₦airaland Forum

Mindfulness:
Ignore mode. Come back when you finish licking your wounded ego.

You took the time to dig up months old posts to misinterpret them deliberately? Your feelings must be very hurt.

How can you ignore me - you get all tingly when I rinse you As for wounds, do you mean the ones you gave me yesterday when you and your cohort could not answer a simple question or 3 !

And let me give you a hint - no need to trawl posts, just type mindfulness, Christian and Nairaland into Google, and voilá. There are loads of your quotes where you tried to give the misleading impression that you are a Christina of sorts . I guess you could be considered a "fake unbelieving Christian"

Any answers yet? Or are you still discussing with your cohorts


TV

Ewuro4:
Calling other posters' submissions that aren't in sync with yours an unbeliever somewhat struck a chord.

Taking trivial 'concerns' to my God is what Christains without deep convictions & Faith do.

You have a good one!

That still seems odd for a number of reasons;

1. I was not referring to anyone in particular, but views that reflect no evidence of, or do not acknowledge, the transforming power of conversion.
2. You hadn't actually posted when I wrote, so why should it resonate with you?
3. You claim to have a relationship with God, why should what I have to say about my beliefs on true Christian practice bother you?

You are free to believe, say and practice what you feel. I also have that right. And I choose to exercise it without paying lip service, or being mealy-mouthed so as not to cause offence; that's exactly what the gospel is, offensive.

You may well feel that everyone that calls themselves Christian is one, or that calling oneself Christian sanctifies anything one does. Fine, but I don't. I call it as I see it, and fully appreciate that judgement is with God, hence my point about taking it to Him. I don't justify or condemn, just state my beliefs.

A was a Christian/Catholic before he became born again right? So why was a conversion/transformation ever required? AO is a Christian/Lutheran no? So why is there a problem.

Apologies for the long post, but to be clear to those reading. And I never called anyone an unbeliever.

Godspeed


TV

Mindfulness:
People I meet online are not so important to me that I would have to prepare for them.

...empty barrel...barely 2 months ago you were pretending to be a Christian of sorts, quoting the bible like you actually believed it. The same God and bible you blaspheme with impunity...well, whatever "makes you happy"


TV

Mindfulness:
No, I am not!

Mindfulness:
I am not a Christian in the traditional sense but I love this Bible passage, which is very true:

Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.
Matthew 13:12.

Are you prepared for today's stuffing?


TV

Ewuro4:
TV01 okay oh .. 'Not a Christian of deep conviction and faith' . Thank Godness this same God we both serve answers my cries & requests whenever I call upon his name. Lobatan Compliments of the season.

...why did this strike a chord with you? Quite odd, most especially since God answers your cries and requests? If you had any concerns, the obvious thing to do would have been to take whatever struck you to Him, no? Compliments of the season.

To buttress my earlier submission;
Both parties in this were ostensibly Christians before any of this transpired, no? He a Catholic, she a Lutheran. I know of no Christian sect or denomination, or even a plain reading of the bible, that teaches shacking up and pre-marital sex are fine, let alone Christlike.

AO herself confessed she had not been living her beliefs. And A had never taken her to worship, almost certainly because his conscience convicted him that their situation was wrong. Call it what you will,that is cultural, conditional, but certainly not convictional. I'd be remiss if in order to please, I made a lie. Let everyone who claims Christian search their own conscience

If there are any posters who identify as Christian, and who believe their situation was scripturally permissible, I'd be most interested in hearing why. Other than there may be grace for a time immediately post-conversion, quite quickly, the sinfulness of the situation would be clear and he would have to take steps to rectify the situation, or conviction would set in.

AO asked for input from those who had a "similar experience" - and whether termed born-again, repentance (of/from sin), or conversion - this experience comes with strong conviction and transformation. Previously, they were at best culturally Christian, after his epiphany, he became a Christian of conviction. It's elementary.

In Nigeria, as everywhere actually, there are a range of people who identify as Christians for any number of reasons. However, their actions, reasoning and utterances are far removed from what could be considered orthodox Christian belief, let alone a Christianity of deep conviction. The Bible itself says as much - repeatedly. Everyone who calls on the name of The Lord departs from sin.

You've either had it or you haven't. And yes, I appreciate that the experience and the journey can be markedly different for each person, but the conviction and transformation will at some point be apparent. If he is not indeed playing her for any of the reasons repeatedly stated on this thread, and his deepening faith is real, then this cannot just be treated as a relationship issue. His faith is now his primary motivator, not his feelings.

Are these quotes from Christians let alone Christians of conviction?

ronald4lif:
Transforming to a born again doesn't stop one from barring their woman to spend time with them nor living together.

BuddhaPalm:
If a man really wants you, he might not care if you worship Baal.

Miami11:
no church, nor salvation makes one dump someone because of renewed faith Or salvation

Judge for yourselves.


TV

^{Matthew 7:21 [ True and False Disciples ] “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.}

AnnaOyibo hi, sorry to hear about your plight. And even sorrier to have to say, that like many have said, you really do need to consider letting this go - although I disagree with the pre-dominant reason given. More on that later

Having said that, there is a glimmer of hope, but not sufficient to warrant your believing you'll ultimately get what you desire from this relationship. Again, more on that later.

Bennyrazz was IMHO closest to the mark; https://www.nairaland.com/2826088/oyinbo-girl-seeking-advice#41389827. And you did well to discern that and respond accordingly.

In your OP, you asked to hear from any who had been in a similar situation. Many who have responded, if termed Christian at all, are not Christians of deep conviction or faith. Nigerians can be cynical and harsh, and in some cases rightly so. That is what you've felt here. Sorry for that also.

A true conversion experience can be very deep, and bring with it a stark realisation of sin. I appreciate your relationship was full and intense, but from his new perspective, it was one of fornication. You must understand that, and why he does not want to resume where you left off. Don;t be upset, or beat yourself up over it, it is what it is.

Indeed, the deeper he journeys into his faith, the more what you had will be anathema to him. All the things you think made you a great person, and the two of you a great couple will not play as well in his new mindset, especially if those qualities do not come wrapped up in like belief.

If his is a true conversion, you have not been duped, neither is it about race, or his tribe; the truth is, the more cosmopolitan Nigerian families are more about class and background than tribe. I am Yoruba, and how many Nnamdis and Adaobis do we have? Let alone names from tribes I can barely recall? The whole tribal thing is more a hallmark of the proletariat.

On conversion, "old things pass away, all things become new". And therein also lies your slim hope. If you tread the same path, there is a chance you can once again become a couple. And although in a new way and with totally different parameters, your aspirations of marriage and children will still be possible, and if anything, fuller and more promising.

But even becoming born-again, and attending the same church is no guarantee. Indeed, if you do become born-again, you yourself will see what you had differently and your paths may diverge even further. And becoming born-again solely in order to rekindle your relationship will at best bring you back to the beginning of this paragraph and at worse, present a whole new set of issues.

All the best, but I really feel it is "as The Lord wills" from here on in.


TV

Mindfulness:
TV01 at his best!

Au contraire - my best is simply not required to deal with you and your cohort. If you saw my best, your blasphemy would become idolatory. My worst sef is too good !

Mindfulness:
He will swiftly sacrifice and betray his coherent belief system - a religion that has unconditional love, even for one's enemies, at its core in order to give vent to his massive resentment because of some strangers - he only met online - who don't even care whether he is dead or alive.

The resentment is all yours - for lacking anything that can be rightly labelled a faith, religion or belief system. Only feelings - "butterfly religion", the gospel of "catch a feeling" !

And unconditional love - not that you have a clue what true love actually is - does not mean agreeing with, or celebrating everything anyone choses to do or say. Catch up and quit dulling the convo with your scanty knowledge of Christianity and the Bible .

Mindfulness:
Dear TV01, I don't mind, not even all the name-calling, as long as it gives you some sense of relief. I want everyone to feel happy. You will get there slowly and gradually.

Believe me, I derive great joy - at little cost - from "mindlessly" bashing you and your cohort - and although it's tantamount to criminal abuse, I can't get charged with DV when I do it, as it's consensual ! Perfick!


TV

Mindfulness:
You won, you alway win.

Do you feel better now?

Be quiet. When you think you are on the ascendency, you form fighter. When you get your behind handed to you - gift wrapped for Christmas - you start to claim lover.

Where is the she-beast Bukatyne, let her come and answer the questions, or clearly state what she meant.

Oshi koshi gbo-gbo - stuffed like turkeys .


TV

Mindfulness:
I am a lover not a fighter.

Shift jor, empty barrel. Go and muster your cohort and come and answer the questions. But of course, you can't, non of you can. If na love 0, weda na fight, you lose - as always !


TV

Mindfulness:
Fortunately it is not for you to decide.

...and the response you boasted of? Spiritually empty barrel .


TV

.

tomyka81:
I am really just hoping that this is a vision problem and you aren't truly illiterate...

Shut your mouth - you indentured ignoramus

tomyka81:
Ephesians 5:21 please read. I Posted it earlier. This scripture proceeds the infamously quoted and misapplied one.

Keep silent - where does the bible state what you claimed below?

tomyka81:
The Bible says submit to one other. The husband to the wife and the wife to the husband

tomyka81:
You call me a deceiver and blasphemer, however you have singularly misfocused on a scripture because you didn't read.

I rightly called you both those things - and I'm wrong only if you do not actually call yourself a Christian.

tomyka81:
You also failed to read all the other scriptures quoted verbatim.

Nope, you failed to apply all the other marriage related submission scriptures I posted or answer the charge I made against you in question 2;

TV01:
1.
No misquoting - Christian wives are to be submissive to their husbands;
Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is head of the wife,
Colossians 3:18 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
Titus 2:5 to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands
1 Peter 3:1 Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands
1 Peter 3:5 For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands,

2.
Per the bold, the bible lacks nothing, and you have committed blasphemy & sacrilege by adding to it. You have been warned

tomyka81:
I don't reason with the unreasonable. Continue on doing what you are doing, treating your wives how you treat them. The scripture is crystal clear about what happens when you mistreat your wife and deal harshly with her. Your prayers will be hindered. If you are so sure of your self ignore the post and rock on. I don't argue about what I know.

The same ruse; you claimed to be exploring submission (& love). Yet you mis-stated submission and then went on too accuse people of "maltreating their wives" to make your point. Firstly, that is disingenuous. And secondly, the two are separate issues and should be treated as such.

And how do you know how we treat our wives? Add accuser to that list.


TV

cococandy:
I just can't deal.

Of course I've been challenged by folks like you who like to read A and pretend that you saw B.

If you have tangible evidence that I prescribed divorce as a solution except in any case that involves abuse (precisely physical abuse), then kindly tender evidence or go back to mischievously misinterpreting what I say just to score cheap points.

How can you deal . The plain fact of the matter is that you are a divorce advocate. It's part of your wider worldview, and not surprising in any way.

Moreover, and as much as I've repeated this a number of times, incidences of physical abuse do not in all cases warrant divorce. Divorce will not necessarily be the best or preferred outcome - even for the parties involved.

Your blanket policy is wrong-headed and damaging to couples, families and wider society. Further, trying to sell your efforts to normalise divorce as you championing strong marriages, is a disingenuous as it gets.

Anyway, here’s one you requested; read your own posts on this thread ; https://www.nairaland.com/2088202/he-changed-almost-completely

And my gently pointing it out to you, as had 5minsmadness & others – repeatedly; https://www.nairaland.com/2088202/he-changed-almost-completely/6#29755931

Now, please show me evidence of my ever doing what you accuse me of below;

cococandy:
You're championing enduring avoidable suffering and pain in the name of staying married.

TV

Strawman:
I'd say this is an apt description of many atheists in general (at least the ones I've met on NL). No need to introduce her character to me; none of these atheist debaters are worth taking note of personally (Apparently, she's given up sef). Unless one of them goes beyond their usual tactic of removing parts of the Bible from their contexts and using those parts as basis for their [pointless] arguments, he/she's not going to make any lasting impression in my memory; I'd probably forget them after this debate. And at least let them just have in mind that some of us Christians are actually [more] educated and knowledgeable [than them].

As for me, I was born to argue

Please spend more time around these parts - I don't have time I'd like, and they are always trying to slip their poison in. I feel like I know you? And not just from that first encounter. You remind me of someone whose presence I really enjoyed around here. Ihe, where are you?

Mindfulness:
@bold
I can't stop laughing.
I will respond when I finish.

No you are not, and no you won't. Mindflness, is it not you? Leave it.


TV

bukatyne:
Thank you for telling us you have comprehension problems, single digit IQ and very thick. It would help in future interactions.

Oya calm your nerves, get used to the fact your opinion doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things and prepare for 2016.

Compliments of the season.

As usual, trying to hide behind snarky behaviour . The refuge of the unredeemable thicko !

Answer the questions. Call your cohort to help. Afterall Mindfulness likes to ride to the rescue like a marine - but usually ends up looking like a kwashiorkwor ridden child soldier Oya, Mindfulness, wear your gun

1. If the message is not that women should leave shitty marriages, what were you taking me to task for?
2. Should women stay in shitty marriages?
3. And finally, if you didn't mean what I claim you meant, what exactly where you saying?

Before 2016 please lest you miss your blessing


TV

tomyka81:
Lol wow I showed and quoted directly where in Ephesians it says submit to each other .... Wow reading and researching is fundamental lol

Don't attempt to "lol" it away. You are a deciever. You said this;

tomyka81:
The Bible says submit to one other. The husband to the wife and the wife to the husband

Where does the bible state what you posted above? You have added and twisted what the bible says. Further, you omitted or misrepresented all the scriptures that clearly state that a wife should submit to her husband.

To be clear, nowhere does the bible state that a husband is to submit to his wife. You then introduced a host of unrelated issues to try and buttress your case.

Blasphemer - not only should you try reading and researching, you should give up twisting and sneaky misrepresentation.


TV

More rubbish.

kelvinclint post=41403743 :
As a woman you need to kill
this insecurity. You were not
created to live to please a
man finally you were created
to live a life for yourself, as
a human.

Giving forethought too, and prioritising marriage is not insecurity. It is sound planning.I wish I'd done it earlier and I'm a man. And I may not have been created to please anybody, but if I choose marriage, it will be an important consideration. Most people choose and want marriage

kelvinclint post=41403743 :
If you keep being
insecure about how available
for pick-up you are going to
be in future you are gonna
get married for the wrong
reasons.

As above, consideration and forethought do not mean insecure. Understanding and preparing for marriage will go a long way to ensuring you have a solid and enjoyable union.

kelvinclint post=41403743 :
If you take your time, and do
the right things, you are still
gonna have a great marriage
no matter how old you are.

Wrong. Taking time and doing the right things includes preparing and understanding marriage - just like one does for other things, such as a job/career, for which we spend 20 odd years in education. Marriage is actually more important for many, and important for most, so warrants at least equal consideration.

As for "having a great marriage no matter how old you are", not only is that untrue, it's likely that at a certain age your chances - and most of the point - of marriage will have passed you by. You really wrote that?

kelvinclint post=41403743 :
Women are trained to look
forward to marriage so much
that they worry about not
getting married quick, not
finding a husband quick, not
looking good enough to be
married... U be commodity?

If anything, both men and women are not trained enough or properly. One should understand, prepare and maximise their chances. And yes, in some sense it's a market, and about pricing, so it's more than being a commodity, but no less.

F9 - try harder

TV

I see absolutely nothing wrong with these reasons - especially within the wider context of what marriage is.


TV

kelvinclint:
perhaps yuh didn't read btw the lines. I do not mean to say women shouldn't marry, but making that their primary motive is bad

You are right, I didn't read between the lines. But why is making marriage their primary motive bad? That can be the case, and they can still have career aspirations, outside interest, hobbies and various other pursuits.

Marriage remains central, and worthy of prioritising above other endeavours. And my opinion on your piece remains as is

TV

Strawman:
Mr. TV01, this still remains the most formal way to welcome someone to NL

https://www.nairaland.com/1582623/boys-night-out-discussions/148#40689047

Holá Strawman - ace exposition you've put on here. Salute. I posted quite late and without checking responses, otherwise I may not have bothered. Really deep and nuanced.

If you mean to welcome Mindfulness, she is not new, just re-named, and/or poly-monikered. In brief, her religion centres around her happiness and gives leave to any selfish act in pursuit of that - regardless of who is hurt.

It also lacks an objective morality, causing her to have concerns, without really being able to make judgement calls. Hence, she is often confused, which is quite funny to behold .

She loves posing, but not answering questions, and frequently revises her positions. She loves to blaspheme against the God of the bible, as it makes her feel better about her wicked ways. Understand that and you have her cornered.


TV

kelvinclint:
.Girls need to be taught to see beyond marriage.

Y'all need a new mindset Africans.

Rubbish. Any worse and it would have been utter rubbish. Marriage is at the heart of community life and pivotal to healthy families and flourishing societies.

Certainly, women should develop themselves and have interests aside a narrow focus on marriage, but what exactly is beyond marriage? For both men and women?

Africans that understand and celebrate marriage do not need a new mindset. That is ignorant and patronising - and probably from a mindset you borrowed without thinking.


TV

Mindfulness, if I've told you once,I've told you a hundred times, don't argue the bible with me, not just because you are a blasphemer, or because you typically only sieize verses to justify your unease with iy's condemnation of your sin, but because, most of the verses you use as excuses have already been fully parsed.

1. The bible does not condone or excuse rape. Even if the words are properly translated rape, how does it mean it condones it? My explanation holds even if rightly translated as rape

2. The term rape used is a best guess and it has been amply demonstrated that it could be exactly as I explained it.

3. Further, more telling and pretty much conclusive, is the fact that what is certainly rape is dealt with in verse 25 preceding this;

25 “But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die.

But continue alleging conscience-easing judgements against the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ all you want; when judgement comes, your mouth will be stopped. No matter how many false christians or feminists you ally yourself with .

Romans 3:4...Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. As it is written: “That You may be justified in Your words, And may overcome when You are judged.

TV

Mindfulness:
As usual you have the correct interpretation.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and [size=18pt]rapes her [/size] and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Mindfulness:
So where exactly did she say HERE that "she considers a shitty marriage as grounds for divorce"?

You are both as thick as each other. I asked this already;

TV01:
If the message is not that women should leave shitty marriages, what were you taking me to task for . Beyond thick sef.

So, ask you friend to answer that, as well as this; "Should women stay in shitty marriages?"


TV

cococandy:
Maybe you intend to but You're actually not.
It's funny you see it that way and see those who feel DV has no place in anything that calls itself marriage as the opposite.
You're championing enduring avoidable suffering and pain in the name of staying married.

Where have I ever stated that people should endure suffering and pain And a focus on DV without the proper context is the way to strong and healthy marriages

On the contrary, you and your cohort prescribe divorce for anything self-defined as "shitty or awful". And not only that, but you
1. Never correctly contextualise domestic relationships vis-a-viz marriage
2. Give any heed to types and degrees of abuse
3. Or the fact that it cuts both ways
4. And possibly worse of all, never give any pause for thought, or consideration to the importance of the foundations of marriage.

cococandy:
I'm for strong healthy marriages. (Which is one where there's no abuse) Not ones bursting at the seams with horror stories but patched up and managed to avoid the word divorce.

As above, you are not. Not least because, abuse to a degree - even if only for a period - characterises many marriages, but that does not mean that it is serious or horrendous, or that divorce is the panacea. And even a zero-tolerance approach to abuse is not best served by a blanket divorce policy.

You are a divorce proponent, and have been challenged repeatedly for raising it even when the situation does not warrant it. And your blinkered and un-nuanced focus on violence and death in order to valorise divorce is very damaging to healthy families.


TV

bukatyne:
I just had to smile at this post.

You should be the one to tackle your comprehension issues.

It is pointless going back and forth you.

I wish you happiness in 2016; you need it.

Comprehension can be worked on - but your single digit IQ will always present problems; you are as thick as two short planks

bukatyne:
And the message of that post is that women should leave shitty marriages?

If the message is not that women should leave shitty marriages, what were you taking me to task for . Beyond thick sef.


TV

cococandy:
You're one weird fellow.
So protecting the sanctity of marriage includes advocating those who find themselves in awful marriages die in it just to keep appearances?
I don't know about you but to me, that is actually what diminishes the sanctity of the whole institution and what it truly stands for.
A union. Not a bondage.

No I've not delivered my baby.
Not yet time.
Thanks for asking.

An awful (or shitty) marriage does not mean death ensues, or that divorce is the best option.

If championing strong, healthy marriages is weird, no problem.

Godspeed.


TV

Ah, Mindfulness, always playing the hypocrite - when you have actually described yourself as a Christian of sorts on the past .

As for the scripture in question, the correct interpretation is too have an unsanctioned relationship - extra-marital affair. In essence, the guy could not just take the womans maidenhead and move on. It was too protect women - who would likely go unmarried if found not to be a virgin. It was never about forcible rape.

As for your usual blasphemies, those of us that know you appreciate it's just your conscience trying to judge God, so as to not have to judge yourself for your wicked ways. It won't ever work mind


TV

Mindfulness:
You have just convinced me that the God Christians believe in is not the God I believe in. The Christian God is a sadistic being who created flawed beings he needs to punish by shedding blood and punishing them in the most barbaric way. The Bible is a collection of extremely disgusting stories.

@red

This is the most idiotic justification I have heard in a long time. So a woman was penetrated forcefully and God knows no better than get her to marry her rapist? I am sure it will heal her trauma.

cococandy:
I can't even read all this. Why did I even bother in the first place
Just read the beginning and the end.
Maybe I'll do the rest later.

So bukatyne's words are mine right? Issorait.


Edited.
Dropped what?

You are co-campaingers for divorce, along with several others. Between you, you have inter-alia campainged to 1. have the stigma removed from divorce, 2. diminish the sanctity of marriage and, 3. even normalise divorce as a good thing.

I thought you had a bun in your oven


TV

Mindfulness:
Let us quote the context too.

And how was the context not quoted? I posted the whole link for people to read, not an excerpt.

bukatyne:
OK I used the word shitty in context of a specific thread
And the message of that post is that women should leave shitty marriages?
I knew you wouldn't disappoint.

Well Kimoni called you a serpent. And you were soooo hoping I would disappoint in a sense - 2 seconds .

Your implication is patently clear;

1. People - especially women - should not be made to stay in shitty marriages.
2. You did not actually define "shitty", hence it becomes subjective and self-defined
3. You were accusing me of doing just that - advising women stay in shitty marriages; so by implication, your meaning is clear.
4. You could not find, nor present any evidence of my doing so when challenged.

Or would you or your co-campaigners like to advise what you meant - in context Comprehension is the first flaw you should tackle.


TV

bukatyne:
Bros,

As you are entering 2016, you should be reducing your flaws and not add lying to them.

Pull out a post of mine where I ever said a 'shitty' marriage (whatever that means) is a ground for divorce.

And get over the fact that you are not a sole authority on people's lives/opinions.

Quote me when you find the post

And don't waste my time with one quoted out of context.

https://www.nairaland.com/2707664/divorce-lawyers-d-house-pls/9#39654978


TV

cococandy:
I don't even remember using that word shitty.

Your co-campaigner Bukatyne, considers a shitty marriage" as grounds for divorce, and it's the logical conclusion to the thinking of your cohort.

cococandy:
I'm always specific-In cases of abuse.
Always specific. Like a million times. It's the same word I always use.

And again, not all abuse is violent, life-threatening, or grounds for divorce. And whatever the situation - even this one - efforts should be made to restore the union first. Your abuse = divorce mantra is plain wrong and irresponsible - wrongly irresponsible

cococandy:
So a violent Union is not life threatening. When is it life threatening? When the fellow is already dead.

Histrionics. A violent union,may not be life-threatening. And in any event, the root of the violence can be considered and possibly resolved, before the rush to divorce.

cococandy:
Like in this man's case that he's managed to be alive because to some reason God has just decided to keep him alive because she could have easily killed him during one those violent episodes.

Like I said, you are a campaigner, not a thought leader. If his life is in danger, he can remove himself from the situation, and make initial efforts from a distance. Going straight to divorce is not the key or even the safest response .

cococandy:
You're saying he should work on it because you have to save face even though it defies common sense.

I read the OP, what has he been doing since? And yes, he should continue until he has satisfied himself all efforts have been exhausted, not head straight to divorce. Further, he should not have entered the union with the requisite understanding, preparation and due diligence, which he clearly did not.

cococandy:
@bold And you've resorted to outright lies.
Well if it makes you feel better....

You belong to the cohort of divorce campaigners, na lie

cococandy:
I'm sorry I had to call you out like this. I knew you'd be nowhere to be found unless it was a woman going through this and people like me advise her to flee. Then you'd come a'running to label them enemies of marriage.

You are patently "not sorry". Per my previous post, I typically advise where an issue is presented, not where divorce is demanded. I usually address men, and I always advice going the extra mile to restore the union. I posted the link clearly demonstrating this.

If you can fond a link where I have acted as you have alleged, I will deactivate .

cococandy:
Like you're the only one who understands what marriage means. (rolls eye)

At least I defend, expound and champion it. Feel free to grow your passion for "divorce in an instant" .

cococandy:
*Now that I spent the energy typing this, it doesn't seem worth the stress anymore*.
Phew.

You are the one stressing yourself, looking for enemies of divorce

cococandy:
You lil'un is cute.
Happy Sunday.

Thank you and thank you. Likewise. So, have you dropped yet?


TV

cococandy:
If I didn't call you out will you be here pretending to ask him to work on the marriage

I did ask him to work on his marriage that's a generic response for me - indeed, what has he been doing

cococandy:
We only see you jump into action when an abused woman is advised to leave for her own safety.
No be today.

Please evidence this . I typically only give advise when issues are presented, not when divorce is desired, and I always put safety first, if it is an issue. https://www.nairaland.com/1284024/broken-dejected-found-out-wife/2#15635959

cococandy:
Well anyhow you paint it, someone who's doesn't have selective eyesight will know that I don't prescribe divorce for every troubled couple.

Not every case, but you freely prescribe it and stridently campaign for it.

cococandy:
That one is a figment of biased imagination. But it just kills you to admit the truth that life is more precious than dying in a violent Union.

You prescribe divorce for "shitty unions" - where shitty is subjective & self defined, therefore quite meaningless. And you point to divorce in any instance of "abuse", even where it is not life threatening. You care little for the sanctity of marriage.

cococandy:
Anyway Who's that cutie on your signature.

My loffly dorra !


TV