₦airaland Forum

tomyka81:
I see a few guy (OK... A lot) keep misquoting the Bible about being submissive to the husband. Here I have quoted that scripture and some more of the Bible that seems to be lacking .

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:
Ephesians 5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

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

No it does not - please show us where it says what you have posted above

tomyka81:
Are husbands loving their wives? Are husbands willing to die for their lives? Or are husbands dominating and crushing their wives with mental, physical, and emotional abuse?

Who is suggesting the above? The truth remains, wives are to submit to their husbands.

tomyka81:
Don't treat your women like pack mules and subservient beings. Give them honor and respect. Respect never makes demands. Also if you mistreat your woman, don't expect a blessing. It says so that your prayers won't be hindered. The reason some are in dire circumstances is because they are mistreating their wife.

Again, no one has said the above is the norm, biblically mandated or an outcome of submission.

tomyka81:
Why are you running outside of marriage with this woman and that woman and this girl and that GI l. Be satisfied with your wife at all times.

Is this abut infidelity or submission?

tomyka81:
Are you cleaving to your wife or what your friends say and think? Are you cleaving to your wife or money? Are you cleaving to your wife or your traditions and superstitions? Are you clinging to your wife or some runz girl?

What has this to do with biblical submission?

tomyka81:
Ushers pass the collection plates.....

Nothing for you. Fail. Next you will be preaching mandatory tithe

Blasphemer.

TV

cococandy:
Where are those anti-divorce marriage protectors on NL. Make Una come preach to this man to stay, protect his marriage and build his home in the face of violence and infidelity.
Suddenly so silent?

TV01.
And crew.

Cococandy, you never drop ? Get it right, I am pro-marriage. And whatever the case is, he should first make every effort to restore his marriage, as I have advised and will continue to advise people facing difficulty in their unions.

The floor is your is you want to go straight to divorce - in fact, don't even bother to label it a "shitty marriage" first, in order to justify it .

We are busy putting the "merry" into christmas and you are scouring NL looking for divorce cases? E no dey tire you? Abeg, tell Oga to "murder that thing" . Not DV type murder 0 - I hear it hastens delivery.


TV

tearoses:
CC TV01

...Ekú keresimesi ...we had a beautiful turkey...I always say that "a quality bird" is the answer to many of life's questions !

Shocked:
I am sorry about the long epistle. What do I do?

Firstly, you take stock of your situation and decide what outcome you are after.

To be honest, your description of your husband is one kin'. You describe him as at once worshipfully devoted to God and, slavishly attentive to his family - working hard to look after you and spending inordinately on you - whilst at the same time appearing to spend every free moment in pursuit of women. And not just pursuit, but taking on their welfare? I wonder where does he get the time, energy or resource It sounds contradictory to say the least.

So, assuming you are being upfront about your dilemma, and that you would at least like to attempt salvaging your marriage, there are number of things to consider.

Firstly, you need to confront your husband and come to some sort of resolution based on what would be considered normal in marriage and what is acceptable. It doesn't sound like you've done this. Blanket denials,would suggest a pathological liar, or at least someone who is not willing to repent/change his ways.

Don't involve your parents at this point. The news would be a shock to them and potentially hurtful if they are frail. How thankless a task raising children can be? At least they did their bit, and supported you when the whole thing started. And, they also clearly stated they would not be party to divorce. Rightly so I think.

If your husband fails to respond, then at some point you may have to involve both families - if they care to listen - at least to notify them of your intentions, but also to bring their weight to bear on efforts at restoration

Don't involve other outsiders or 3rd parties and tell your sister to keep schtum. Keep your child at the forefront of your mind, whatever outcome you pursue.

Start with that - all the best.

Thanks Bellong for parsing the x-tian claim. For some people it's merely a cloak, not core lifestyle. Great advice Onegig.


TV
^{...wanna weds, get a quality bird or you will dry fowl !}

Stillfire:
TV merry christmassssssssssssss!

Merry crimbo o jare....turkey stuffed...just have to prepare the bird for tomorrow and I am done !

Come Stilly, is that you describing black men as libido-led feral animals up there . Your own pass OP's own sef. In the spirit of x-mas cheer, and using 9 of your 10 goodwill tokens, I'll let that slide - just .

Watched those videos, nothing special, and other than the race thingy, nothing there. It's telling that the reverse - black male, white female - would not get the same traction; it's just too common, and through pretty much all demographics.

I was at our work kiddies party earlier today. The two "black women" that rocked up both had mixed race kids, Women and partners were all very middle-classy, but not even as special as the ones in the videos - in fact, I'm being polite, enough said.

Of the 3 black men, 1 had mixed race children, and a number of our female employees have black partners - evidenced by their kids. I'm not sure "mixed-ethnicity" pairings are actually noteworthy anymore?

It does seem black women are taking the white option more though? I'm sure many simply have a preference for white, but I also suspect that at the middle class range, many are driven by a "needs must" approach due to the dearth of available brothers?

Am I right, or am I right Stilly !


TV

pickabeau1:
Happy holidays ..guys

Merry x-mas y'all. Festive greetings and here's to great new years ahead, dripping with Gods blessings and the satisfaction of all righteous desires. Better men, better families.


TV

Sh0llypopz:
@Vivalavida99, self-hate also plays a part. BTW, I don't think the number of Nigerian men married to white women is noteworthy. A lot of Nigerian men in diaspora still keep it African because they know only African women will tolerate their rubbish.

Tag: TV01, Enlightenedsoul, subomi1, shymm3x

Merry x-mas everyone...I'm almost lost for words here...utterly dire. Totally shoddy premise and asinine conclusions, some pretty crap posts in response as well .

I think Mindful got it exactly right in the first sentence of her first post; https://www.nairaland.com/2817873/nigerian-men-foreign-wives-must#41260069.

So. Nigerian men marry foreigners in droves; true to a degree ! I hear estimates of up to 50% of black men in the UK are actually with non-black women, let alone black women from different "tribes/nations". I'm sure there are some Nigerians amongst that number.

It then disses Nigerian men as controlling and paternalistic - even the well-read and well-travelled, Nigerian male. Whose nature is seemingly so strongly embedded, he cannot but help his antediluvuian self?

And the beef? Nigerian men somehow treat these foreign women they marry way better than the Nigerian wives they forwent. Really? But this will all change once Nigerian women realise their true worth?

Surely if Nigerian men are as bad as portrayed, no women would want them Even the self-worth lacking Nigerian women - once they realise their full worth of course .

Nothing about the nuance of todays Nigerian male. In Nigeria sef, let alone the wide variety outside of it? it. Nothing about different cultural settings, expectations, legal frameworks, or the range if individual circumstances. And to conclude self hate or low esteem play a large part in this?

Not just cobblers, real headache inducing codswallop. This trope is so stale, about half a century old. It's not the Nigerian male that is outdated.


Make I go stuff ma turkey jor...

TV

Kimoni:
Pastor TV!!!!!!!!!!

A40 and TV - this is not the men's thread ooooo

Pastor t'on discern ! Every thread na mans thread !


TV

Timbuktou:
Whether Jose is arrogant or not, sacking him is the worst decision Abramovic has made in his running of Chelsea. Sacking Mou has to rank as one of the world's silliest decisions ever. I'm so pissed right now. Benin witches have infiltrated Chelsea finally. Shame.

...for what it's worth, I also think it was a mistake. I thought they'd give him until the new year at least. There appears to have been some player agitation with this one.

This saga is just beginning. How well will Chelasea do post Mourhino, and how will José fare post Chelsea. I wouldn't be surprised if Mourhino' twin mission now, was to prove himself elsewhere - not that I think he needs too - and stuff the Blues whilst doing so. Do they really want him plotting against them?


TV

Acidosis:
Conniving with one's father, pastor, mother or anyone to acquire a land while the husband whom she sleeps with, eats with and talks to daily is unaware or left in the dark is absolutely wrong.

Dude, you did well to answer. That a spouse should undertake any kind of meaningful action or embark on a huge project without so much as "advising" their spouse, let alone "discussing" it or even better, "raising" it as an idea/concept before they even consider acting.

And, as you rightfully pointed out, to do that with a 3rd party - whomsoever that may be - traduces the spouse. In fact, in magnitude, it's little different to cheating.

I've always been a little naive and trusting. In as much as I often take contrary views to the female folk on this section, I've always wanted to believe they speak with the best of intentions.

But for a while now, and especially since the revelations of the coogar saga, I haven't been able to resist the compelling evidence, that except for a rare few, they are an assortment of burger married, rebound wives, bitter divorceees, pained spinisters, single and pretend single mums, glorified girlfriends, home-wreckers and shameless cheats.

The main point in continuing to post is so that other women may not be seduced, nor men deceived by their wicked and heartless ways.


TV

^{...some of them enter multiple categories sef}

Mindfulness:
We are married and we will do our best to be the happy family that we are till death do us part but not because anyone tells us to.

Awon "co-habber" gbo gbo, aka "married because we say we are"


Teefee

RoyalRoy:
[color=#000033] Lol, pride goeth before a fall.


Mou should have learnt his lessons the hard way now. Never be too arrogant and brash in victory.

Life is not a leveled ground, neither is it a straight path!!


Seriously rooting for Stephen Keshi ... [/color]

...abi 0! What's so special about being unceremoniously sacked? I thought they'd give him till the NY at least. What a bummer for Christmas.

Wait 0! Keshi for Chelsea ...well at least it rhymes if you speak like Baba Ibadan.


TV

Mindfulness:
I do not believe in the vows Christian couples take. Maybe it is a new concept to you but couples are free to take any vows they choose for their marriage and we have enjoyed this freedom and we did things in our own way.

I have never claimed that the Christian way is the only way. Neither have I ever been prescriptive about how a couple structure their "union". What I do hold to however, is that marriage is by definition, a vow to a lifelong union. But not every union is a marriage.

So when I ask if you married in a traditional/conventional way, that in no way means strictly Christian marriage. You have to be married to have a wife or husband, but not "Christian married". So stop skirting; did you commit to a lifelong union?

Mindfulness:
Traditional like in church? Hell no! Conventional as in lawfully. Heaven, yes!

So when you say lawfully, was it a marriage or some other form of union such as a civil union, domestic partnership or the French PAC type arrangement? Are there legal forms of marriage - not unions - that allow an omission of the "lifelong commitment"? If so, that is news to me.

Mindfulness:
The point is that you have no clue.

The point is you are not being truthful. Too much suggestion, implication and grounds for plausible deniability, instead of just telling it like it is.

Mindfulness:
You have mentioned it twice on this thread now so I don't see how you have ignored it.

Ignored as in not directly responded too - it's not worth dignifying, as you sneakily avoid the underlying principle.


TV

...he gon' http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34670192 - who will manage them in the relegation battle

TV

Mindfulness:
If he decides to leave, I will let him go and love him unconditionally nonetheless as the father of our kids. He is not responsible for me and I do not depend on him for happiness or anything else. Each day in our marriage is a decision made out of love and appreciation rather than a duty and responsibility. I do not need anyone to force himself to stay with me due to any prescriptions. We would love for our marriage to remain as joyous as it is till death do us part but we will not imprison ourselves in eternal unhappiness when it is not longer possible.

Mindfulness, why can't you be honest with us? You've clearly stated that you do not believe in taking vows, as you cannot tell what the future holds, and would not like to force someone to stay with you, or likewise be forced.

So, it's either you are being hypocritical, a liar, or both. Are you married in the conventional/traditional sense? Or do you simply refer to your relationship as a marriage, and your partner as a husband?

I see your insistence on defining marriage as whatever one feels works for them, and this just speaks to that very point. But it's decietful to talk as if you are married when you are not, or claim vows are wrong/unnatural or something you are against, if you have indeed taken them.

Your sneaky use of "relativity" to wriggle out of this conversation is noted and ignored .


TV

babygirlfl:
I always discuss ( not take his consent or permission) with my hubby when I want to embark on such a huge project. I think it's the right thing to do in MY case.

So, you want to embark on a "huge project", and you discuss with your husband, if it's not for consent or permission, what is it for exactly?

Is it for buy-in, or agreement, or advice? And if he disagrees, what happens, since you have already decided to embark? You see I find this somewhat odd - as I suppose would anyone that gives more than a cursory glance to this statement.

A "huge project" - presumbaly one that will have impact on the wider family? Really? So for example a wife decides to pursue an MBA, meaning changes to income and say childcare arrangement. She discusses - which the way you've worded it, means nothing more than tells/advises - but embarks regardless?

I'm sure there would be interest in understanding this kind of assertive declaration the more. Please indulge/educate us and expalin further. I won't address the rest of your post here,as I've done that elsewhere.

Please try and avoid Mindfulnesses decietful employment of the term relative in order to wriggle out


TV

fem29:
I don't see what is contradictory there.

I actually agreed whole-heartedly with your second point. Indeed, I live it. I lead my home, but discuss pretty much everything with my wife.

I understand that sometimes the husband as the head has to have the final say, but you must always carry your wife along and make sure that all decisions you make are for the good of the family

There have been instances where something has been needed, but I haven't acted until my wife is comfortable with the course of action I propose. Am I taking permission? Of course not, but I love my wife and would be loath to act without her buy-in/agreement/acceptance - whatever you call it - even though I would if I had to.

This however is odd;

Yes it would be nice, in an ideal world of your wife to discuss with you openly and if she doesn't, you need to ask yourself and her why she doesn't feel comfortable discussing it with you

Whereas a husband should always endeavour to carry his wife along, if a wife doesn't, it's possibly a failure of leadership (the husband)?

I carry my "wife along", even when she is being - IMHO - slow, unthinking, unengaged. Misgivings do not excuse what is bad practice, the misgivings should be resolved beforehand, not used as an excuse for wrong action or to blame hubby for what he may not have control over. Kapeesh !


TV

tallfish145:
I am about getting married in the next two months. All preparations have been made,but who to take care of the wedding cake is left undecided,because i learn't it is one of the most sensitive items the couples need. Now my ex-girl friend,who i left few years ago(though on mutual agreement) is into cake making and wants to handle our wedding cake by herself. Should i allow her to take up the contract?

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah !

Ask you wife to take care of the wedding cake arrangement.

If she knows your ex, codedly ask her who she is using, if it sounds like your ex, steer her away from that idea by whatewver means necessary.

Not a risk even worth entertaining. Better your ex vexes for you eternally than to consider it. What are you thinking?


TV

yuzedo:
I believe I am ready, by God’s grace, simply because I like to think that (true) love is sacrifice, and I’m already very much in love with my unborn kids…….

Funny, but so true. A very fair view of a mans life, is of sacrifice - of his vigour, labour and, even his well-being in caring for his wife and children. And for most men – especially the “ordinary Joe”, that is the reality.

It’s why I can’t stand ignorant, entitled women painting men as brutes, and spouting off about discrimination and supposed ill-treatment. Few women, if any, would want too, or be capable of swapping places with ole’ Joe. God bless him.

Good piece. And all the very best in your labour of love - may it not go unrewarded or unappreciated


TV

...why waste a good word? Let's retain it as a term of abuse ?


TV

A40:
Aside my weakness for big boobies

...that ain't no weakness bro'...not unless you act recklessly as a result

TV

Mindfulness:
What a major financial expenditure is, is relative.

As are disclosure, truth and of course feelings abi

Mindfulness:
I know that you love taking comments out of their context to pretend that they don'T make sense. Tell me where you read that a spouse should celebrate something they don't know about.

Out of context ke? If a couple are happy for one to forge ahead and act unilaterally, does that preclude mentioning what they are doing to each other? The OP clearly stated the secretive nature and hidden intent in question. Fail .

Mindfulness:
As in I don't care to respond to comments without sense.

As I've already told you, you have a co-habbing arangement which is both quantitively and qualititively different from mariage. It's not the same, equal, or as good, hence your "my money" approach. Your advice tends to fall short on marriage related threads - mainly because you are unable to make sense of marriage.


TV

Acidosis:
I'm beginning to think marriage is a scam

At all, there are simply too many scammers using marriage as a cloak

fem29:
Yes it would be nice, in an ideal world of your wife to discuss with you openly and if she doesn't, you need to ask yourself and her why she doesn't feel comfortable discussing it with you

fem29:
I understand that sometimes the husband as the head has to have the final say, but you must always carry your wife along and make sure that all decisions you make are for the good of the family

Blatantly contradictory.

Mindfulness:
1. It is an investment in the future.
2. How is it my business?
3. It was my idea.

What do you want to do now?

You would plan "your" future, without recourse to the one you wedded your future too?
Because as wedded, major financial expenditure should be discussed and agreed, and always advised.
It would be a bad idea by any spouse - worse to do it with a 3rd party.
People with understanding do their "doing" ahead of marriage, not during or after it !

Mindfulness:
I agree with you that it is much better to share such information in a marriage. However, our advice is not always needed. At times it is enough to rejoice in our spouses's eagerness regarding something that s(he) is sure is the right decision to do.

Please explain how one celebrates something with their spouse which they do not know about. Or ss this one of the signs and wonders of your faith !

Mindfulness:
What is the difference between 'spousal separation' and divorce?

Mindfulness:
Whether you divorce your wife or separate from her, without going through the process of divorce, the end result is the same, is it not?

As in, doesn't get marriage, not married !


TV

Kimoni:
I cant outrightly call every case where the wife demands 50% greedy, the peculiarities of each case would differ and each would be judged differently.

Why not? That is the nature of a comprehensive union - such as the one of Will and Kate, whose vows I noted in my initial post on this thread.

My only beef is with the concept of no-fault divorce. If the woman wants to stay, but the man insists on leaving her, where she has done no wrong, certainly. If however, she just wants to leave, and he has done nothing wrong, certainly not, and vice-versa (depending on who is the main source of the wealth, which by marriage becomes communal).

Kimoni:
On Tiger's case - can I ever judge that case objectively considering Tiger's escapades? I don't think so.

She should get 50%, then a further percentage as punishment, then a lien placed on any future earnings and further garnishing of his pension .

Although I think that was a bad match, once you are in, you are in. Enter with sobriety .

Kimoni:
With Serena - if you as a man has sacrificed all to keep the home front going while she concentrated on amassing trophies and earning money, why not?

Same again.


TV

^{...Sagamite, superior model e da ?}

temi4fash:
To me, it depends on the dynamics of the marriage. No two marriages are the same but any marriage in which one or both parties are not looking for ways to better each other lifes is not marriage in the first place. It is staying together.

If these ever happens in what I believe to be called marriage, I believe they're not married, they are just room mates.

Looking at situation critically, you should begin to ask questions, if he is still interested in the marriage he should probably sit her down and ask questions cos if he does not the marriage would never remain the same..

Let me tag men from the men's thread

TV01
Pickbeau1
Netotse
NashvileTN
Bellong

The host of others...

Lots of fast food advice from people with burger marriages or no marriages at all. Some people don't grasp the fullness of marriage, and as a result cannot give advice aspirationally. It's the kind of thread that leaves me wondering. For the sake of the wanna-weds and those that will hear sha.

I have spoken about how I believe marriage at it's best is a comprehensive spiritually, and physical union. For example here; https://www.nairaland.com/2789558/uk-divorce-court-awards-woman/2#40866411

Some may well have a more "transactional" approach to marriage - as long as they fulfill the criteria for marriage, I won't quibble - once qualified, people are free to determine the dynamic of their individual unions. I said that here; https://www.nairaland.com/2789558/uk-divorce-court-awards-woman/3#40874114

Such people may see nothing wrong with what this woman has done, possibly even laud it as "smart". But for those that subscribe to "fullness", this can only be considered a colossal fail.

Taken without regard to anything else, this is at best utterly disrespectful of her husband and seriously undermines him - making him easily challenged, if not held in contempt by his inlaws. It weakens the marriage bond.

If he indeed has assets in his name only, the first push should be for him to include his wife as co-owner based on the "spousal interest" principle, not a tit for tat move in order to prove a point.

And at least she knows about such assets. At best, this secretive action will only widen the gap between them and doubling down on any mistrust.

It could even lead to inheritance issues; if she passes away, how is she sure her undisclosed assets will pass to her children? I wonder where Nigerian law stands onthis kind of question?

Whether you term it permission, consent, agreement, discussion, understanding etc., I'm not sure how doing it without letting him know can be predicated on anything other than ill-motivated reasons.

To me, fullness suggests the very idea of investing in anything is raised and discussed, before we ever get to the point of acting - at which point we are already in agreement and jointly own both idea and action.

These transactional, separate (and undisclosed) asset type approaches reek of cynicism and a falling out of love, or failing to understand the marriage ideal. Very sad, as in some ways, while retaining the marriage form, a lot of benefits from marriage will ultimately be lost due to the increasing break-downs this kind of approach will engender.

Haute cuisine anyone?

TV

chichi234:
My advice to guys who like sex is NEVER to marry a virgin but marry a girl with correct sexual history. Sex is very important in marriage. A slut wife will satisfy all your sexual needs. Virgins most of the times reject alot of sexual fantasies as unnatural. Virgins will say no Bloujobs Anall sex or even dooggystyles.

Care to share what would be considered a "correct sexual history"?

And slut =/= sexual expert, slut = morally incontinent.

Virgin
- More likely to cleave tightly to her husband
- More likely to be satisfied with her marriage
- Less likely to cheat
- Health and fertility unimpaired by abortions
- Health and fertility unimpaired by STD’s
- Health & fertility unimpaired by a cocktail of toxic contraceptive drugs
- Little or no psychological damage from previous affairs
- No kiss/shag/gang-rape and tell stories lurking in the background
- Little or no chance of her having engaged in sugary or runs
- Little or no chance of paternity fraud, or undisclosed offspring ^new
- Teachable and more amenable to what pleases her husband - in all ways
- Worth 10 oloshos with change that will build a house

Timbuktou:
Stop consoling yourself. Virgins can learn and become good just like you did. Everybody learns, no human comes ready as an expert. After all, sluts didn't land here without hymens, did they?
Meanwhile, nobody really wants to marry the neighbourhood bicycle. Carry your gospel somewhere else. We're not buying.

Correct, school them scorn them - beyond shaming

OP, are you by any chance the same religion as Mindfulness !


TV

Sagamite:
The Gods will stamp it when I carry 16 wives to go and marry in the Shrine.

Start with one first

Use it to demonstrate this relationship model that is superior to marriage - as defined - and a construct of your advanced learning, structured education, colossal intellect, and eerrr... "literacy". We can't wait !


TV

Mindfulness:
Are you saying that Christians are the only people who have the right understanding of what a marriage should be like?

I am saying that;

1. people are free to structure their relationships anyhow they choose
2. but not all relationships qualify as marriage
3. I consider the Christian ideal of marriage to be the best and am happy to compare, contrast and champion it against any other form.

Sagamite is saying marriage is outdated and unfit for purpose. He is also saying he has a better relationship model, but as the patent is still pending, he is unable to share it at this point in time

Mindfulness, as usual is not saying anything other than her gospel is about her feelings above all else !

Mindfulness:
I have never tried to measure or determine what is good for every individual. How you find my views in none of my business. By now you should know that the more of you disagree with me, the better I feel. Call your friends.

You are clearly unable to state what is objectively moral or good, so how on earth can you determine what is individually good? And as you have no objective measure, everything becomes good based on your selfish unconsidered feeling.

Ergo, a woman can abandon her kids to pursue a feeling she deems good, and convince herself it's a good thing, regardless of the fallout or damage to others.

You are right, you really don't have a gospel worthy of the name, just a shallow mish-mash of feel-good tropes to help you justify your misdeeds - we've had your likes before. Hope you "feel better"

Mindfulness:
I have the right to be happy. I am the only person responsible for my happiness. How is it anyone's problem? How is any cost attached to it? How is my selfishness a problem to anyone?

Anyone with a a smidgin of discernment can see what this implies - without even seeing any of your posts.

Keep trying to fill that hole with feelings.


TV

As I noted in my very first post on this thread, many view marriage as a comprehensive spiritual, physical and material union. As evidenced by the prince's vows, he commited to honouring his wife with all his wordly goods as part of that union.

If they part and she gets Buck house, I am not the least bit worried by that. For many, it is not a transactional union, quantified by earnings and income, or the before and after, or at the point of entering or exiting.

I agree that divorce laws could be varied, but divorce in that context is a tragedy in, and of itself. And for those wanting to structure their relationships differently, simply opt for something other than marriage, nothing stops them.

With the advanced leaning, superior intelluct and structured education of today, it shouldn't be overly difficult to frame something vastly superior to the outdated and no longer fit for purpose institution called marriage se (Sagamite, that's your cue )

Why do people covet the respect and dignity marriage confers and not want to be subject to it's particulars. Especially as there is more freedom now than ever? Freedom to structure your relationship as you see fit.

If all could do as they want, and call it marriage, the term itself would be meaningless. Hence, we let people do as they choose, but not necesarilly call it what they like (or recognise every relationship as marriage).

I rest. In the absence of an alternative, proper marriage wins .


TV

Sagamite:
Yep. Literacy is the ability to read and write.

But a second definition in the dictionary is "the possession of education". It has also become the lingua franca for stating the level of education. Those are the context in which I used them.

They might be literate for their time, but the level of their time is complete illiteracy.

We are too structured and formally educated for any future generation to call us illiterate, so that argument does not carry water. Those that went to Oxbridge even in 1650 are still regarded as literate and educated today because they faced a structured education.

I do not agree. What of classical Greek education and philosophy - on which the whole of Western education rests. You do them a huge disservice. Whatever we are, we are not structured or educated enough to disdain them. At best we've built on what they left us.

Sagamite:
Someone being taught capentry 100 of years ago is illiterate.

By the way, Mohammed was a stark illiterate who could not read and write. I know that 100% because I read it. I am not too sure about Jesus, I bet he too was illiterate in reading and writing as I cannot recall anything he wrote.

Even if we view Jesus as a mere man, it is documented that He could read, that He taught, and was held in esteem by learned men of His day. You are mistaken in judging Him by His profession, which was almost certainly to accomodate His ministry.

He had well learned disciples, such as the well known Paul, who was a Lawyer and a Pharisee, thereby being secular and theologically educated. Don't disdain that time or the people that lived then. I would wager that few NL'ers could even drag basics with them .

Sagamite:
The people then were stuuupid and dumb. They brutalised and killed each other at will out of their ignorance and lack of knowledge. Some of them wrote the inconsistent and illogical junk we know today as the Bible and Quran.

I'm comforted by the knowledge that we do not brutalise or kill each other in this day and age? We have merely gotten more sophisticated - and even liberal - about how we go about it. It's not sophistication, or even intelligence, it's hman natue. And it's fallen.

Sagamite:
What you missed in your metric was people being happy in the set up.

To you, success in marriage was staying together for life exclusively.

While we might have different metrics, in my books, lack of happiness is a failure in life. You have only one life, don't believe the moronic rubbish the Hindus teach you, passed to them by their own medieval illiterates. Enjoy your ONE life, you are not coming back as a cattle of rat.

If you don't enjoy it, you have failed. If you are not happy in a marriage, it is a failed marriage.

First, you fall afoul of your own demand - let every couple define happiness as they choose; this I did in my definition at an individual level, At a generic level, it does not matter. We consider the utility of marriage as a society and accord it benefits.

Having qualified for and entered marriage, we do not intrude into peoples privacy and demand they live their unions in a certain way, to ensure a degree of happiness as determined by someone else. If a couple marry, live together and raise children, that in the eyes of society is a success. Nothing does it better !

Sagamite:
Well, keep you biblical marriage to yourself and your batch. It is not the ONE!

Neo is the ONE!

It is for those who subscribe to it - it's choice for everyone, that much we have agreed. That it is antiquated and not fit for purpose, as you have claimed, has not been demonstrated. Neither have you presented anything superior.

Sagamite:
Then I am going to heaven with you too then.

Good news.

I am danicing Kukere now.

There is yet time, but the day of salvation is always today.

Godspeed


TV

Sagamite:
Respect!

{Salutes}

I like it when someone does not try to play "I no go carry last".

Happy to carry last if I'm hearing new and good stuff

Sagamite:
Would you give you child the education they have then?

Would you even see it as sufficient to live as an educated person.

Mate, lets be frank. They wer uneducated just like our ancestors were uneducated before the Whiteman came.

People teaching you or training you in something is not necessarily an education. Fck it, many Nigerian kids today are not even getting an education even though they go to classes for 6 years.

Nigga, let me even give you a live example. When the Chibok girls were kidnapped, it was during the SSCE exam period. Some escaped. When the BBC was interviewing these girls, NONE I can recall, could do an interview in English. They were using translators.

And these were kids about to do exams that would have been administered in English.

So please, let us know what education is based on the standards that is right.

The writers of the Bible and Quran are illiterates. Medieval ones! No different from those you will find in the villages of Ijebuland bar Sagamu.

Literacy is the ability to read and write - agreed. Education is acquiring the lifeskills to function normally in the society, and at the time in which one lives. Knowledge is altogether different. There are vast differentials between people in a society at any point in time.

They were literate and educated for their time, as we are for ours, And our successors of 10, 20 or how ever many generations time turning around and calling us ignorant would be as wrong as what you are doing now. Not least because these things are successive.

The people then had the brains to do exactly what we do now and would if they had the same benefit of hindsight that we have. There is a pernicious myth, that present day men are somehow more intelligent, than our ancestors. Nope!

Sagamite:
Well, then you metric is wrong.

Because people stay together till they die does not mean a marriage was successful. Even those women that face domestic violence stay exclusively with their tormentor till they die or he kills them. That is not a successful marriage as your metric would suggest.

Firstly I gave allowance for hiccups. Secondly, of all domestic relationships, domestic violence is least prevalent in marriage. Thirdly, it is not always extreme or dangerous; in fact many "relationship types" experience a degree of low level of conflict. Fourthly, if a "spouse" dies at the hads of their spouse, that would not be considered successful by my metric.

Sagamite:
You see, you are sounding confused again.

Why must a marriage be between 2 individuals?

Who the hell are you to tell these 2 individuals to be exclusive if they both want to be swingers? .

That is marriage - biblical marriage - as I understand and champion it. It's not for anyone else, and certainly not for those who subscribe to different relationship types. It's close to the one under discussion, and even those forms of marriage that differ from mine are always enacted between two people no?

Sagamite:


You don't even go to church regularly?

Fck me! I never imagined that.

TV01, you are going to HELL FIRE o.

I'm happy to be labelled a Christian as I'm a bible believer and a disciple of Christ. Assume nothing else !

There is no fear of hell-fire for believers. The gift of god is eternal life. It's that, or one perishes - completely ceases to exist - after paying for their sinful deeds, which may be quite heated .

Now please, this relationship model that is better than marriage - we are waiting

TV

Sagamite:
TV01, this is another education for you.

You can have your own choice but don't force it on others as the ONE!

Au contraire - I know I am free to do as I choose, and fully acknowledge others are free todo exactly that a s well. And again, I've said that repeatedly on this thread.

This is a discussion of ideas. You disdain the Christian ideal of marriage, you've failed to demonstrate a superior one. Mindfullness just appears to be in general denial, but in search of tingles

Defend your stated position, don't mis-ascribe views to me as an out .

Oya


TV

Sagamite:
Now you sound less confused.

I may have been guilty of assuming, but then we all can be.

Sagamite:
No, I don't.
I asked questions about how educated they were. Illiteracy is a general synonym for being educated.

Evidence of the state of their culture then is both documented and extant. As is it's flourishing sionce then. The term "education" is at best subjective. And if you mean "advanced", I've touched on that.

Sagamite:
So, to summarise, your definition of marriage success metric is:

"When 2 people stay together exclusively till death do them part"?

Please try as best to modify if I am wrong when you reply.

No need to summarise - take it as written in the first instance

Sagamite:
You specifically want ONE?

This is where you are getting confused and not coming from an intellectual angle.

There are many people in the world with different desires, different aspirations, different beliefs, different values and different in so many other ways.

You can't satisfy this differences by saying you want to stick with ONE solution and think you have been optimal.

For each batch of people, they would have a superior and preferred model.

This is what I have repeatedly tried to educate your likes on. If you want to have a Christian-arranged marriage with your wife where you both agree that whatever you make in the union is seen as joint earning and you would not separate even if one of you is miserable because Jesu would throw a tantrum in heaven, by all means, do have it.

But that is not what Saga's batch would want. Saga needs to be happy. Saga needs to have the best option at all times. He does not do religion and does not give a hoot about Jesu or Mo or Kristna or whoever. He gives a shyt about making sense and making sensible decisions.

This is where you need to learn: The world does not need ONE and ONE should not be forced on everyone. What should be forced on everyone is ability to make choices.

It is your confusion that is glaring and dude, you are not educating anyone, far from it;

1. It is marriage you so pointedly disdain. Show a model that gives society, communities, families, the 2 individuals, and any offspring, the same or superior benefits to marriage - we are waiting

2. In as much as there are different desires, needs and requirements, no one has said that you cannot structure your relationships as you see fit. I've said that repeatedly here. Marriage is what it is. You are the one that disdains it, but is unable to improve on it.

3. Free-form structuring of relationships is fine! But it does not mean every relationship qualifies as a marriage. Ditto, it does no tmena everyone gets to structure their relationship as they like and demand it be called marriage. It's that simple

Your befuddlement in 3 easy steps .

Sagamite:
To be clear, you are saying you do not have your own shushi, but you do go to shushi?

I don't think I could have been clearer; I don't have/run/own a church. I don't belong to/regularly attend/identify with a denomination.


TV