Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
@Mikala
Well, not to chat-up the topic, but I've addressed the way you answered as "diplomatic". You might have not been in such situation, but there are plenty of situations where people NEED to make a definite say, otherwise the relationship with their spouse WILL turn hostile over time, or relationships among relatives WILL escalate. Sometimes doing nothing equals giving the legitimacy for one side to continue making hostility and alienate the other side.
In today's families it's a rarity to see any significant influence from any other family member in general. But the problem is generally about this:
1. children are seen as personal fulfillment for lots of people, rather than the thing they live for
2. they rather "don't want to be"/"are incapable of" living with anyone other than themselves alone, which is why many folks find it intolerable to even share a home/life with someone else, including a spouse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Jack22
A man and his wife become one flesh.
The bond between a man and a woman is the closest bond between two human beings.
Kids should never be more important than a woman's husband.
Children are the future of that bond. Think again.
With the question, "if kids and hubby were drowning, who would you save?"
I've asked my friends this, they all say the kids.
When I was a lot younger, someone asked me this question, I said, "the husband because I can have kids with him again".
I guess that was the wrong answer. Maybe that's why I don't want kids. I'll take the man over them, because in my world, he comes first and will always come first (unless he's an ass and I leave him, LOL).
ETA: I don't think you should love either more than the other. However, I do think you should show the kids that marriage/spouse comes first. So when you come home, you'd better go love your spouse first then the kids. So many spouses ignore each other and only give love to the kids. My one friend said she asked her husband why he showers the kids with love and not her. His answer, "they're only young once, I can shower you with love again later on". OMG, bad answer IMHO. She was really hurt by that too. And that is why I don't think kids should come first, per se.
Firstly, I believe that we fall deeply in love with our babies and our young families. But speaking as a mother of older children – I have come full circle to know that my love for my husband is above and beyond that for my children. But that is because I am seeing them for the individuals that they have grown into and will soon enter the world as. Not as the babies and young ones dependent upon me for life.
I love my children dearly and deeply – but I have returned to the original state of the union with my husband where I have remembered where and why it all began. Between the two of us and our love for each other. The kids will grow and move away – and the relationship with my husband will be on the forefront of my mind. It is he that I will pass the days with while my children grow and live their own lives and create their own families.
I hope that my husband and I have communicated our love for each other in such a manner that my children feel compelled to want the same for themselves. Each night I pray for the individuals that they will share their lives and love with – even though we haven’t met them yet.
If more women thought like this, there wouldn't be as many divorces in Western society.
@Mikaela
Well, not to chat-up the topic, but I've addressed the way you answered as "diplomatic". You might have not been in such situation, but there are plenty of situations where people NEED to make a definite say, otherwise the relationship with their spouse WILL turn hostile over time, or relationships among relatives WILL escalate. Sometimes doing nothing equals giving the legitimacy for one side to continue making hostility and alienate the other side.
In today's families it's a rarity to see any significant influence from any other family member in general. But the problem is generally about this:
1. children are seen as personal fulfillment for lots of people, rather than the thing they live for
2. they rather "don't want to be"/"are incapable of" living with anyone other than themselves alone, which is why many folks find it intolerable to even share a home/life with someone else, including a spouse.
Children are the future of that bond. Think again.
But it's the husband's seed that ensures those generations.
Besides, the wife and husband share sexual bond that's beyond anything a mother shares with her children.
If more women thought like this, there wouldn't be as many divorces in Western society.
I think that's the wrong logic. If the love of the children were above all other things, making moves that would separate another family member from their children would be only if:
1. the other spouse is a savage idiot
2. is heavily into vices (drugs, alcohol, gambling, prostitution, generally a terrible example for a parent).
You'd literally have divorces for the true reason why someone would generally divorce, for true betterment of the children. And you wouldn't have situations where couples literally let themselves "set apart".
With the question, "if kids and hubby were drowning, who would you save?"
I've asked my friends this, they all say the kids.
When I was a lot younger, someone asked me this question, I said, "the husband because I can have kids with him again".
I guess that was the wrong answer. Maybe that's why I don't want kids. I'll take the man over them, because in my world, he comes first and will always come first (unless he's an ass and I leave him, LOL).
Actually, the reason you think you'd choose your husband first in a drowning or other emergency situation is simply because you have not had kids yet.
In general, once a woman has a child there's a fierce natural instinct to protect that child that comes out in them. You simply can't appreciate this right now.
Most parents agree that in such an emergency they would both choose to save the child over trying to save one another. It's just what parents instinctively do.
But it's the husband's seed that ensures those generations.
Besides, the wife and husband share sexual bond that's beyond anything a mother shares with her children.
LOLOLOLOL - you people who have never had kids crack me up with some of your "opinions"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
