gadgetlady

Didn't we already do that? I'm claustrophobic anyway, so I never much liked being in a box.

Very, very true. We all assume things about others based on single (or multiple) opinions on controversial issues, but very often our assumptions are way off base. I've been accused of being someone who is so diametrically opposed to who I am it's ridiculous. I learned a long time ago that when people are going off the deep end on a subject, there's usually something behind the scenes that no one's aware of. For example, when someone rants about how intolerant Christians are, they usually have had a horrible experience in their lives with someone close to them (friend, family member, etc.) who they view as representative of the group as a whole. They then apply the (awful) model that that person created to everyone they meet who's a Christian. I'm sure you've experienced the same things in your life. I like to think I learned long ago never to put people in a box.

Wow. I appreciate that. I was actually surprised to get that post from you because it's not in your character (as far as I have seen from your previous posts). I wrote my last post after having been back and forth to the computer a few times, so I didn't see this one until just now. I'm sorry your son is giving you trouble. Isn't it amazing how our kids learn to push our buttons?

Thank you, MsDad. I must say throughout all of my experiences with people on this board with whom I disagree, I have always found your posts insightful and well thought out. I appreciate that you are so even-keeled :-)

I didn't realize the discussion was over. I assumed it would continue after my post and therefore what I said was not the "last word." I don't expect to alter your decision; you seem to be pretty firmly entrenched. So I'm happy to agree to disagree. Because you're not the only one reading this thread. And to offer another perspective. And because I received the email newsletter and planned to post it before I read your response. There are many reasons, and they don't always involve you.

That's a bit obnoxious, don't you think? Am I not allowed to have an opinion on this issue lest I be considered argumentative? I was responding to YOUR post, saying there was no debate because he was convicted. I could just as easily respond that YOU were being argumentative when you responded to MY post! I am being quite serious, because I KNOW the justice system doesn't always get it right.

If you believe in the infallibility of the justice system, then you also believe OJ is innocent? Is there ever a time when the justice system gets it wrong?

I agree wholeheartedly. Especially about the part where he'd be wearing his food. My Italian temper, I guess. I do also agree about the part where he's talking to you in your "sleep" -- what the heck is that all about? I wonder if he realizes he's a jerk during the day so he's trying to subliminally affect you so you won't do something drastic. Anyway, in that situation I would roll over when he says that and say something like, "That's so sweet; I really appreciate your saying things like that" and start up a conversation. See where it leads. Best of luck to you. I am continuing to pray.

No, two wrongs do not make a right. But first one has to determine if one of the wrongs is indeed wrong. And I think in this case that is a matter of serious debate. As to the hypocrisy of the liberals on this issue, I think THAT matter is quite clear. If it's not, click here: USDOJ: Office of the Pardon Attorney - Pardons Granted by President Clinton and here: USDOJ: Office of the Pardon Attorney - Commutations of Sentence and Remissions of Fine Granted by President Clinton

I'm just cutting and pasting from an email (political newsletter) I received today. I don't really have any other comment: Justice: Those who criticize President Bush's decision to commute Scooter Libby's 30-month prison sentence should remember: The punishment should fit the crime. And in this case, there wasn't one. Yet, that hasn't stopped Bush's foes from going into high dudgeon about Bush letting Libby avoid jail. ... [P]residential candidate Hillary Clinton, made this comment, dripping in irony: "This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice." Is this the same Democratic Party that shamed the White House for eight years in the 1990s with its illicit activity and lying? ... Just checking. It's pretty rich listening to the Democratic grandees wax eloquent about the "rule of law." As we recall, just a few years back, they seemed to think the nation's laws were mere suggestions. ... Let's return to the previous occupant of the White House -- relevant, of course, because he might soon be back in 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. as first husband if Hillary can win in 2008. As we said, the "equal justice" argument against clemency really founders when you compare Libby with what took place under the Clinton administration and after. The difference in treatment is stark. President Clinton: Impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, but acquitted by the U.S. Senate. His impeachment on the obstruction charge was basically a hung jury -- 50-50. In 1999, District Judge Susan Webber Wright cited Clinton's "willful failure" to tell the truth and failure to obey the court's orders of discovery in citing him for civil contempt in the Paula Jones case. (Jones, remember, claimed she was sexually assaulted by Clinton.) Again, Clinton lied and obstructed an investigation. Yet he got off with a hand-slap: No prison time. An admission of misconduct, a $25,000 fine and a five-year suspension of his license. He had to pay Jones' lawyers' fees and some court costs -- $90,686 total -- but no felony was put on his record. Based on all this, the Arkansas Supreme Court made Clinton surrender his Arkansas law license and he subsequently resigned from the U.S. Supreme Court bar -- just before they were about to suspend him. Sandy Berger: Former National Security Adviser Berger pleaded guilty in federal court to stealing classified documents from the National Archives, destroying some of those documents (obstruction), and lying to federal investigators (perjury). Berger hid secret NSA documents in his socks and pants. He stole and apparently destroyed secret documents from the national archives. ... He took five copies, but returned just two. Again, perjury and obstruction of justice? Berger, too, got off with no prison time, a $50,000 fine, two years' probation and 100 hours of community service. No felony on his record. He also lost his law license. Then there are the Bill Clinton pardons. Those now screaming about the leniency granted to Libby surely forget that Clinton issued 140 pardons on his last day in office. Many are questionable, to say the least. ... Clinton commuted sentences for 16 members of the Puerto Rican separatist group FALN. That group had set off more than 100 bombs in the U.S., and the 16 had been convicted for a number of violent crimes, ranging from sedition to bomb-making. ... Clinton also pardoned carnival operators Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory. How did carnival operators get on his radar? Turns out they had loaned Hillary's brother, Tony Rodham, $107,000, which he never repaid. ... Then there was Carlos Vignali, a cocaine trafficker whose sentence Clinton commuted. And Almon Glenn Braswell, who was found guilty of mail fraud and perjury but won a pardon. ... Braswell and Vignali each paid Hillary's other brother, Hugh Rodham, $200,000, hoping he could win them clemency. Rodham returned the money, but only after the scandal became public. ... Others also found grace under Clinton's pardon frenzy -- former Rep. Mel Reynolds (found guilty of sexual assault on a child and later of bank fraud); Susan MacDougal (pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal); and President Clinton's brother Roger Clinton (pardoned for earlier drug convictions). As we said, the list is a long one. We gave just a taste of its sordid contents. But it puts Scooter Libby's case in context. ...

It is painful to read your words; I can't imagine the pain you are feeling being in that situation. Have you ever told him the situation is dire and you can't go on living like this and if he refuses to work on the relationship something drastic is going to happen? I'm not talking about threatening him, just telling him that you can't go on living the way things are? I know it opens you up to more hurt, but can you explain that you're in pain and it's only getting worse? Suggest a marriage retreat weekend to reconnect and remember what it was like when you were first married? If none of those things work, then I suggest going to a counselor alone. Sometimes that helps with good suggestions for how to handle the pain and how to impact the relationship -- and sometimes when one partner starts going and the other notices changes, the other partner eventually joins. All I can say is if the situation is that bad, just enduring it and plodding through day to day means it isn't going to change. It is not good for your psyche to continue to endure silently. Eventually something's got to give. My goal would be to try to make it give for the better by being proactive now, rather than spending your life in pain just waiting for it to get worse and eventually blow up. I'm so sorry you're going through this.

Ohhh, that was fast -- I found it! They changed the name which is why I was having trouble. Christian Marriage Counseling | Marriage Seminars - Marriage Counseling There are plenty of others; this is just one I've heard good things about.

I keep reading these threads over and over and my heart is just breaking for you ladies. I just want you to know I am keeping all of you, your husbands, and your relationships in my prayers. There are several weekend marriage intensives that you might want to consider. They're pricey, but IMO worth it. Some of you have spent or are planning to spend several thousand dollars on the band -- certainly your marriage is worth a financial investment? I was trying to find a link to one of the intensives I've recommended to some friends, but I've been unsuccessful. If I find it later, I'll post it. Marriage does NOT have to be so unfulfilling -- please, please consider something like this or get some good counseling. It is NOT good for you to be so unhappy.

Thanks for your post, Jon. Hopefully we're headed down that road.

Ohhhh, I love that kiss. I still get it, pretty much daily. Yesterday it was in an elevator. Why don't you ladies ask for it? Just say, "Hey, remember those awesome kisses we used to share while we were dating? I'd like some of those again!" See what happens.

Why don't you try non-hormonal forms of birth control? Dh and I use a combination of barrier methods and NFP (which for us just means knowing when I'm fertile and using the barrier methods then). Although it's not as convenient as pills, shots, patches, IUD's, etc., it doesn't mess with your body like all of those things do. I'm not a big fan of tricking your body into thinking it's pregnant for years on end -- AND all of the side-effects that come with it.

Oh, no, mousecrazy! No sense injecting FACTS into the discussion. (In case anyone hadn't yet guessed, I'm being sarcastic)

I was in Florida a few weeks ago. One night I accidentally forgot my Cutter Advanced and on the walk (100 feet) from the car to the door of the hotel I got six bites. I didn't forget it after that. When I sprayed myself, I got no bites at all. I now swear by the stuff. Blue bottle, orange cap. Lifesaver.

Love it! Keep 'em coming! OK, did you guys talk about the 2008 cruise destination?

Awesome! Love it, love it, love it! You look terrific, btw :-)

Ahhh, yes, Karla -- once people do their first cruise, they're usually hooked! IMO it's the ONLY way to travel. Glad to hear everyone had a great time. Post some photos!

nume130, you've taken a step in the right direction. Getting things out in the open and talking about them is a GREAT start! May I suggest getting some good counseling for you and your husband? I know Focus on the Family has particularly good help, and there are also some weekend getaways that you might consider. Go to Family.org for more information or call 800-232-6459 and just ask for help. Don't assume all is lost in this marriage!

I'm a big believer in both, so I didn't vote because "neither" didn't seem appropriate. You CAN have both (bwg).

I agree about the passive-aggressive, joking-but-not-really-joking behaviors. I also have a comment on the issue of being too afraid or nervous or shy to talk to your husband about what is bothering you (or what you want in bed). They way I frame any such conversation is that this is our life together and our marriage and I want it to be the best it can be. I'm not going to play games with our relationship and I'm not going to NOT say something that needs to be said just because I'm timid or proud or whatever. There is nothing I can't say to dh, and if there is I just push past it and know that I need to say it and get it off my chest or it'll just fester there under the surface. If he rejects me (he never has) or belittles me (he never has), I'll call him on it because that's not acceptable. We are 100% transparent with each other.

Our pastor did a series on sex a while back and he used a great analogy: men are like microwaves, women are like crock pots. That crock pot needs to be on all day and get stirred every once in a while for it to be ready at dinner time. There's also a book with a title something like "Sex Begins in the Kitchen" -- meaning that we women need more than intimacy to start when you hop into bed, and that often if a man helps out in the kitchen by washing the dishes or whatever, this will turn his wife's heart towards him. We need to have our pots stirred throughout the day. Explain this analogy to your dh. Then, when he's not doing it, just say "crock pot" (with no explanation) throughout the day. In other words, I need a kiss, I need a snuggle, I need a hug, I need you to show me you love me, etc.