Divorce Because Of
- Thread starter tresbien
- Start date
Mod Hat - Notes Around
Mod Hat — Notes around
Dr. Lou, you're out of line. If this is the two posts I just deleted are the best you can come up with, stay the hell out of EM&J.
Got it?
Good.
Kadark:
You do realize the irony of that post, right?
As I recall, you started on this issue as a response to Spidergoat's erroneous assertion about Islam. Yet it was S.A.M., and not you, who actually asserted a correction to that point. Meantime, you seem more interested in a cultural pissing contest.
Take it to Politics, start a topic.
Mod Hat — Notes around
Dr. Lou, you're out of line. If this is the two posts I just deleted are the best you can come up with, stay the hell out of EM&J.
Got it?
Good.
• • •
Kadark:
Kadark said:
You do realize the irony of that post, right?
As I recall, you started on this issue as a response to Spidergoat's erroneous assertion about Islam. Yet it was S.A.M., and not you, who actually asserted a correction to that point. Meantime, you seem more interested in a cultural pissing contest.
Take it to Politics, start a topic.
Last edited:
Yet you did anyway. Because you seem to have some sort of obsession about my posts. Either that, or an inabilty to STFU and drop it.
WTF are you talking about?
I'm just going to go ahead and sit back and see how many paragraphs your response to this one is. Let's go ahead and hear your miserable attempts to be condescending towards me by making long, babbling novel sized rambling responses of talking out your ass, again. Go ahead sweetheart...
Well, she sort of made it everyone's business by posting it on a PUBLIC INTERNET forum, now didn't she? How does that seem to elude your infinite intelligence, Bells? She didn't have to answer us even if we did pressure her(which we really didn't), did she Bells? She could have very well just as easily have kept that shit to herself, couldn't she have, Bells?
I dunno, but if she posts what she did, and neglects to leave out what the reasons were ('sexual reasons' is way too vague), then WTF did you expect people to do? And guess what happened when she did neglect to leave out the reasons. Everyone assumed that he was just a bad lay, and grilled Orly because of it. I actually felt bad for Orly after she explained it (providing she was telling the truth). Oh well. You can think what you want.
I figured their way out of line responses to my counter arguments to their flawed defense of Orleander would have given you your answer there. I wouldn't worry about it. But I would also expect a whole chapter of a response from Tiassa here soon.Lou Natic said:
Not as embarassing as the fact that he has to make posts long enough to make 'War and Peace' look like a pamphlet to make his point; which he never really makes anyway.
Didn't mean to confuse you
No, I addressed the issue in black ink.
See, I'll flip a coin here ... and tails it is. As such I'll presume you genuinely don't understand.
What you quoted:
I'll try to skip rhetorical questions, then. You focused on one while ignoring the direct and applicable question, and apparently also missed an entire paragraph in the comparison.
Sorry, chap. Didn't mean to confuse you so.
Oh, poor you. Tell you what, toots, how 'bout this? How about if, in the future, I don't make the mistake of presuming you're intelligent? That way you won't risk hurting yourself trying to figure out what's going on.
Easy enough?
Wonderful.
Mikenostic said:
No, I addressed the issue in black ink.
See, I'll flip a coin here ... and tails it is. As such I'll presume you genuinely don't understand.
What you quoted:
In other words, are you lying, or just stupid? So it's up to you, Mike. Which standard would you prefer?
What that comes from:Hmm ... should I apply your standard here and not give you the benefit of the doubt? In other words, are you lying, or just stupid? In either case, of course, it amounts to the same general outcome. If it's simple ignorance, you're not capable of understanding the condescension in the extraneous second sentence of your first point noted above. Nor are you able to comprehend the condescension of deciding why I've criticized your contemptuous expressions. To the other, if it's a more complicated ignorance, you're just too stupid to figure out why lying is bad.
Or perhaps I should give you the benefit of the doubt—that's right, give you what you're unwilling to give Orleander—and simply remind you that the way to peace, progress, and prosperity is through our capacity for human sympathy. Had sympathy no place in the human endeavor, it would have selected out long ago. It would be easy enough to theorize that your focus on the injustice of dumping a man for being a bad f@ck reflects your own fears of inadequacy, but it is well enough to give you the benefit of the doubt and simply wonder if your desire to appear quick-witted simply blinded you to the obvious. And, hell, pretty much everyone does that from time to time.
Unfortunately, I made the mistake of presuming you capable of reading through a couple of paragraphs and figuring out the comparison at hand. If I wish to treat you as you treated Orleander, and then me, the question is whether you are too stupid to understand your own condescension, or simply dishonest in pretending it isn't there. The alternative, of course, is to treat you like a decent fellow and give you the benefit of the doubt (that second paragraph, the one you missed). In that case, you made a simple mistake we all make from time to time.Or perhaps I should give you the benefit of the doubt—that's right, give you what you're unwilling to give Orleander—and simply remind you that the way to peace, progress, and prosperity is through our capacity for human sympathy. Had sympathy no place in the human endeavor, it would have selected out long ago. It would be easy enough to theorize that your focus on the injustice of dumping a man for being a bad f@ck reflects your own fears of inadequacy, but it is well enough to give you the benefit of the doubt and simply wonder if your desire to appear quick-witted simply blinded you to the obvious. And, hell, pretty much everyone does that from time to time.
I'll try to skip rhetorical questions, then. You focused on one while ignoring the direct and applicable question, and apparently also missed an entire paragraph in the comparison.
Sorry, chap. Didn't mean to confuse you so.
Oh, poor you. Tell you what, toots, how 'bout this? How about if, in the future, I don't make the mistake of presuming you're intelligent? That way you won't risk hurting yourself trying to figure out what's going on.
Easy enough?
Wonderful.
Learned Hand
Registered Senior Member
Depends on the state/country you live in. Most states have a no fault divorce statute.
You can get divorced for whatever reason you want. In fact I don't think you need a reason. You may not be entitled to anything, but thats your choice. If you don't want to be married to someone then don't be.
How would you know anything about a person's sexual practices unless they told you or you had sex with them? If your relationship was based on avoiding sex then you probably wouldn't even mention that in passing conversation.
Not sure how you don't bring that up in passing conversation in that period of time...
I was wondering how a man that was that perverted could hide it for 2 yrs.
I understand that she didn't have sex all that time. I don't have a problem with that. I wondered though, in 2 yrs you must get intimate with the guy.
Necking, fooling around, etc. I wondered how someone that was that perverted would act so nice all the time. He would never show any signs of aggression or let anything slip (talk about sex) in 2 yrs?
That is where I was going with that question. I think it was a damn fair question. But apparently we had no business asking it :bugeye:
hmmmm You wonder this too huh? You must just be another retard like the rest of us
Bullshit. Unless you're just so damn young and stupid you don't realize that is just as important as asking them things like 1. do you want kids. 2. do you save money 3. is going to church an important issue etc., etc., etc.
Just because a person is abstaining from going all the way doesn't mean the sex topic hasn't been explored in conversation. More to the point, it's absolutely frightening to me to think that two people could get together, date for two years, and never even have a conversation about sex. Now THAT is one sick thought. Talk about not doing your homework....
hmmmm You wonder this too huh? You must just be another retard like the rest of us
I am a pretty hardline proponent of no sex before marriage but at least the topic comes up among girls that I am really starting to think about getting tied to...
I agree. You talk about almost everything when you are with someone that you plan on marrying. You also do alot of fooling around, not necessarily sex.
You can also get some idea what the person is like in that dept too. Like me for instance. The topic came up about how I don't like porn, and wouldn't
appreciate it in our house......stuff like that.
Last edited:
even got into arguments about what we would and would not do despite never having actually had sex...
maybe it is just that i've gone this long and not had sex, but if I really loved a girl and the sex ended up being bad, too bad i'd still love her and if i did just fine before, then i should be able to do just fine after...
maybe it is just that i've gone this long and not had sex, but if I really loved a girl and the sex ended up being bad, too bad i'd still love her and if i did just fine before, then i should be able to do just fine after...
Bells
Staff member
Think about it. Even if they fooled around without having sex, it is quite easy to hide it (any perverted tendencies). After all, he is hardly about to tell her to dress like a little school girl or poo on his chest if they're just necking, now is he?
How many women have been married to pedophiles or rapists without even knowing?
Do you think he's going to say in passing conversation on sex "oh by the way, I get sexually aroused by small girls, so you're going to have to dress up like a little girl and take a dump on my chest"?
How many women have been married to pedophiles or rapists without even knowing?
Do you think he's going to say in passing conversation on sex "oh by the way, I get sexually aroused by small girls, so you're going to have to dress up like a little girl and take a dump on my chest"?
And so what if he wants to stick it in her butt? She should say no, that isn't my bag baby, and leave it at that, unless of course he tries to pin her down and force it in her butt, then that'd be another story.
I am a Moroccan man who conducted a research on beauty in Morocco in the eyes of religious men.Dear there are still many muslim women and men who are still chaste and preserve their islamic identity and culture while others can be just be muslimS by birth.It is impossible for a believer who loves and fears God to engage in any ilicit behaviour such as killing innocents, terrorise them;committing adultery, telling lies and so on.
pls visit this link
http://www.islamonline.net/English/IWitness/PenTalks/06.shtml
pls visit this link
http://www.islamonline.net/English/IWitness/PenTalks/06.shtml
when a guy is diagnosed with Diabetes, he often looses the ability to get an erection, but with a bit of love and understanding "BOTH" people will find a way to work around that, should, all the women with diabetic husbands leave because he can't get an erection?
(not all men with the condition do have this problem but quite a few)