🚀 go-pugleaf

In <34425F38.BB6FDC48@seas.gwu.edu.NOSPAM> Alan Davis
<adavis@seas.gwu.edu.NOSPAM> writes: 
>
>
(edit)
>
>Male and female submit to each other.

            -------
            Men submit to god; the woman to her husband.
            ---------

>This does not mean subservience, it means service.

            ---------
            Gender aparthied service.
            ----------

>It's the same 100-100 percent discussion we had before.
>50-50 relationships don't work, because they are
>selfish. 

        -------
        That's fine;  I don't mind 100-100, just so my roles
        aren't prescribed.
        ----------

Relationships in which each respects the other
>100 percent of the time do work, they are based on
>love and service to each other.

            -------
            Fine, as long as my roles aren't defined I don't
            mind mutual service.
            ---------


>The husband and wife promise to love, honor, and cherish.
>"Submit" means to give in, to give and take, to sometimes
>say "OK, I'll do it your way." 

            ----------
            So fine;  I'll submit to _god_; the man can 
            submit to me...his wife.  
            -----------------


 It also means to contribute>100 percent of ones effort to the health
and hapiness>of the family.

            ----------
            That's simply not possible...realistically.  One must
            also contribute to one's employers, one's frineds, etc.
            Nice thought tho.
            ---------------------------
>
>
><snip>
>
>> >I said nothing of the sort.  I suggest that  a mind set in which a
>> partner>bales when the going gets>tough is a breach of promise.
>>
>>             -----------
>>             It really depends upon the promise, and the actions
>>             of the parties.  Each case is unique;  that's why
>>             those who CLAIM a breach of promise have to go to
>>             court to see if it realy was one, and that's only
               where fault is at issue.
>>
>>                 Lefty
>
>And that is also why a partnership that does
>not include a real promise is destined to break
>up.

            ---------
            I agree with that;  those who only say "I do" when they
            mean "I do, for now" are doomed to break up. That simply
            doesn't explain the inequity of PK.
    
                Lefty
>