I wonder why the term estrangement. I've even seen children of married couples who are still estranged

Granted, the child might feel bitter about the marriage dissolution. But they later get to understand their parents decision when they get older

Obinoscopy: Matthew 5:32

Read it carefully, it says sexual immortality is enough justification to divorce a marriage

Read that as you will, but it does not imply re-marriage.

TV

Marriage in truth is about serving the other. If you can't do that or cannot aspire to it, then forego it.

What if the couples were ignorant of the bolded and ventured into marriage, would you agree that they should seek divorce? After all, they should have forgone it in the first place! I sincerely need your response to this.

TV01:

Read that as you will, but it does not imply re-marriage.

TV

The bone of contention is not about remarriage but about the permissibility of the termination of marital commitment

Tgirl4real: Audience and judges can ask their questions please...

mine is a comment; hope I am not breaking the rules. I will advice that Obinosco shouls pursue other lines of argument in his rebuttal than trying to make the bible say what it didn't say. The holy writ is settled on the fact that marraige is for life. The other points he raised in his presentation are worth pursuing than trying to di-prove the bible. Thank you.

I'm wondering why this debate is based more on the bible.

Sisi_Kill: By Betrayal....do you mean getting divorce? I.e a child would find it difficult to take advice from divorced parent.

That's a real possibility. even adult children are affected by teir parents divorce. It can seem as if your whole childhood was a lie and can make you doubt everything they ever said or modelled.

Sisi_Kill:
So basically you are saying a child who watches one of his parent threat the other badly is more likely to still seek advice from them if they remain married than if they are divorced? He is more likely to see their marriage as a model regardless of what kind of model it is as long as they remain in the union?

I have stated no such thing. In the first instance you are implying "abuse" as the cause. In the second you are missing the bitterness that typically accompanies divorce whatever the cause.

Sisi_Kill:
It seems to me that we are more concerned about "keeping the vows" than whether the right message is being sent or the right lesson being learnt.

As ever, I am concerned about strong marriages and flourishing societies. In any event, if vows are being kept, then the right message is being sent and the right lessons are being learnt.

Sisi_Kill:
Please correct me if I have in someway misunderstood your point.

As above

TV

DrummaBoy: mine is a comment; hope I am not breaking the rules. I will advice that Obinosco shouls pursue other lines of argument in his rebuttal than trying to make the bible say what it didn't say. The holy writ is settled on the fact that marraige is for life. The other points he raised in his presentation are worth pursuing than trying to di-prove the bible. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I'm not disproving the bible. I am simply quoting it. I am also addressing other lines of argument. Regards

Studies show that of all the relationship arrangements male/female marriages have the lowest levels of abuse.

Please provide us with source. It is very wrong to make such assertion without providing source.

Obinoscopy: What if the couples were ignorant of the bolded and ventured into marriage, would you agree that they should seek divorce? After all, they should have forgone it in the first place! I sincerely need your response to this.

One cannot plead ignorance. Marriage is no to be entered into lightly, as it says on the tin. Whoever joins you should make that clear. Mature, caring, committed. Marriage is not for anyone to devalue or to vary.

TV

Tgirl4real: I'm wondering why this debate is based more on the bible.

It was not mentioned in my submission. But I had to re-but errors in my learned friends piece.

TV

The fact that all of these happen outside marriage amply proves that these ailments are not caused by marriage, but by individual human frailties and inability to cope with the demands of the marital union

So what should be the solution for the person you referred to in the bolded? Don't you think he/she should dissolve that marriage since he/she can't meet the demands of the marital union?

TV01:

One cannot plead ignorance. Marriage is no to be entered into lightly, as it says on the tin. Whoever joins you should make that clear. Mature, caring, committed. Marriage is not for anyone to devalue or to vary.

TV

You've not addressed my question on the matter . Please read my question again and reply.

Tgirl4real: Kindly indicate when you are satisfied with your opponent's and you have nothing more to add.

Thanks.

I think it might best to put a time limit on the arguments - else they'll drag on indefinitely and ultimately end up boring the viewers.

Just saying...

Mature, caring and committed adults do not abuse their spouses.

Not everyone who ventures into marriage is matured, caring and committed. Even those who had these virtues abinitio before getting married might end up losing some of these virtues. When they do, don't you think it's advisable for the partner to seek divorce?

Obinoscopy: So what should be the solution for the person you referred to in the bolded? Don't you think he/she should dissolve that marriage since he/she can't meet the demands of the marital union?

No, he/she should not enter into it in the first place.

TV

I have responded to all substantive questions at least once.

I'm happy to close, unless any judge or viewer has a query?

TV

TV01:

No, he/she should not enter into it in the first place.

TV

Ok, but the deed has been done. He's already married. Don't you think we should liberate him?

Since my contestant has begged to take his leave, I beg to take mine, even though some of my questions and rebuttals were not addressed squarely.

Goodnight everyone.

Obinoscopy: Please provide us with source. It is very wrong to make such assertion without providing source.

http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron1.html

http://www.smartmarriages.com/cohabit.html

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

TV

Thank you Sirs.

@ Obinoscopy. he may consider responding again later.

Obinoscopy: Ok, but the deed has been done. He's already married. Don't you think we should liberate him?

Did we force him into marriage at gunpoint?

TV

TV01:

Did we force him into marriage at gunpoint?

TV

A simple answer such as: "No he should not seek divorce" or "Yes he may seek divorce only in that instance" would have sufficed. Thanks all the same.

TV01:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron1.html

http://www.smartmarriages.com/cohabit.html

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

TV

Okay thanks, I will look them up.

Obinoscopy: Since my contestant has begged to take his leave, I beg to take mine, even though some of my questions and rebuttals were not addressed squarely.

Goodnight everyone.

I don't feel I received responses to my extensive queries. But a lot has been written.

Lets leave it to our judges to decide.

Well done Obinoscopy, I appreciate it's challenging.

TV

Excellent arguments by both contestants. Well done!

TV01:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron1.html

http://www.smartmarriages.com/cohabit.html

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

TV

The first reference was about same sex marriage, the second about cohabitation before marriage while the third reference was also about homosexuality. There's no correlation between your supposed source and your previous assertion that made me request for your source. I'll quote your previous assertion here for the benefit of the viewers

TV01: Studies show that of all the relationship arrangements male/female marriages have the lowest levels of abuse

You said of all relationship, male and females marriages have the lowest levels of abuse. So you're inevitably saying that they shouldn't seek divorce due to marital abuse because of the above reference of yours? Have you not heard of marital rape?Domestic violence? Are you saying such is lowest in marriages? Cos your reference was silent on that

TV01:

I don't feel I received responses to my extensive queries. But a lot has been written.

Lets leave it to our judges to decide.

Well done Obinoscopy, I appreciate it's challenging.

TV

Same here. It's an honour being in this contest with you. I certainly learnt a lot. Have a good night rest.

Regards,
Obinoscopy

Obinoscopy: The first reference was about same sex marriage, the second about cohabitation before marriage while the third reference was also about homosexuality. There's no correlation between your supposed source and your previous assertion that made me request for your source. I'll quote your previous assertion here for the benefit of the viewers


You said of all relationship, male and females marriages have the lowest levels of abuse. So you're inevitably saying that they shouldn't seek divorce due to marital abuse because of the above reference of yours? Have you not heard of marital rape?Domestic violence? Are you saying such is lowest in marriages? Cos your reference was silent on that

Please read again, it's there. Here is an additional one where it's "in one' face".

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2004/03/marriage-still-the-safest-place-for-women-and-children

TV