beastie wrote:What's interesting about this is that some believers actually insist that the act of a spouse losing faith constitutes "spiritual infidelity", and is, in and of itself, justification for divorce.
Yet I'm sure these same believers would insist that for an exbeliever to pressure (via the threat of divorce) their spouse to get out of the church is evil incarnate.
And yet, when a couple is married while in some other religion, if one of them later joins the Mormon church, these same TBMs consider that change in belief to be a good thing.
"Every post you can hitch your faith on is a pie in the sky, chock full of lies, a tool we devise to make sinking stones fly"
The Shins - A Comet Appears
asbestosman wrote:<snip> Otherwise the law will come down hard giving him only weekend visits in exchange for a heafty fine of child support and probably alimony too. It's unfair, but the courts aren't gonna change what with "best interest for the child" and all (as if divorce is in the child's best interest--not that the courts care about that part).
Abman - just to clarify, child support is not a "fine". It is intended to ensure that a child is provided for, not to penalize a parent with more income. I don't know which state you live in, but in California once children are past a certain age (usually after toddler age), physical custody tends to be 50/50, unless a father has little interest in trying to care for his children for that amount of time (which unfortunately happens on occasion). Alimony (a.k.a. spousal support) is not infinite, and is part of the social contract of marriage. Again, not a fine. Let's not grossly and unfairly characterize the operation of family law as a punitive action against fathers.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
I have a daughter, married in the temple, whose husband has left the Church. They have a strong and happy marriage. The husband remained respectful and supportive of her continued faith. They have family home evening, home teachers, he goes to Church to hear the kids speak or perform, does not complain about her attending the temple or doing her callings. He does not try to convince the children to leave the Church.
What does she do, to show her support for him, for his beliefs? Does she allow him to teach their children what he views as the truth? Does she allow him equal time, to take the children to do what he wants to do on Sunday? Does she complain to him that he's not attending church or the temple?
She doesn't complain or berate him for his various forays into different religious activities. She has gone with him to different meetings. He has never settled on another specific religion. She doesn't pressure him to attend church. And of course, she would never pressure him to go to the temple since he can no longer obtain a temple recommend. His idea of a nice Sunday activity is to read the Sunday paper, nap, play computer games. The kids are around when he does all those things. Their cildren are all above 8, and make their own choices about what church to go to. One of them stayed home from Church one Sunday to be with dad, and thought it was boring. The children know that he questions the existence of God.
skippy the dead wrote:in California once children are past a certain age (usually after toddler age), physical custody tends to be 50/50, unless a father has little interest in trying to care for his children for that amount of time (which unfortunately happens on occasion).
I wasn't aware of that. I guess things aren't as bad as I thought. I had thought the mother custody thing applied until the children came of age.
Alimony (a.k.a. spousal support) is not infinite, and is part of the social contract of marriage. Again, not a fine. Let's not grossly and unfairly characterize the operation of family law as a punitive action against fathers.
Actually I knew that alimony was more equal. I wasn't aware that it wasn't infinite though. Better than I thought.
Given those things though, at least Cal. appears to be reasonably fair. Sure, the toddler thing isn't fair, but it's reasonably temporary in my opinion. I can live with that.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
charity wrote:She doesn't complain or berate him for his various forays into different religious activities. She has gone with him to different meetings. He has never settled on another specific religion. She doesn't pressure him to attend church. And of course, she would never pressure him to go to the temple since he can no longer obtain a temple recommend. His idea of a nice Sunday activity is to read the Sunday paper, nap, play computer games. The kids are around when he does all those things. Their cildren are all above 8, and make their own choices about what church to go to. One of them stayed home from Church one Sunday to be with dad, and thought it was boring. The children know that he questions the existence of God.
Too bad she isn't president of Relief Society's general board. She could teach them a few things about what's important, and maybe she could get what's important out to some of our less supportive more manipulative daughters of Zion.
harmony wrote: Too bad she isn't president of Relief Society's general board. She could teach them a few things about what's important, and maybe she could get what's important out to some of our less supportive more manipulative daughters of Zion.
I doubt she had any quarrels with Sister Parkin's talk. And if you want to change those less supportive more manipulative behaviors in women, in and out of the Church, you are have a big job ahead of you. People tend to manipulative.
harmony wrote: Too bad she isn't president of Relief Society's general board. She could teach them a few things about what's important, and maybe she could get what's important out to some of our less supportive more manipulative daughters of Zion.
I doubt she had any quarrels with Sister Parkin's talk. And if you want to change those less supportive more manipulative behaviors in women, in and out of the Church, you are have a big job ahead of you. People tend to manipulative.
True. But as members of Christ's church, we shouldn't be.
Asbman wrote:I wonder, though, how someone would work things out if a spouse actually joined another church. Should the children attend the Lutherian and the Mormon services?
I find this question funny, maybe it was a slip up.
You do not specify which church in your preposition question and then specify in the following question.
Good catch. Actually, I had my mother-in-law in mind because initially her father was Lutheran while her mother was LDS. She switched off attended each for a while until her father let her just go to LDS services. I also heard that the Godmakers made him mad at his own church because he knew his wife's faith wasn't as bad as portrayed.
Also, he passed away a few days ago--a little before president Hinckley.
Your mother in-laws father passed away, or your wife's father? I am sorry to hear that either way.