TV01:
Perhaps, but my mazy runs lead to end product. it's why Pappilo will always rank higher and won more than Jay-Jay.


Listing virtues or attributes, is no the same as listing relationship types or family forms. The attributes can exist in any form or type, but the form or type make a difference - ATBE.


And here you are factually incorrect. Marriage is and remains the optimal way. Backed up in every which way, and from every perspective, with raw unassailable data. In absolute and comparative terms. Anything else is just gainsaying. And yes, I believe it was laid down by God, and if entered in,and adhered to as He commands, it won't be just optimal, or the simply the best, it will be perfect.


Marriage (as defined) as the optimal form is not subjective, as stated above. That's no to say I don't appreciate that there are some who will not be able to understand or embrace it in it's fullness, or others that will enter into it and fall short.


I fully acknowledge other relationship forms and family types,and that they can raise well-adjusted and productive children. But as stated marriage and its outcomes remain superior.

To personalise it, someone would have to convince me that my children would be just as well - or better - off if I swapped their mother for another woman, or a man, and vice versa. Or or if both of us where out of the picture and they were raised by just anyone, in any combination, or family setting.

Does there have to be a reason . It was mostly because I wasn't even getting scraps from Mindfulness and her cohort. I hope whatever she has doesn't rub off.

TV

TV01:

The question please

TV

On whose authority is it to structure marriage based on commitment level?
Religion or Government?

You agree that marriage is entered voluntarily, why then should anyone be sanctioned for voluntarily choosing to cheat on someone he/she voluntarily married?

You have the right to marry voluntarily but you have no right to cheat voluntarily - according to whom?

Stillfire:


The government should be least bit interested in 'stopping' adultery, that is for religious houses to do. The government would be/is focused on making money in regards to Nigeria being currently broke. It would definitely make money from the 'adultery' industry. lmao!

crackhaus:

Soon and very soon bro, you will get it.

All I have said is, "I believe in marriage and I believe that it is good, but don't create laws that will coerce/force me into remaining in one that no longer has a happy future". - I am not infallible, you are not infallible, TV01 is not infallible, Stillfire is not infallible... who died and made it a rule that all of us will love and stay true to the same person for the rest of our lives?

Do you all prefer staying married to someone who is only in it because he/she doesn't want to go to jail or pay a fine?

Yea, didn't think so.

crackhaus:

Education is an attribute/virtue?
Peaceful coexistence in a community, is an attribute?
Exposure and enlightenment are virtues?

Lol, now you're grasping.

When you asked me to name in-lieu of marriage, you didn't draw a line between virtue/attribute and form...not like any of the above are even virtues.

crackhaus:
Marriage remains the optimal way according to who TV01? - Did I hear someone say God? Yes I did...

crackhaus:
In that case, isn't God the one who sanctions any and all acts of infidelity?
The wages of sin is death seems not to be a good enough sanction any more according to TV01, NL's foremost marriage advocate.

crackhaus:
Lawd have mercy, on whose authority is it to structure marriage based on commitment level?
Religion or Government?

crackhaus:
You agree that marriage is entered voluntarily, why then should anyone be sanctioned for voluntarily choosing to cheat on someone he/she voluntarily married?

crackhaus:
You have the right to marry voluntarily but you have no right to cheat voluntarily - according to whom?

pickabeau1:


Why do you persist on the negative

When marriage was more of a civil contract and not what it us now....was society better?

Yes or no

Please

TV01:

I'm not sure what inference you are drawing here? Marriage is a family structure, a relationship type. And my position is that it's the best for raising well-adjusted and productive citizens.

Qualities like education, or enlightenment or exposure, are in some ways arbitrary and, in any event, independent of the relationship form. For example, ATBE, the children of an educated men in marriage, will have better outcomes than the same educated man in a different structure. So your points are moot, in fact, not actually relevant.

If anything, qualities would have been a better descriptor than virtues. And you would have been better served by linking "real" virtues to outcomes, separate to "forms or types".


Feel free to research and return evidence to the contrary. And no, education, exposure and enlightenment do not in and off themselves raise children .

I was happy to restrict it to civil marriage, but if you wish to discuss both, or conflate them, no problem.

As I said, spiritually, restoration and reconciliation is always preferred - even by God (I speak as a Christian). However, if the sin (breach, transgression) goes un-repented off, there will be a price to pay as you've noted. Not sure what you are inferring here?


TV

TV01:
Discussions would make much better progress if only people would answer questions .


I'm not quite sure why you ask this? But I'll answer. Marriage has always been based on lifelong fidelity and commitment. Some - like I do - believe, it was God-given, others believe it evolved through culture. Either way, it's a societal artefact for the good of the whole. And government should support it, but not seek to vary it - they didn't devise it, and they don't own it.


You keep repeating this point, but fail to see that it's a non sequitur. Can you take out gym-membership, or a lease on a rental apartment and then simply walk away from it when you choose - a contract that you voluntarily entered into? Does the fact that you voluntarily entered into it mean you can voluntarily walk away from it - without cost or sanction?

Taking vows changes the whole nature of what you can voluntarily do. Marriage comes with rights, responsibilities and obligations. You voluntarily agreed and committed to them. And they are binding on both parties. To keep repeating that one can voluntarily take vows and voluntarily not keep them - without at least showing how that is the case in any other context is odd.

As above. You can only say this if you don't understand what marriage is, or label something that is not marriage as marriage.

Now, the question please .


TV

I fully acknowledge other relationship forms and family types, and that they can raise well-adjusted and productive children

crackhaus:

Now he wants me to do the research for him...

You're the one telling us marriage remains the optimal way to raise well-adjusted productive citizens and you say it has been proven.

The onus is on you to back that up, not me.
Where's the research and/or evidence?

crackhaus:

Since you didn't answer my question, I will assume then that you wouldn't want to be married to someone who's only in it because she doesn't want to go to jail or pay a fine. lol..

How is this persisting on the negative?
This is covering all bases and exploring all options...thought you were into the sciences.

The answer to your question is neither until you specify the terms on which you rate a better society.

Society has more innovations today, more vaccines, more infrastructures, more explorations, people are getting more educated, etc etc.. There are too many ways in which society can be judged to be better now.

But I presume that what you're getting at is that there's less morality and value system - and on this account, I don't see how family/marriage is responsible for it.

Better still, you should specify what you use to judge 'a better/worse society'.

crackhaus:
Took a while, but I suspected it was only a matter of time till you bring it down to 'not understanding marriage'.

crackhaus:
I have answered all your questions -

How would you structure marriage, so that it would deliver the same benefits, not have any "coercive" penalties for breaches, and at the same time retain it's honour and prestige, and be materially different from any other relationship type?

crackhaus:
I told you other ways by which productive citizens can become, chief of which is education.

crackhaus:
I have also told you that you can't have an optimal way in producing these citizens as there have been very influential people who were not brought up in the usual family setting...one example would be the first black president in one country somewhere.

crackhaus:
What other question do you need answered when you already know and typed this:

crackhaus:

Doesn't this already answer the first question of me naming other means by which productive people can be?
Does it not also answer the second question proving that there's no optimal way on that account of raising well-adjusted and productive
citizens?

crackhaus:
What else na?

Acidosis:

No, I am only opposing OP's stance that a woman can freely cheat on her husband, and walk away after the act.

Can a man also cheat on her wife, and walk away?

Before they cheat, they should find good reasons to depart.

Acidosis:


Killing a cheating spouse is a terrible thing that must be frowned upon by all and sundry.

I am particularly angry that the thread assumes and encourages women to rightly cheat, flaunt it, and walk away, and the same thread expects that men, by virtue of their MATURITY, remain silent and just let go as though nothing happened.

lezz:
Your story seems to stem from a larger experience you didn't state here.

There's no justification beating a woman in so far that the woman did not strike first or initiate violence.

And why do you tag Nigerian men to this?

Violence against women has higher occurrence rate in the West than in Africa!

mizzochocinco:
probably because stastitics in Africa are not recorded properly

I like the word " probably that preceded your submission.

You aren't too certain. Lolz.

A woman is raped every 2hrs in America. That's 500 woman a day according to 2008 statistics.

Do you still believe it's down to statistics?

pickabeau1:


ok bro.. I hear


from your latest discourse, you opine that kids don't have to be raised in a marriage to provide well adjusted environments
So really there is no further need for this back and forth

crackhaus:

This here in bold is the reason y'all were coming at me in the first instance, and I figured that out as soon as TV started introducing children and productive citizens into the discourse.
What does criminalizing adultery have to do with raising productive citizens?

crackhaus:

The argument is this:
People should/should not be sanctioned with jail terms or fines on account of infidelity.. simple!

crackhaus:

Every other argument is as a result of TV trying to prove that infidelity should be sanctioned because a broken marriage is worse than a happy one (where people are coerced into staying married) with respect to raising productive citizens.

crackhaus:

I didn't opine anything, all I did was refute the claim that productive citizens can only come from a marriage/family unit, which is just not true when it comes down to reality - anyone who isn't blinded by a certain bias would definitely see this...lol

crackhaus:
What you should be arguing is the sanctions on infidelity, not TV's linear tangent on how to raise productive citizens - the one you jumped on.

crackhaus:

Soon and very soon bro, you will get it.

All I have said is, "I believe in marriage and I believe that it is good, but don't create laws that will coerce/force me into remaining in one that no longer has a happy future". - I am not infallible, you are not infallible, TV01 is not infallible, Stillfire is not infallible... who died and made it a rule that all of us will love and stay true to the same person for the rest of our lives?

TV01:


Stillfire' take on jail times or fines merely added nuance. Here I felt that while they should not be the go-to response, they should not necessarily be ruled out. They could actually be counter-productive, as healing and restoration should be the best outcome.

Where there is no healing, the fine would almost certainly come in the nature of the settlement, although this would be rendered somewhat useless if there was "no-fault" divorce.


TV

crackhaus:

This here in bold is the reason y'all were coming at me in the first instance, and I figured that out as soon as TV started introducing children and productive citizens into the discourse.
What does criminalizing adultery have to do with raising productive citizens?

The argument is this:
People should/should not be sanctioned with jail terms or fines on account of infidelity.. simple!

Every other argument is as a result of TV trying to prove that infidelity should be sanctioned because a broken marriage is worse than a happy one (where people are coerced into staying married) with respect to raising productive citizens.

Consequently, you jumped in at this point to infer from my argument whatever it is you're now inferring probably due to some misconception you now carry around regarding what you perceive as a change in opinion.

I didn't opine anything, all I did was refute the claim that productive citizens can only come from a marriage/family unit, which is just not true when it comes down to reality - anyone who isn't blinded by a certain bias would definitely see this...lol

What you should be arguing is the sanctions on infidelity, not TV's linear tangent on how to raise productive citizens - the one you jumped on.

lezz:


I like the word " probably that preceded your submission.

You aren't too certain. Lolz.

A woman is raped every 2hrs in America. That's 500 woman a day according to 2008 statistics.

Do you still believe it's down to statistics?

Dheartless:

tell her something.
developed countries always have more crimes due to population, exposure, equipments, knowledge/experience...more .
them go dey talk without reasoning.

TV01:

Nope, if there was any conflation between (1) sanctions for infidelity and, (2) marriage as the best vehicle for nurturing our young into well adjusted and productive citizens, that was cleared up.

You have clearly stated that (1) there should be no sanctions and, (2) that marriage is not the best way to raise children. Both of these are being discussed separately, if simultaneously

The rub here was whether there should actually be sanctions or not. You insisted there should be no sanctions as "the agreement was voluntary and breaking it should also be voluntary". After all, you did not agree that there should be sanctions, just not jail or fines did you?

Stillfire' take on jail times or fines merely added nuance. Here I felt that while they should not be the go-to response, they should not necessarily be ruled out. They could actually be counter-productive, as healing and restoration should be the best outcome.

Where there is no healing, the fine would almost certainly come in the nature of the settlement, although this would be rendered somewhat useless if there was "no-fault" divorce.


Again nope, the discussions are separate and distinct (1) should there be sanctions or not? with nuance around the form sanctions take and, (2) is marriage the optimal way to raise children?

Both yourself and Mindless are not just against sanctions in any form (on the basis of freewill, not wanting to coerce anyone into staying if they don't want to etc.), you also demur that marriage (as defined) is the best family setting for raising children.


Nobody - and certainly not I - ever made the claim that other family types or relationship arrangements could not produce productive citizens. I actually stated that repeatedly - the point was marriage is superior in everyway that matters.


And your "no-sanctions" for infidelity did not achieve take-off, as it was based on a faulty understanding of contract law, and misapplying the concept of freewill violations.


TV

pickabeau1:



In your opinion which social arrangements is the optimal.one.for.raising children

crackhaus:

A happy and peaceful home.

lezz:


I like the word " probably that preceded your submission.

You aren't too certain. Lolz.

A woman is raped every 2hrs in America. That's 500 woman a day according to 2008 statistics.

Do you still believe it's down to statistics?

pickabeau1:


Define this

What does this mean to you.
crackhaus

Please humour us

crackhaus:

It means 'my home'.

Humoured yet?

mhizeva:
You are one of those people rubbishing this world.....

So many women will translate that meaning that they have authority even when they cheat... They will start giving excuses and claiming equality instead of being sorry for their actions.

Review your post it lacks any vital form of message