The marriage vows may say “for better or for worse” and “in sickness and in health,” but Rev. Pat Robertson told his “700 Club” viewers that divorcing a spouse with Alzheimer’s is just fine. Robertson says that the vows say “until death do us part” and Alzheimer’s should be viewed as a type of death.
Robertson was asked on this television program for advice for a friend whose wife has started suffering from Alzheimer’s and has started to see another woman. Robertson responded “I know it sounds cruel, but if he’s going to do something, he should divorce her and start all over again, but make sure she has custodial care and somebody looking after her.”
When he was reminded of that vows concerning “for better or for worse” and “until death do us part,” Robertson explained “If you respect that vow, you say ’til death do us part.’ This is a kind of death.”
I have always been fascinating by these programs with Muslim or Jewish or Christian figures dispensing advise to the faithful. No one ever asks, “are you just making this stuff up as you go along?” This seems a pretty massive change in the plain meaning of those vows. I hate to lawyer the language, but what is the basis for this new interpretation that the term “death” extends beyond the obvious meaning of the end of life and can include constructive death. It brings a new meaning to the phrase “you are dead to me.”
Source: Yahoo
___
LK,
Now would you please explain what you just said….I may have gotten this wrong..
I think you said…You’d jump the shit of anyone that crossed the line…Ok..Now why didn’t you then?
Because you cherry pick….You’ve decided I am wrong…You can say its thread crossing or what ever…Say it enough and it will make you feel better….but its still not my perception…
I have said long enough that I am a conservative Texas Democrat…see other threads for the Definitions….
Suffice it to say….The ill will from SWM boils down to, I made an accurate statement about Ann Richards she did not like and she slammed me on that thread….I asked her off line not to do that (attack me) she continued…This may not seem like much to you…but I generally have respect for folks until I have not the reason to…I hope we understand…that I can disagree with someone and still like them and be civil….I think you can….
The way I see it…you don’t know the whole story, but chose to get involved anyways….and decided that I abridged some unwritten rule….So what its not on topic…how many other threads are no longer on topic…hence, the cherry picking…
Elaine, Thank you.
Bob Esq., Some folks are too paranoid, some folks aren’t paranoid enough and it ain’t paranoia at all if they’re really out to get you. 🙂
Thanks for the Annie Hall reference, it’s one of my favorite movies, a classic.
Anonymously Yours
1, September 16, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Correction:
You cherry pick what you wish to address….
*****
What if that same comment was made by a female, posting as Darwin….would you have still said the same thing regarding “You Women”….Oh…my….you have a quandary now….
————-
LOL, you don’t know me at all after all this time, you bet your ass I would the context being the same.
Regarding your charge that I didn’t defend you: The statement by SM as a rhetorical question about the women Justices was answered well (by you) and was inoffensive. It was appropriate in manner and degree of acrimony over a mis-characterization.
It’s when you went all nuclear and started cross posting that pissed me off, you became an aggressor over an issue that was minor in comparison to the original disagreement. Your aggression in demanding an apology and rehashing the matter became an aggression on my enjoyment of the blawg. You needed to move on, I don’t mind a tantrum now and then but when they go on for days, then it falls, as offensive, entirely on the person throwing the tantrum. The conflation was yours.
Similarly, this statement is a conflation to hyperbole about my statement to Darwin:
“May I inquire as to why you have double standards? Is not the equality you seek for yourself to be shared? Or is it to be, once you obtain the equality you seek the annihilation of the male race?”
Srsly? 🙂 And you ask why I jump YOUR shit? LoL
That she looks askance at people that fail to take some things into considerations is not a big deal- I do also and explained that in another posting. I have a lot of ‘single issues’ on my social agenda and don’t do trade offs for economic gains. The economy as a lever for altering artificially manifest corollary issues is too easy to manipulate. (The banks screwed us all, defence is eating all our money, that means that we need to kill Planned Parenthood …and Social Security.)
Generally I will not trust the judgement of people that trade off social issues for financial issues. That tells me that if the money is right s/he will sell anyone out, out of ignorance if nothing else. You’re ire at that statement does not compute, as you have put it.
It is most interesting that the guest bloggers place their own spin on things… Remember those words when blogging or posting ….
Gene,
That’s one of those answers that will most certainly bite one in the ass sooner than later…. You’ve been known to have had your tangents….just saying….
To whoever reacts to it.
Gene,
And who would your statement be directed to….
“If you are the only person seeing a problem, then maybe you’re the problem.”
Well, there are lots of progressives that have called out other progressives for their gay bashing attacks on Marcus Bachmann. That I am aware of this and you are not perhaps speaks more to your own ignorance and insensitivity than it does to my being the problem.
More generally, perhaps you are too cowardly and brainwashed to note swm’s constant stream of bigotry. And it takes a relative outsider to note the King has no clothes.
You’ve now been given ample evidence of Mespo’s comments and swm’s oeuvre, perhaps you’ll be more aware and able to point them out in the future.
Woosty,
“As a nurse I have luckily never run into the kind of creep that would divorce his wife due to illness in order to pursue another woman. From what I’ve seen, that is rare.”
You are luckier than I. As I said, I have a close relative who used to be a hero, do that. And as I pointed out, Michael Schiavo wanted to do this, but stayed married as that was his only control point over Terri Schiavo’s relatives.
And of course we all know of that scumbag Newt.
I suspect there are many cases of men and women that have done this.
And as I agreed with Lottakatz, I would (have) want(ed) my wife to do this, and well, who knows what my wife would have wanted from me. (Probably to drop dead.)
My own suspicion is that, most people think that if they were in Terri Schiavo’s state they would want not want abandonment but they would want their spouse to move on.
So to me the interesting question is what is the difference between a vegetative state and a state of severe advanced Alzheimer’s.
And of course the elephant in the room Woosty, is that even though you haven’t found a creep that would leave *his wife*, you and I both know that women initiate the vast majority (70%) of all divorces. And apparently we are all good with that.
Personally, I think it’s really creepy that society thinks this sort of ratio is okay. I suspect it says a lot about the pathology of women.
So men don’t move to divorce their wife, until she is brain dead, and that appears to be a problem.
Women are encouraged to divorce their husband if he bores them or is otherwise below their standards. But once the husband is severely ill, it is true that women will stay by their sides more often than the men will. And we think that all of this should be the norm.
The statistics are about 7:1. So for every seven creepy assholes like Newt Gingrich, there is at least one cold hearted bitch out there.
And as others have pointed out, and you agreed, in Schiavo’s case, and in many cases, and probably even in this case, divorce of a partner in this state is not necessarily or even likely abandonment.
If you are the only person seeing a problem, then maybe you’re the problem.
I suppose that it is too much to expect…
That is absolutely correct SWM….and in those Texts and Emails….was basically asking you if I had offended you in someway to deserve the attacks….The last text 8/29 was one couched in the term regarding the El Paso Thread….The last Email was about September 1…. I basically said then….That I was tired of your attacks….and that if that was the way you wanted to play…then I would respond in kind….You are correct….The Huntsman thread was September 8….
You have yet to apologize…..
TexasSage1, September 16, 2011 at 12:27 pm
That said, I think in this case he is right. Divorce does not necessarily mean abandonment.
————————————-
As a nurse I have luckily never run into the kind of creep that would divorce his wife due to illness in order to pursue another woman. From what I’ve seen, that is rare. I HAVE seen couples married for 40+ years talking about divorcing in order to protect the families assets and prevent loss of a house or to be able to get some kind of help with the astronomical medical bills. The stress of economic hardship to people in the throes of medical catastophe is immense and uncivilized and inhuman. I have also been blessed to see people who were married and extremely committed to spouses suffering from severe Alzheimers who valued and were faithful to thier marriages. Real Alzheimers is ugly indeed, it does not surprise me that someone would run away from it….it does surprise me that someone would dump a long time spouse who was sufferring from it (or anything else…) as an excuse to run towards something else….
There has been no email discussion of anything since Sept. 1. The Huntsman thread was well after that.There have been no texts since August when I was texted about El Paso County.
Mike S.,
Thank you…While I think she stated what I read…..There was also the phone text and email exchanges between the two of us….How I got being called a Republican….and I even said that I’d probably vote against the other guy…hence casting a vote for Obama…I as well as a number of other folks are unhappy with the way Obama has operated while in office….
How I got the misogynist part was based upon everything said and the words used…then askance was directed in the same breath……
I did not start it…and I see no reason to back down…when I heard and read what I read….
I would be doing this regardless if it was SWM or someone else…The statements were uncalled for….and I asked for an apology….I got nothing….other than derision from 2 women folk +SWM on here for expressing my opinion….
Apparently, it is fine for women folk to attack a male….but to defend oneself….is not permissible if you happen to be male….I see no reason for the double standard….Just like on the Firefighter Thread today….I did not want to comment because I feared reprisal of being called a racist….that as well would send me over the edge….
With respect to Anon…I called him out when it was not civil… I think I have tried to maintain a certain degree of civility….not that it has been returned….
“Someone referred to me as a feminazi on another thread. That was a first.”
SwM,
Any one who uses the term “feminazi” except to deride its utterance by another writer/speaker is not only a moron, but very afraid of women. Now, however, I really doubt it was AY who called you that it doesn’t seem his style. If he did then he does to be described as in sentence one. I do think you’re mixing up AY with Anon though, because I think that there is a clear thread in Anon’s writing that does bespeak opposition to the fight for women’s full equality. AY can go over the top at times to be sure, but I don’t see him as anti-women. I also don’t see him as a Republican and I certainly don’t see him as being anti-choice. There are many here who don’t support Obama, like Gene, FFLEO and Jill. I respect their beliefs and am likewise angered by this Administration, yet I will nevertheless vote for him as I’ve stated many times.
AY,
I think you also have gone a little too far in your interpretation of SwM’s comments. I don’t read her statements towards you as being so far out of line as to take umbrage. SwM is expressing her point of view strongly and you seem too have reacted with more “touchiness” than is called for
from the remarks. My sense is that you have read far too much into them and in so doing have felt quite put upon. I don’t think you consciously altered her words, but I do think that in your mind you distorted their meaning beyond that which was meant.
To Everyone,
I write the above not to stifle this argument or to take sides, because I truly believe that at least between AY and SwM there is more smoke than fire. To me there has been over exaggeration on both sides that has escalated with each passing comment as the tempers of both these outspoken people have further flared. As far as I’m concerned they can both have at each other to their hearts content, not for the least of reasons that I’ve in the past have had my own verbal feuds here.
Unfortunately though, Anon has challenged me to give my opinion and in my own macho way I will always rise to a challenge. I think the real targets of opprobrium here are those who seem to think that Robertson’s remarks were benign and that if it were a woman rather than a man asking the question, his answer would have not been controversial. Anon has gone out the the way to reference this as both an issue of feminist and progressive tunnel vision and I think his case is a poor one.
To my mind even the term “feminist” has pejorative connotations. The battle is nothing less than a battle for equality in all aspects of life and it is a struggle against the bounds being put on women by government, societal mores and religion. The struggle didn’t begin with Friedan, Greer and Steinem although gave it a new impetus in the late 60’s. This is an age old struggle of humanity and while some might think me a “traitor to my sex”, whatever the hell that would mean, I stand with the underdog as usual. To be clear, because some whining males think their sex the underdog, I stand with women.
Now please go back to your bickering as I cook dinner.
Lottakatz: “You women..” Is that like ‘you black people’? Or, ‘you Jews’?
From “Annie Hall”
ALVY: I distinctly heard it. He muttered under his breath, “Jew.”
ROB: You’re crazy!
ALVY: No, I’m not. We were walking off the tennis court, and you know, he was there and me and his wife, and he looked at her and then they both looked at me, and under his breath he said, “Jew.”
ROB: Alvy, you’re a total paranoid.
ALVY: Wh- How am I a paran-? Well, I pick up on those kind o’ things. You know, I was having lunch with some guys from NBC, so I said … uh, “Did you eat yet or what?” and Tom Christie said, “No, didchoo?” Not, did you, didchoo eat? Jew? No, not did you eat, but Jew eat? Jew. You get it? Jew eat?
Correction:
You cherry pick what you wish to address….
*****
Does not seem like a denial of the remainder….So you agree that we have is in your mind permissible double standards…..and so long as it is an injustice that is directed at a male or what is perceived as a male….then it is ok….Right?
What if that same comment was made by a female, posting as Darwin….would you have still said the same thing regarding “You Women”….Oh…my….you have a quandary now….
Do I expect you to address it…Probably not….
The way I see it LK….If you cherry pick what you wish to address….
What was said:
“Darwin52
1, September 16, 2011 at 2:43 pm
I find it most amusing that you women are the first to call out a male for saying something unkind to a female. When the shoes are reversed and the male is still attacked you stand together in furtherance of this injustice.
May I inquire as to why you have double standards? Is not the equality you seek for yourself to be shared? Or is it to be, once you obtain the equality you seek the annihilation of the male race?”
Does not seem like a denial of the remainder….So you agree that we have double standards…..and so long as it is an injustice to what is perceived as a comment made by a male….
What of that same comment was in fact made by a female….would you have still said the same thing….Oh…my….you have a quandary now….
Lottakatz,
Darwin52, “You women..” Is that like ‘you black people’? Or, ‘you Jews’?
Got your number pal, try harder. Amateur.
**********
Well done! Score one for the “V” people. Not bad for a…a…a woman.
😉