Yes, liberals value family, but not enough to recognize that a broken family is a tragedy. Divorce is actually worse than death as far as the grieving process goes- especially when there are children, custody battles, parental support, and alimony involved. And homosexuals raising children? That is tragic, not something to be celebrated.
Maybe if we'd *recognize* that a broken family is a tragedy we would be more willing to say, pay taxes for WIC so that the single mother working a minimum wage job actually has the ability to choose life. Maybe we'd have more men willing to stick around and help raise the children they cause because the condom broke while they were stupidly using sex only for recreation. Maybe, just maybe, we'd be raising men instead of a generation of cowardly wimps who choose homosexuality and suicide over real life.
Suffering and tragedy is valuable- but only if we recognize that it exists.
I'm Outside the Autistic Asylum!
RSS Feed link
The crazy stuff I can't post anyplace else
Introduction to Wonko the Sane and Outside the Asylum, which this blog is named after.
33 comments:
"Divorce is actually worse than death as far as the grieving process goes..."
You should try to qualify statements like this with words like "In some/many/most cases.."
You never allow for exception in any opinions you express. Are you aware of that trait?
In ALL cases Bill. There is always at least one member of the family, usually one of the spouses themselves, that is left grieving. It is ALWAYS tragic, and should always engender compassion.
There are no exceptions, because it is common to all humanity.
I don't believe in exceptions to universal morality. Those who do, have done great damage to themselves, their families, and the wider community.
There are cases where divorce would not be worse than death. You simply won't try to come up with one. You are too extreme in your opinions.
I did not say "divorce is worse than death".
I said "Divorce is actually worse than death as far as the grieving process goes", as in, for the people who have to suffer from a broken home, it takes them longer to grieve a divorce and come to terms with it, than a broken home due to death. The extra complexity involved is the reason why- at least if you are a widow, you know your spouse did not *choose* to leave. If you are an orphan due to death, at least you know your parents didn't *choose* to be out of your life. With death there are no custody battles, no spousal support, no breaking up of the household possessions.
Yes, a funeral and funeral planning is stressful- yes it takes 6 months to several years to convince our overly aggressive advertisers that somebody is dead.
But you aren't dealing with them still demanding access to your home and kids every day. And few dead husbands come back to do a murder suicide on their wives in this life- many divorced men do.
"But you aren't dealing with them still demanding access to your home and kids every day. And few dead husbands come back to do a murder suicide on their wives in this life- many divorced men do."
There is such a thing as an amicable divorce. Sometimes there are just irreconcilable differences that make divorce the better option. Not all divorces become adversarial.
They claim that, but my wife deals with quite a few such families- and even the ones that claim they aren't "adversarial", are *constantly* confusing the kids. We've got a one little autistic girl who can't even count on sleeping in the same bed 8 nights in a row- which has become devastating to her schooling and her sense of place in the world. Even the neurotypical kids are harmed by even the most amicable divorce; we've got one currently who sometimes comes before I leave for work and won't let me out of the house without a hug, because he's so afraid the people in his life will leave.
Amicable isn't enough. The only real solution is to be adults, work out your differences, and stay together if at all possible.
The only way I see divorce as even a reasonable situation is in the case of physical abuse. And in that situation, as hundreds of cases in the last decade have shown- divorce can and does turn deadly.
"The only real solution is to be adults, work out your differences, and stay together if at all possible."
I agree. But there are situations (such as abuse) where staying together is not possible and where the children would be better off with the divorce.
ONLY in an abusive situation, and there, I'm still not in favor of divorce. I am in favor of committing the abusive spouse to an insane asylum under maximum security until such a time that they are no longer a danger to themselves or others.
" I am in favor of committing the abusive spouse to an insane asylum under maximum security until such a time that they are no longer a danger to themselves or others."
Ah, no. Divorce is the appropriate solution. Your being so extreme, what causes that?
Divorce is NOT an adequate solution in this day and age with an abusive spouse- all that happens is that the spouse comes back to murder the kids and wife before committing suicide. I've lost 10 friends in the last 5 years that way, to abusive spouses.
" all that happens is that the spouse comes back to murder the kids and wife before committing suicide."
This isn't a big problem where I live. I think you have experienced a lot atypical situations and have somehow come to believe that they are typical. They're not.
Maybe you just aren't "tolerant" enough of abusive gun owners....
That's because you don't live where there are Black Bear, Cougars, and Wolves.
But I do find it interesting where your vaulted tolerance finds its limits. So much for Live and Let Live.
"That's because you don't live where there are Black Bear, Cougars, and Wolves."
That doesn't justify the number of and types of guns out there. There's nothing that can be done about it because the gun fanatics are in control of this issue now and always will be.
Actually, I've been talking to a friend who is in the business, and we're working on an "App for that". The hard part isn't the gun industry, it is the mental health industry and privacy requirements. But we think we have a solution there- if we can build a database of courts and mental health professionals, and then use credit card records to look for those payees, we can build a smartphone app that will add an instant background check to gun purchases. Such an application would be greatly welcomed by the dealers who frequent gun shows, and solve a huge loophole that has caused many mass murders recently.
I think there might be some privacy issues but, otherwise, it sounds like a good idea.
There are significant policy issues involved, but it is the only thing left I can see that will make a difference.
The problem isn't that there are too many guns out there- to operate a gun, you need ammo, and banning guns alone won't do it now that we can just download a design, print it, add a nail, and you have a gun.
But Ammo, and the chemicals needed to make it is a different story.
Plus, out of the last 5 mass shootings, in every single one the shooter either had previous arrests or years of therapy. Looking for bail payments and therapy copayments is a good way to screen out people who shouldn't own guns or be sold ammo.
It will be a long time before we can 3D print gunpowder.
Back to your claim that divorce is always more tragic than death and that locking adversarial and/or abusive spouses up in insane asylums is better than divorce and death...
You seem to have an incredibly narrow and superficial set of experiences, Mr. Seeber. You also seem not to be able to understand human beings very well. You have claimed elsewhere that you have some emotional/mental issues of your own.
Um...maybe you should let the sane, balanced people work this stuff out. Frankly, I don't think you're fit to be a parent, especially a parent of a child with special needs.
Your bizarre claims that rape has nothing to do with consent (are the police in your area aware of your odd views on women's right to consent when it comes to sex...?), plus your absolutist, lunatic notions of How Things Would Be If I Ran The World, and now your gun fetish (you do realize your little app would preclude YOU from owning a gun, right...right?) are deeply disturbing.
Get help. Seriously -- get yourself to a mental health professional and get serious help. Maybe CPS should read your blog, too. There's something wrong with you. I wouldn't be surprised if you were the next lunatic with a gun who goes around killing women for tempting you with their slutty capri pants and t shirts or insisting that they have sex with you because you "rightly" intend for them to get pregnant as the Lord has decreed, or whatever nuttiness you're up to lately.
Oh, and that you personally know ten people who killed their spouses is a freaking GINORMOUS red flag.
Been there, Done that, got the T-shirt.
A huge part of the reason I have these opinions is in the URL of this blog- Outside the Autistic Asylum.
I don't know that you get the reference. If you can, pick up a copy of Douglas Adams' So Long and Thanks for All the Fish. And look up the beliefs of the character known as Wonko The Sane.
In other words, there are exactly TWO ways to deal with mental illness from the inside. Either believe that you are insane, or believe that you are sane and the rest of the world is insane.
Based on the effects of things like divorce, I am absolutely ready to declare the world is insane.
And yes, there is a reason why I haven't purchased ammo in the ten years since I got my diagnosis, and the only gun I have in the house is an under 100 FPS spring style pellet gun (wait, no, that's not correct- my son now owns a pump style Nerf single-shot sniper's rifle- in bright orange. We don't let him take it out when the daycare kids are there, and it is normally stored higher than he can reach in the garage). Neither of which, of course, could even harm a squirrel.
I am convinced your type is NEITHER sane nor balanced by any stretch of the imagination. Neurotypicals have been bigoted ever since writing the "Statistical Manual for the Use of Institutions for the Insane" back in 1850. It has always been far more political than scientific, especially since the DSM III-TR, and is an attempt to suppress truth.
BTW- the man's right to consent is equally at stake in my definition of rape; merely using a condom is admitting to being a rapist, because it means you want to have sex with a woman without being committed to her for her life plus the lives of your children and your children's children.
The police in my area have people they actually have to worry about- like those who get divorced.
More knew the VICTIMS personally Bill- through my work for the Knights at a battered women's shelter.
"merely using a condom is admitting to being a rapist, because it means you want to have sex with a woman without being committed to her for her life plus the lives of your children and your children's children."
Ted,
That's just crazy talk. Using a condom does not make a man a rapist. I don't know where you come up with these things.
What part of only using another person's body for eros with no intent for storge is Greek to you? Other than eros and storge, of course. :-)
"Um...maybe you should let the sane, balanced people work this stuff out. Frankly, I don't think you're fit to be a parent, especially a parent of a child with special needs."
PatchworkFaith,
I don't agree with Ted about just about anything. But I would never say to him, or anyone else for that matter, the cruel things that you said yesterday. I thought long and hard about whether to ignore you and just let you go away or telling you what I think. Ted had the option of deleting your vile comments but he took the high ground and provided you with a very honest response. You should think about apologizing or, at the very least, staying off this site.
Sorry Bill- we were having such an intense discussion that Patchwork's insult bomb dropped and I thought it was you.
Patchwork, I knew the VICTIMS personally- through my work for the Knights at a battered women's shelter.
They should never have returned home. And we need stronger laws for the commitment of even the most powerful politicians who become abusers (in one case, it was a well respected business man who had everybody fooled- right up until he dumped his family in the bay, hopefully dead before they hit the water, then killed himself).
That is good that you do that volunteering. You deserve a lot of credit. I didn't realize that the problem was that bad.
Divorce may still be necessary in abuse cases, but it should come only after everybody is *safe* first. And with certain fundamentalist Islamic and Christian sects, the only safe abuser is one who is locked up under guard.
Any man who would hit a woman in anger, is far too chaotically evil to be allowed freedom.
"Any man who would hit a woman in anger, is far too chaotically evil to be allowed freedom."
True. But most times the woman defends the abuser just making the problem worse.
Yes, she does. But in the case of the murder-suicides, the woman was definitely not defending the abuser- she was divorcing him.
I would certainly be for, as a halfway step, any filing of divorce papers for the crime of abuse to require a 72 hour suicide watch on the spouse who didn't file papers.
"I would certainly be for, as a halfway step, any filing of divorce papers for the crime of abuse to require a 72 hour suicide watch on the spouse who didn't file papers."
Can't do that without reasonable cause.
Given the history as of late, a wife filing papers for divorce charging her husband with abuse, IS reasonable cause to make sure the husband doesn't harm himself or others.
The character sketch of Wonko the Sane on the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy wikipedia.
Post a Comment