I was stunned just now when I went to Roci's blog. His post took a little bit to sink in. I had to reread it a few times to really believe it. Unexpected bad news doesn't register immediately in our minds. Then I just sat there, thinking.
We correspond with so many people here on the blogs, it should be no surprise that there will be times when we will hear bad news concerning one of the regulars. This is one of those times. It saddens me to hear this.
My prayers are with you and your family, Roci. I will miss your posts and comments. May God bless you and give you strength through this most difficult time.
We correspond with so many people here on the blogs, it should be no surprise that there will be times when we will hear bad news concerning one of the regulars. This is one of those times. It saddens me to hear this.
My prayers are with you and your family, Roci. I will miss your posts and comments. May God bless you and give you strength through this most difficult time.
Archived Comments
Morris ~
Yes, I saw that yesterday. I felt quite sad. A few people seem to be doing it tough around the blogs lately.
Nov 06, 2007 11:54
AJW308 ~
It sucks.
I never really felt like I knew Roci though he was a regular.
I hope he's got some good friends for him to lean on.
Nov 06, 2007 17:29
Taylor ~
Yeah, I feel for the man and what he must be going through. Having one's life suddenly turned upside down can happen to any one of us at any time - and there's not a damn thing we can do about it.
Nov 06, 2007 20:08
Difster ~
Roci, if you happen to catch this, I know what you're going through and I'm really sorry.
I wasn't married as long as you were but it was the most life shattering event I've been through.
I'll keep you in my prayers and you know how to reach me if you'd like to talk.
Nov 07, 2007 03:06
AJW308 ~
Roci,
I'm with Difster on this.
My first wife did that to me and it hurt me so bad it changed me to my core. I've always been a 'nice guy,' but I can still clearly remember the Dark Times and for the first time in my life feeling like I just wanted to go out and hurt somebody, anybody. I didn't care who.
I grew up playing hockey and put myself through college playing offensive tackle. I loved the contact, the hitting and the competition. The desire to go out and hurt the first candidate that crossed my path was something alien and unwanted, but it was a part of the Dark Times.
I had some very good friends and worked out with a pack of boxers which is ideal for venting anger and pain in a healthy way.
I don't know you so I have no preconceived ideas of who you are. Maybe that makes me easier to talk to, maybe not. Like I said earlier, I hope you have some real good friends, but if you do want to talk to me, I'm open to it. Just e-mail me.
Nov 07, 2007 17:39
Taylor ~
I'm sorry that you, AJW, Difster and now Roci have suffered the devastation of divorce.
It's a very sad reality of our society today that you are all probably in the majority. And that reality is possible only because our culture accepts, supports, and even encourages divorce - more so than it does the continuance of a marriage.
Actually, marriage is favorably portrayed only within the context that divorce is always the option. In effect, marriage becomes the precursor to the divorce - the expected outcome, otherwise it would not be fully sanctioned. In other words, marriage is a joke in our society, not to be taken seriously. Along with that goes the family, child rearing, tradition, inheritance - all down the drain. And it's all perfectly fine! Aren't we wonderful and open-minded!
Nov 07, 2007 20:22
Taylor ~
I don't know if the phrase "until death do us part" is still included in the marriage vows. If so, why is it? It's meaningless. It's bad enough that we want to be free to break our vows for no good reason, but that we even pretend to make them in the first place - all serious and solemn like - to feel good about ourselves - is pure hypocrisy. I think used car salesmen have a better record for sticking by their word.
Nov 07, 2007 21:15
WaterBoy ~
Taylor: "It's a very sad reality of our society today that you are all probably in the majority."
Almost. According to the Census Bureau, roughly 43% of first-time marriages end in separation or divorce within the first 15 years.
Mine went about 6 years. But I'm probably in the minority of divorce cases, since it was an amicable, mutually agreed upon decision and involved neither children nor large amounts of money. And there were no lawyers involved.
That wouldn't have happened had it not been for the advent of no-fault divorce.
Nov 08, 2007 00:33
WaterBoy ~
I also wonder if there is any correlation between a person's personality type and their incidence of divorce. I suspect there may be more divorces amongst I--- types than E--- types, all other factors being equal.
Nov 08, 2007 00:36
AJW308 ~
Waterboy, mine was amiciable, and the money involved was 5 figures, which she initially said she wouldn't go after since it was all brought into the union by me. She later changed her mind and wanted half of it, which after speaking to a men's lawyer, I offered her since legal fees can quickly eat up cash (the lawyer's recommendation).
My point is while I survived, I did not make it unscathed. I can't imagine going through a bad divorce or dealing with the entanglement of the purgatory that comes with joint custody of children.
I had one friend who occasionally mentioned that "Boulder can be a rough town and it would be a shame if she got mugged, wouldn't it?" To which I'd resolutely tell him "NO". There was also an associate who'd mention that "when cocaine was found in a car during a traffic stop, that person's life can turn into a living hell and if she's going to use that money for drugs, it would be easy for you to keep it in court." Again I passed, but was suprised at how easily the courts can be used for personal vendettas, if you know the right people or they know you.
Funny how things long forgotten can resurface.
I could go on, but this is not the place.
Nov 08, 2007 01:00
WaterBoy ~
AJW308: "I can't imagine going through a bad divorce..."
Nor can I. Those that do have my sympathy.
In showing my example, I disagreed with Taylor's comment ("we want to be free to break our vows for no good reason") -- there ARE valid reasons for divorce. Hence there should be an avenue for a (relatively) painless ending. No need to compound the original mistake by dragging it out, or worse yet, forcing it to go on against the wishes of those involved.
A Biblical marriage may have been different, but that is not the case now with the State having usurped the marital institution.
Nov 08, 2007 02:31
Taylor ~
Well, if it wasn't so easy to get out of marriage, people would think twice about making the commitment in the first place and be much more discriminant about who they choose to marry.
We humans are like that. That's why death is such a deterrent from doing many things that we might otherwise do. We KNOW there's no turning back from that.
Also, almost like everything of this world, money/economics plays a big role in people's attitudes and actions. I believe that if/when the economy tanks, divorce rates will steadily decline. Necessity is not only the mother of invention, it's often the glue that binds us.
When things get tough, people are much less capricious, just happy to have a roof over their heads and a steady food supply. Few women are going to leave a marriage and security simply because they feel they need to go off to find themselves or some crap like that. That's the sad truth, but that's human nature.
Anyway, I've heard divorce horror stories. I respect men and women who go through a divorce and then take another chance at marriage. But then, the alternatives to being married are not very appealing. It's a shame that the best choice is also the one that can hurt us the most.
Nov 08, 2007 03:11
Taylor ~
WaterBoy, I think personality types need to match up with the right personality types. I think both the I or E types would bring both good and bad things to the marriage.
The E types, while being more sociable could also be more prone to having an affair. The I types, while being more rational, could also be colder and more closed, maybe alienating their partner.
I suppose the correlating factor is not personality, which is more or less genetic, but morality, which is what we develop via our free will. I don't think corrupt individuals can have a good, lasting marriage. Simple as that.
Nov 08, 2007 03:38
WaterBoy ~
Taylor: " Well, if it wasn't so easy to get out of marriage, people would think twice about making the commitment in the first place and be much more discriminant about who they choose to marry."
While that's true to some extent, I also think we're starting to see the opposite effect, now. Where more people -- particularly men -- are becoming gun-shy of marriage precisely because divorce is so easy. They're keenly aware of how much they stand to lose, and are reluctant to enter into such an arrangement at all; and they're much more discriminating when they do.
Nov 08, 2007 04:00
Taylor ~
So, divorce serves no good purpose. Marriage is a farce now because of no-fault divorce. That's why I made that comment about the vows.
And I would think that since divorce is so common, couples who are going through hard times, as will happen in every marriage, will find it too easy to just call it quits. It's like our entire system is set up to accommodate doing the wrong thing, the easy thing - at the expense what's right and moral.
I don't blame men for foregoing marriage. They have too much to lose on that risky deal. But it isn't just the man's problem, as you know. All of society loses.
Nov 08, 2007 05:17
WaterBoy ~
Taylor: "It's like our entire system is set up to accommodate doing the wrong thing, the easy thing - at the expense what's right and moral."
And this is the point on which I disagree with you, as it is no more 'moral' to enforce what has basically become a legal contract on a person -- when the other party has violated said contract -- than it is in any other breach-of-contract situation. And that is essentially the nature of marriage today, as I said previously; since the State has gotten involved, it is a shadow of the covenant it previously was. If it weren't for the legal benefits that are contingent on a formal commitment, I wouldn't have considered marriage in the first place.
I'm all for returning marriage to the status it previously held, if states would institute a civil union instead for purposes of taxes, medical benefits, etc. But until they do (and some states are heading that way), outside the Church it is just another contract to sign.
Nov 09, 2007 02:59
Taylor ~
Enforcement of a contract, marriage or any other, in itself has nothing to do with morality. I agree. But non-enforcement of the marriage contract leads to results that are immoral. Breaking up a family, to me, is not moral. Destroying someone's life is not moral. Separating children from a parent is not moral. Very rarely are divorces amicable, mutually agreed upon, and with no harm done.
You can send someone to prison for breaking in and stealing your television. Yet, your spouse can too easily decide to end your life as you know it and you have zero recourse.
Maybe I don't know what the fug I'm talking about, but I think marriage is fundamental to a civilized society. But, in its present state, marriage is dysfunctional. No-fault divorce makes the marriage contract essentially unenforceable. The ramifications being immoral. The degree of the State's intrusion into marriage is not the point. If the State was not involved at all and no legal benefits were contingent upon it there would still be some body of law regarding the marriage contract, divorce, property, children, etc.
Nov 10, 2007 04:40
No comments :
Post a Comment