What would you

[P.C.]

I'm not sure if I'm buying the family first thing.  This is the order for me.  Husband, children, family and friends or friends and family.  Their positions can possibly be interchangeable.   You choose your friends, you don't choose your family.  No church or god for me either Itsy.

It probably seems shocking to say husband before children, but I mean that the role parents play in childrens' lives is to teach and to guide and there is no better lesson for them, than seeing a loving couple who treat each other superbly.  All that they learn about relationships, they will learn from how you treat each other.  If you show them that your partner is number one, they will settle for nothing less in their relationship.


 

[Itsy Bitsy]

^ looks like we both value lovers (husbands) more than most.

[DDD]

I see we have alot of [img border=0 src="http://discoverseattle.net/forums/richedit/smileys/8.gif"]going on. I will get back here as I just stopped in been busy day.  

[P.C.]

^[span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;"] looks like we both value lovers (husbands) more than most.[/span]

As it should be Itsy.   It's hard work and an valuable life lesson for your children to see what working at a relationship and commitment looks like because goodness knows the alternatives for learning it elsewhere suck.  The days of anything that resembles family values on tv are long gone and non-existent.

One of the largest contributors to the steady climb in the divorce rate is the absence of an example of commitment, patience, tolerance and understanding.  Children seldom learn from what we tell them, if it isn't reinforced by what they see.
 

[Natasha]

P.C. wrote:


I'm not sure if I'm buying the family first thing.  This is the order for me.  Husband, children, family and friends or friends and family.  Their positions can possibly be interchangeable.   You choose your friends, you don't choose your family.  No church or god for me either Itsy.

It probably seems shocking to say husband before children, but I mean that the role parents play in childrens' lives is to teach and to guide and there is no better lesson for them, than seeing a loving couple who treat each other superbly.  All that they learn about relationships, they will learn from how you treat each other.  If you show them that your partner is number one, they will settle for nothing less in their relationship.


Some of my friends come before certain members of my blood family. Why? Because they have been there for me when certain family members weren't. Blood means little to me when it comes to aunts, uncles, cousins. I love my blood family because they are my family and I have forgiven them for anything and everything they've ever done to me. But they are not and will not be a priority in my life and I will not chance exposing my own child to the dangers my family bestowed upon me when I was her age.

 As for husband... if I were married not even he would come before my child(ren). I was married to the father of my child and he beat me... daily. That was some of the nicer stuff that happened in that marriage. I divorced him for our survival and future well being. My child brings out a fighting spirit in me that has me alive today (literally). Why on earth would I put any man before that? Why on earth would I show my child that a man (her biological father at that) who almost kills me while she plays in next room is number one? Men can come into my life and be equal to her but no man will ever be before her.

 

[Natasha]

P.C. wrote:
^[SPAN style="FONT-STYLE: italic; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"] looks like we both value lovers (husbands) more than most.[/SPAN]

As it should be Itsy. [img border=0 src="/forums/richedit/smileys/Happy/14.gif"]   It's hard work and an valuable life lesson for your children to see what working at a relationship and commitment looks like because goodness knows the alternatives for learning it elsewhere suck.  The days of anything that resembles family values on tv are long gone and non-existent.

 It's also valuable for your children to see a woman fight for her life as well as their own. It's valuable for your children to see that attempting overall wellness, happiness and LIFE is worth waking away no matter how hard the struggle. It's valuable for your children to see you learn, grow and prosper as a strong woman/mother. And that is can be achieved without a man/husband.

One of the largest contributors to the steady climb in the divorce rate is the absence of an example of commitment, patience, tolerance and understanding.  Children seldom learn from what we tell them, if it isn't reinforced by what they see.
 
Commitment, patience, tolerance and understanding mean nothing when it comes solely from one person in a relationship. However, commitment, patience, tolerance and understanding can be reinforced to children by one person alone if those are the values the one person abides by.

 

[P.C.]

Of course I'm not talking about such situations.  I'm talking basics or ideals.  About a healthy family dynamic.  I'm certainly not suggesting a woman should stay in an abusive situation.    

[Natasha]

P.C. wrote:
[SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"]Of course[/SPAN] I'm not talking about such situations.  I'm talking basics or ideals.  About a healthy family dynamic.  I'm certainly not suggesting a woman should stay in an abusive situation.    
   Basics.. mmm, that implies settleing. I'm not ok with that either..lol

You never struck as the type to suggest a woman stay in an abusive relationship but the way I preceve your wording is that you're suggesting a child can only be raised healthy with a boxed life. By "boxed life" I mean typical lifestyle... mother, father, sibling(s), white picket fence, little dog, apple pie baking neighbors welcoming you to your new home. Like you said just as it was once upon time on TV. Well I have a hard time believing reality was ever as seen on TV... even back then. I believe what we bestow upon others is a mix of what has been bestowed upon us, what we learned from that (if anything), how we were raised, and what position our heart lies in. Children can become morally strong adults while being raised with one parent. As I said before I would never put a man before my child(ren) and if he were a father, I would never expect him (nor would I ask) to put me before his child(ren) be them with some else or our own.  

[Itsy Bitsy]

Hmm... I agree that children should without doubt come before dating.

  As for abusive lovers, nobody should stay in a poor relationship, not for any reason or anyone. The way I saw it, this is sort of putting relationships/ lovers before children. Let me explain it though.... in a case where a husband was abusive to the mother only when alone and not in front of the children and was really great to the children (this does happen), the woman should put her need for a healthy relationship before her childs relationship with their father. Now I'm not suggesting she should go out and date, nor that she needs to have a lover at all, but she should never stay in an unhealthy relationship just because of how it impacts the kids.

[DDD]

Natasha wrote:
DDD wrote:
 I see we have some [img border=0 src="http://discoverseattle.net/forums/richedit/smileys/8.gif"]here from you two.............I will now [img border=0 src="http://discoverseattle.net/forums/richedit/smileys/8.gif"]try to clear up what i ment.  

    as I wrote it

   [P style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal][SPAN]1)[SPAN style="FONT-VARIANT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; 7pt: ; lineh-eight: normal; -adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none"]      [/SPAN][/SPAN]Being with a person you love and not married

 [P style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal][SPAN]2)[SPAN style="FONT-VARIANT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; 7pt: ; lineh-eight: normal; -adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none"]      [/SPAN][/SPAN]Getting married to a person you could be with

 [P style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal][SPAN]3)[SPAN style="FONT-VARIANT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; 7pt: ; lineh-eight: normal; -adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none"]      [/SPAN][/SPAN]Marriage comes first, then the relationship

 [P style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal][SPAN]4)[SPAN style="FONT-VARIANT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; 7pt: ; lineh-eight: normal; -adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none"]      [/SPAN][/SPAN]Relationship over all else.

 [P style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal]

 [P style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal]

 I got the impression it want like this

  1. Great relationship, no marriage

2. Great relationship, plus marriage

3. Poor Relationship, plus marriage

4. Great Relationship, no marriage

   I took #4 to mean relationship over all else as in family, friends, kids, money, etc..

    I think that was the point. I mean not the fair comparison part but for it to be so extremely different than the others. But I guess only D would know that for sure.  

      and that is my life right now........................[/DIV]

 
[BR style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"][SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"]Ok now I'M confused. What is your life right now?  #4?[/SPAN]
[/DIV]

 

 My life right now is in a good relationship but marriage seems to be for her the only thing that counts. I think because she has never been married (lots of offers and a couple here is your ring back) I have done the marriage thing and for me the relationship over all other things is what counts.

[Natasha]

DDD wrote:
  My life right now is in a good relationship but marriage seems to be for her the only thing that counts. I think because she has never been married (lots of offers and a couple here is your ring back) I have done the marriage thing and for me the relationship over all other things is what counts.

I agree. Entering into marriage wont equal happiness. Some people get divorced shortly after marrying so why mess up a good thing. I mean if it's what you both want, that's one thing. But marriage is huge and shouldn't entered into by guilt or ultimatums.


 

[Natasha]

Itsy Bitsy wrote:
 Hmm... I agree that children should without doubt come before dating.

  As for abusive lovers, nobody should stay in a poor relationship, not for any reason or anyone. The way I saw it, this is sort of putting relationships/ lovers before children. Let me explain it though.... in a case where a husband was abusive to the mother only when alone and not in front of the children and was really great to the children (this does happen), the woman should put her need for a healthy relationship before her childs relationship with their father. Now I'm not suggesting she should go out and date, nor that she needs to have a lover at all, but she should never stay in an unhealthy relationship just because of how it impacts the kids. [/DIV]
 Just because abuse doens't happen right where the children can see it with their own eyes, doens't mean they don't know what's going on. Adults don't give children the credit they deserve. Children are more aware of what's going than we think they are. Children can benefit from a good male figure... perferrably the father of that child(ren). No one can deny that. If abuse was happening in a way that a woman could fool even herself into believing the child(ren) didn't know about it and the husband/father was great to the children, I see no harm in her trying to stay with him. However, when a beating stops because a crying child stands in front of the mother (that does happen) then it's just a bad situation for everyone involved. When life has gotten to a point where all you have is your child(ren) and all they have is you, making those children feel as if they've replaced by a man would be a huge step backwards in all of your progress.

[P.C.]

 Basics.. mmm, that implies settleing. I'm not ok with that either..lol
You never struck as the type to suggest a woman stay in an abusive relationship but the way I preceve your wording is that you're suggesting a child can only be raised healthy with a boxed life. By "boxed life" I mean typical lifestyle... mother, father, sibling(s), white picket fence, little dog, apple pie baking neighbors welcoming you to your new home. Like you said just as it was once upon time on TV. Well I have a hard time believing reality was ever as seen on TV... even back then. I believe what we bestow upon others is a mix of what has been bestowed upon us, what we learned from that (if anything), how we were raised, and what position our heart lies in. Children can become morally strong adults while being raised with one parent. As I said before I would never put a man before my child(ren) and if he were a father, I would never expect him (nor would I ask) to put me before his child(ren) be them with some else or our own.

[span style="font-weight: normal;"]Whooooaaa.  [/span] [span style="font-weight: normal;"]This has gone off in a strange direction.  Maybe I'm not wording it well. [/span][span style="font-weight: normal;"][/span][br style="font-weight: normal;"][br style="font-weight: normal;"][span style="font-weight: normal;"] But I'm not talking about abusive relationships.  Or picket fences or 'settling' and I'm definitely not talking about dating.  I am talking about a couple, with children, in a healthy relationship. They need to present a united front in rearing children. [/span][br style="font-weight: normal;"][span style="font-weight: normal;"] If a child comes to their parents for something, that they are not in agreement on, they need to come together on a decision.  If dad's saying yes, and mom is saying no, they need to sort it out before a decision is given to the child.  Should it become an issue of contention (in front of the children) and ONE of the parents over-rides the other, they will not only learn who they can manipulate, they have taken a place in the family that they shouldn't.  Dad absolutely has to respect the mother's decision first.  [/span][br style="font-weight: normal;"][br style="font-weight: normal;"][span style="font-weight: normal;"]I maintain that children learn about relationships from example, which isn't to say we can't raise healthy well adjusted children alone.[/span]
 

[Natasha]

P.C. wrote:

 [SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal"] If a child comes to their parents for something, that they are not in agreement on, they need to come together on a decision.  If dad's saying yes, and mom is saying no, they need to sort it out before a decision is given to the child.  Should it become an issue of contention (in front of the children) and ONE of the parents over-rides the other, they will not only learn who they can manipulate, they have taken a place in the family that they shouldn't.  Dad absolutely has to respect the mother's decision first.  [/SPAN][BR style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal"][BR style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal"][SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal"]I maintain that children learn about relationships from example, which isn't to say we can't raise healthy well adjusted children alone.[/SPAN]
 

 lol.. ok, that (imo) is worded in a more clear manner without any confusing lines  =)  If THAT is the situation, then yes, I totally agree. However, these days that type of family setting is less typical.

 Now I'm trying to remember who started this thread. Whoever did, we should beat his bottom blue for not being more exact with his original posts... lol


 

[P.C.]

Hahahahaaa.  I think it was about how we want to be remembered when we're dead.

I just decided I want to be remembered for being clear and succinct.