pickabeau1:



Same to you

That was Mo Money Mo Problems

crackhaus:

You got your game tight on rap as well..

Mondisweets:


I would for any reason get angry at my father in-law, he will be like a second father to me. I would not go around insulting him over a petty issue. i already said and i would give him the same respect i give my father. i would even call him to give him notice that i would be coming over to thank him personally.

I will however try and convince my husband to give us time to go see the house and make arrangements with people who will help us pack up and move to the house.




This is where you are completely wrong. If you haven't heard of the word divorce, let me enlighten you, husbands can come and go. Your father will always remain your father. Never get that mixed up.

that's why marriage is for mature people, because mature people do not turn every little frivolous thing into WWIII! So if something isn't presented to you in the way you want it presented. You go around disrespecting and insulting you in-laws because things weren't done your way? Last time i checked that's what 5year olds do, not grown married men?

Let me ask you again, as a grown man with a functional brain, do you think insulting your wife's father in her face would make her love you and respect you more?

Bigsteveg:


It's either ure having difficulties reading or having problem comprehending my point. Whichever way, am not ready to exchange words with u.

Who talk abt insulting.

Mondisweets:
dont worry yourself you will never get a response for this

crackhaus:

Let me humour you a little bit - is your opinion based on the idea that a wife is a human being, while the car isn't?

Because if that's it, I'm pretty sure there are/were cultures where women have been offered as gifts to men as payment for work, debt settlement, creating alliances/treaties...etc.
It happened in the Bible more than once - with Moses for helping the daughters of Jethro, he was given Zipporah as a wife gift.... with Jacob for serving Laban, he was first given Leah and later Rachael as wife gifts.

There are other examples like in England and France or England and Scotland forming alliances by gifting princesses with the intention of forming marriage unions which lead to alliances.
Even to this day, things like that still happen - so you really got no point.

Anyway enough of the examples, the analogy is not on the gift itself but on the unawareness/lack of prior knowledge which leaves one party in the dark, thereby making them feel inadequate, simple!
I already made this clear enough in that my post you quoted.

A gift is a gift, be it human or inanimate - as long as it is offered to another in the form of assistance, appreciation, or commendation.

Mondisweets:



Saying someone is interfering with your marriage when he is actually helping his child out is disrespectful and insulting.

As usual keep shifting the goal post. You obviously have no answers to the questions you have been asked. Typical nairalander, when u have failed to give answers you resort insulting the other person's intelligence.

LordReed:


Leah and Rachel were not gifts, Jacob worked a total of 14 years as dowry for them read your Bible carefully again. As for Zipporah it was never stated that she was a gift. The term used was "he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter" this term is used over and over again in the Bible and does not indicate that the women were gifts.



Alliance by marriage was a diplomatic tool, whether you can consider that a gift is highly debatable. However it still doesn't buttress your point because these were negotiated marriages which all parties were aware of what was going on.



Are you of the opinion that sufficient notification given to a wife will allow her to agree to her husband marrying a second wife?



Sir, I doubt you will appreciate any member of your family being considered a "gift". Humans are not chattel, equating them to gifts is tantamount to acknowledging slavery as appropriate.

crackhaus:

Dude like I said on the first line in my last reply to you, I intended to humour you and you made it too easy for me with this reply of yours - I'm having a laugh on your account, no kidding...

So in your opinion, because the word used in the bible translations is gave', it automatically connotes to not being a gift huh?
I don't think you knew when you typed that, because for someone who claimed not to have a simplistic mind earlier on this thread, that interpretation is at best acutely simplistic.

Let's say you're a married man like you say you are and you have one of your younger (student) family members over at yours and spending a weekend, on his/her way back you offer them N5,000 using these words, "take/I'm giving you this money so you can make use of it for your transportation" - now according to LordReed, that money is not a gift because he didn't use the actual term gift when offering it to his relation...this is your logic right?

There really is no making you see any sense, is there?



Prior notification provides the person being notified/made aware, with the possibility of calmly expressing his/her refusal or acceptance.... simple!
It also creates room for dialogue as to the reasons behind such gifting which may/may not be necessary.

Well mister, you will keep being the captain-save-a-clueless-broad that you are and I will not be replying you again on this thread - there's a reason I ignored all your previous mentions of my moniker on here, which is even now justified by this thing you just typed to me.

I can't believe you also posited that offering princesses/princes with the intention of forming alliances isn't gifting, but just a diplomatic tool.
Pray tell, that this process is a diplomatic tool automatically means it's not a gift - a gift with a means to an end?

You are definitely trolling!

pickabeau1:


Bro I love rap..

But not the modern flavour though

I stopped at kanye's 808.

crackhaus:

Very few of them younger artistes got their rap game on lockdown, the last album I bought with my money is JayZ's Blueprint 3 and that was because I had the previous Blueprints and wanted to complete my collection - these days I just download specific tracks that catch my attention, no particularly favourite rapper.

pickabeau1:


Am not really a fan of da hov but he's a legend

crackhaus:

I can't say I'm a fan as well, I listen to a whole lot of rappers - but there's something about the way Jay delivers his verses and punch-lines...the metaphors and literary figures of speech he employs makes rap look intelligent, and not just all noise/bragging.

Mondisweets:

The guy in question felt disrespected by this FIL (for whatever delusional reason i have failed to understand until now) and the best way to deal with it was insult him in his daughter's face, because thats what mature men do? They make the issue worse?

ochon:


A quick question though. How did you arrive at the embolden when in that same sentence, you acceded that you didn't "understand" why he rejected the car? Doesn't it sound ludicrous that you are judging the man based on NO UNDERSTANDING of what really happened?

What you are doing now is akin to seeing a 14-years-old lady sentenced to death by lethal injection and without knowing why, you accuse the Judge of being wicked and heartless to an "innocent" teenager. Won't you bother to know why the judge passed such sentence?

Unless you're the OP, the husband, the wife or the FIL, you've no insight about what really happened. Do you know what really transpired behind the scene that made the man reject the gift?

If only we could drop this woman vs man ish, we'd judge reasonably. [quote]

If u check all my posts you will realise i was criticising the son in-law based on his attitude towards his father in-law. Unless one of then has turned into a woman you cannot exactly call this a "woman vs man ish"

[quote] The story is not complete. The motive is not yet known. Don't blame the man for NO REASON. I reiterate, NO SANE man would reject that car for a "delusional"reason. It's only a braindead, moronic, egoistic dumbass that will do such thing.

Mondisweets:

I was being sarcastic.



Ochon when you go into court you argue based on the facts presented. You cannot argue that a person is innocent but the facts to prove it are yet unknown. Im basing my judgement on what has been given so far, not annonymous. If there is more let the OP say so, if not i will stick to the what i have already said this far.

ochon the day your wife claims that your mother is
interferring with her marriage over a petty issue as the
presentation of a gift, i hope you love and respect and love
her more for saying that.

ochon:


I'm not arguing who's innocent or not. I've NEVER sided any party in this discourse.

Maybe it's my spirit that typed such but not me. All I've been saying is that, you can't blame the man because you don't know why he rejected the car. Or are you saying NO matter the reasons, EVERY gift should be accepted?

You're basing your judgment wrongly because you don't know if he was right or wrong to reject the car.

The story is not enough for you to blame the guy. He rejected the car? Why? We don't know. So why blame him without knowing why he rejected the car? Or do you blame someone for NO reason?

You call a gift of "car" a petty issue?

Mondisweets:




There is no reason to refuse a car from your father when yours has broken down.



The only reason my judgement is wrong in your eyes, is because im not agreeing with you, that's all.

ochon:


1) Yeah you are right. Even when the REASON is EVIL, a person should never REFUSE a gift from his parents. SMH.

2). I never said your judgment is wrong, obviously you read another NL not this one. I only asked how you arrived at your funny conclusion even after saying IN THE SAME SENTENCE that you don't understand WHY. Anyway, I'm done on this argument.

Mondisweets:


If the reason is evil i will not accept the gift. But if the reason behind getting me a new car, is to replace my old car that broke down, then obviously i would gladly take it. Everyone else who gets upset over property that is not given to him/her must just go hug a transformer

Why will i want to remain dependent on someone else to pick me up and drop me off, when i have been given a chance to become independent once again?



I arrived at that funny conclusion by solely basing my opinion on what the OP wrote.

LordReed:


This is too "insane" for some folks. They need to invent wicked FILs and wife-gifting MILs to make their reasoning "sane", LoL.

crackhaus:

Let me humour you a little bit - is your opinion based on the idea that a wife is a human being, while the car isn't?

Because if that's it, I'm pretty sure there are/were cultures where women have been offered as gifts to men as payment for work, debt settlement, creating alliances/treaties...etc.
It happened in the Bible more than once - with Moses for helping the daughters of Jethro, he was given Zipporah as a wife gift.... with Jacob for serving Laban, he was first given Leah and later Rachael as wife gifts[/b].
There are other examples like in England and France or England and Scotland forming alliances by gifting princesses with the intention of forming marriage unions which lead to alliances.
Even to this day, things like that still happen - so you really got no point.

Anyway enough of the examples, the analogy is not on the gift itself but on the unawareness/lack of prior knowledge which leaves one party in the dark, thereby making them feel inadequate, simple!
I already made this clear enough in that my post you quoted.


A gift is a gift, be it human or inanimate - as long as it is offered to another in the form of assistance, appreciation, or commendation.

Shirley07:

Smh. Tell me more.
Empty heads forming know how.
If you read your bible well, you would know Jacob and [s]Moses laboured for good amount of years before they were granted their wives. The work they did was their bride price, the girls wasn't given to them as gifts.[/s] Infact, they wanted a wife, worked and got them. The only gift Jacob/Moses got from their FIL was the flocks of sheeps/rams given to them as dowry.

crackhaus:

Doofus....still making a f00l of yourself, are you?

Go read the book of Exodus 2 - but if the entire chapter is too much work for your imbecilic brain matter, restrict your reading to just Exodus 2:16-22.

When you done, I know your next line of argument will be in trying to explain to me how the contents of Chapter 3 now precede those of Chapter 2.

Mega doofus!



*******************

That aside, let me humour you as well - now let's assume they did in fact work to earn these wives, how does this refute the fact that these women were offered as reward for job well done?
Are these women not human beings?
Why will a human be given as reward to a man, whether as repayment for work or as a gift?

Does this not also defeat the argument that a woman is not chattel?

There's a reason I stopped responding to captain-save-a-hoe on this topic - I can't stand it when people can't think beyond the length of their own nose just because they feel like typing to earn brownie points.

Now doofus, bring on your next line of insipid mental reasoning

Shirley07:

Empty head, you clearly forgot verse 21 or probably got blinded. The verse says 'Moses was content to dwell with the man.' Am I supposed to make you understand that part too. Oops! I forgot you are too dead brain to undestand that Moses dwelt with the father of the girls before he was granted a wife.
That should tell you Moses stayed and worked for some years before he got a wife. The bible doesn't have to narrate all Moses' life story before you get it.
If ch 2 & 3 of Exodus was read literaly, you would think Moses was still a young guy at the time he returned to Egypt but we were made to realize he was around 50 yrs. So tell me, why didn't the bible talk about all the years he spent at his FIL house?
You should try to make use of that remnant you called brain at times.. It will save people the energy to spoonfeed you at all time. It's even funny when you think about it. A father would just give his daughter to a strange man because he helped her to fetch water? Are you thinking straight at all? You're a fool.
If you aint one, why would you also think a father would allow Moses/Jacob to marry his daughters when they had nothing? Or are you forgetting they were sojourners who ran away from their homes?
Let me tell you, the work they did was to earn their living and get their own livestocks which they did. Yes, the work can be referred as bride price and the gift of livestocks as dowries. Call it whatever but the fathers didn't give their daughters as gifts. Get it, baboon.

freeboy604:


This is totally wrong, let me tell you that as a married woman you are no longer under your father, even in your working documents your fathers name has been replaced with that of your husband , why would a Father favour his daughter when he knows this will brings negative felling amongst couple as it now, when only one car was functioning because of the love/understanding they has for each other they still manage to make sure the car served both of them, now, based on the way he got involved did he brings joy to them or asunder? as human dont forget that we think alot to see why individual take some certain action on some issue, mostly now that that sometimes you hear issue of Father sleeping with their daughters. Will you blame the husband if he thinks towards this direction? Heemmm lol

Now the father failed to follow the right channel, it would have been better for him to call both of them and explain his feeling/concern to them and give both of them the car as a gift to thir family and as a lovely family the husband will prefer she used the one that will not be given her problem because the husband will want to avoid his wife calling him for assistance as a result of vehicle broken down.

This would have be a better way in handling the issue.

milychocs:




Like a well known Igbo "Prince of Africa" would say,
"Nanchench"

No disrespect meant....just that this post makes me go, like, aarrrrggggghhhhh!!!!!!!

If your Mother in-law bought a new set of cooking pots for his daughter in-law and gave it to his son, will the daughter in-law be happy?

To all ladies that said that there is nothing wrong, if your mother in law start buying cooking pots and plates for your kitchen, will you be happy with that?

What the father in-law did that was wrong is to give the car to his daughter directly without informing his son in-law. Best way to go about it is for the father in-law to present the car to them as a couple instead of giving it to his daughter directly.

If your Mother in-law bought a new set of cooking pots for his daughter in-law and gave it to his son, will the daughter in-law be happy?

To all ladies that said that there is nothing wrong, if your mother in law start buying cooking pots and plates for your kitchen, will you be happy with that?

What the father in-law did that was wrong is to give the car to his daughter directly without informing his son in-law. Best way to go about it is for the father in-law to present the car to them as a couple instead of giving it to his daughter directly.