thejeff wrote:
Nike Marketing Team wrote:After the kids leave the house, does the spouse become number one with loyalty?
This is exactly why you see empty nest divorces. Parents put the children first for 18 years and forget how to love their spouse.
You can love both but kids come first. I could just as easily make the poor counter argument that strippers exist because of people who always put their spouse first and don't know how to show affection to their children.
Marets wrote:
thejeff wrote:This is exactly why you see empty nest divorces. Parents put the children first for 18 years and forget how to love their spouse.
You can love both but kids come first. I could just as easily make the poor counter argument that strippers exist because of people who always put their spouse first and don't know how to show affection to their children.
You love your children BY loving your spouse, not INSTEAD OF; the two are not mutually exclusive. The most important way you can love your children is to show them unconditional love for their other parent. I appreciate your recognition that your example is poor, but I am not sure you understand WHY your example is poor.
This "kids come first" mentality is why we have such a soft generation of millennials.
God puts parents before spouses.
The 10 Commandments List, Short Form
1) You shall have no other gods before Me.
2) You shall not make idols.
3) You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
4) Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5) Honor your father and your mother.
6) You shall not murder.
7) You shall not commit adultery.
8) You shall not steal.
9) You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10) You shall not covet.
I wasn't there, but I'm pretty sure God started his dialogue with Moses with "In no particular order...."
Baconator wrote:
thejeff wrote:The most important thing you can do for your kids is love your spouse unconditionally. Spouse comes first.
It's rare to truly love a spouse unconditionally. People do love their kids unconditionally.
And it's not mutually exclusive to love both. A strong marriage is vital for your kids development. So we agree there.
But if you could donate one organ in a life saving operation I'd wager 100% of well adjusted people would give it to their kid.
Either way both are orders of magnitude more important than ones parents or siblings.
I agree with this. Kids should come first. Then spouse close second. Parents distant third. Siblings distant, distant fourth.
Hmmm..... wrote:
I wasn't there, but I'm pretty sure God started his dialogue with Moses with "In no particular order...."
Wrong. The first commandment is obviously the most important. Then it's descending order of importance.
thejeff wrote:
Baconator wrote:Your kids come first, then spouse. Parents are a distant, distant third.
A parents job is to launch their kid forward - there is no reciprocal obligation.
The most important thing you can do for your kids is love your spouse unconditionally. Spouse comes first.
I don't think you know what "unconditionally" means.
I am with thejeff here. I think that this kind of goes back to our base biological and evolutionary drives. We are intended on some level to propagate the species. If you think of it this way, once we have children, they become the most important relationship we have. Significant others come in a close 2nd as we may want to continue to produce more children, but in any event, we want to maximize the opportunities for the children that we have already produced and having a stable family unit historically increased the odds of success for our offspring. Parents do not really fit into this equation. That is not to say that parental relationships are not important, just that their importance is not rooted in our biological or evolutionary drives in the way that our relationships with our children and spouses are. At most, they are connected in an indirect way from a biological and evolutionary drive standpoint in that a broader web of loyal relationships will increase the odds of survival of all involved. Of course, our loyalty to our parents goes beyond that because we have evolved in such a way that our base drives are not the only factors that drive our actions any more. Still, this model kind of explains things a bit.
zohan wrote:
thejeff wrote:The most important thing you can do for your kids is love your spouse unconditionally. Spouse comes first.
I don't think you know what "unconditionally" means.
Try me.
Smoove wrote:
I am with thejeff here. I think that this kind of goes back to our base biological and evolutionary drives. We are intended on some level to propagate the species. If you think of it this way, once we have children, they become the most important relationship we have. Significant others come in a close 2nd as we may want to continue to produce more children, but in any event, we want to maximize the opportunities for the children that we have already produced and having a stable family unit historically increased the odds of success for our offspring. Parents do not really fit into this equation. That is not to say that parental relationships are not important, just that their importance is not rooted in our biological or evolutionary drives in the way that our relationships with our children and spouses are. At most, they are connected in an indirect way from a biological and evolutionary drive standpoint in that a broader web of loyal relationships will increase the odds of survival of all involved. Of course, our loyalty to our parents goes beyond that because we have evolved in such a way that our base drives are not the only factors that drive our actions any more. Still, this model kind of explains things a bit.
Thanks...but, you are not with me if you are saying kids come before the spouse. Maybe I am misinterpreting something? (Mile repeats today, so I am not all there right now :-))
God rules wrote:
Hmmm..... wrote:I wasn't there, but I'm pretty sure God started his dialogue with Moses with "In no particular order...."
Wrong. The first commandment is obviously the most important. Then it's descending order of importance.
What are you basing that on?
1. Kids
2. Parents
3. Friends
4. Spouse
Which of the four is most likely to stop loving you because of jealousy or if you made a bad mistake?
Maybe 1 in 10 people are lucky enough to have a spouse at the same level as a good friend.
You are correct, I attributed a different response to you.
As to the idea that we will end up with bratty entitled kids based on them being the most important relationships in our lives, I get that, but I think it is an outcome that results from many people misinterpreting what it means to be the most important relationship (not you, but those who end up raising bratty entitled kids). It doesn't mean you put their wants first, it means that you put their needs first. Their needs will vary from time to time. They may include a sense of stability and security (in which a healthy spousal relationship is vital), they may mean tough love (in which they get what they need, not what they want), it may mean positive behavior modeling (including modeling a healthy spousal relationship - regular date nights with a spouse instead of fawning over your children 7 nights a week, for example). But I think that if there were an active shooter situation, my wife would want and expect me to take action that would cost me my life so as to protect my children's lives, and I would expect the same from her.
In any event, the spousal relationship and the parent-child relationships are so intricately intertwined that I am not sure that it really makes a ton of sense to try to distinguish between the two..
It's the reason of your order that spouses come and go.
modern times wrote:
thejeff wrote:s
Spouses come and go. Kids and parents will be with you forever.
If you found out your spouse was meeting truckers and giving free bjs at a truck stop would you stay with her?
If your wife took out a ton of credit cards and maxed them out, so she could buy her boyfriend clothes, food, drinks and fun weekend vacations, would you stay with her?
You know stuff like that....
Being married is very much a conditional relationship, having a child is not.
thejeff wrote:
Marets wrote:You can love both but kids come first. I could just as easily make the poor counter argument that strippers exist because of people who always put their spouse first and don't know how to show affection to their children.
You love your children BY loving your spouse, not INSTEAD OF; the two are not mutually exclusive. The most important way you can love your children is to show them unconditional love for their other parent. I appreciate your recognition that your example is poor, but I am not sure you understand WHY your example is poor.
This "kids come first" mentality is why we have such a soft generation of millennials.
You love your spouse BY loving your children, not INSTEAD OF; the two are not mutually exclusive. The most important way you can love your spouse is to show him/her unconditional love for their children. I appreciate your taking the time to recognize that your example is as poor as mine.
This "spouse come first" mentality is why we have such an incapable generation of millennials
orderup wrote:
1. Kids
2. Parents
3. Friends
4. Spouse
Which of the four is most likely to stop loving you because of jealousy or if you made a bad mistake?
Maybe 1 in 10 people are lucky enough to have a spouse at the same level as a good friend.
You and I have very different worldviews, but I will try to address your point from your perspective. Let's assume you are claiming that the spouse is the most likely to "stop loving you". It stands to reason, then, that that relationship should take priority and needs the most investment.
All of that being said, remember: infatuation just happens, but love is a choice. Also, there are plenty of people who have completely disavowed blood relatives, legally or otherwise. I don't think your point is a valid one.
Smoove wrote:
You are correct, I attributed a different response to you.
As to the idea that we will end up with bratty entitled kids based on them being the most important relationships in our lives, I get that, but I think it is an outcome that results from many people misinterpreting what it means to be the most important relationship (not you, but those who end up raising bratty entitled kids). It doesn't mean you put their wants first, it means that you put their needs first. Their needs will vary from time to time. They may include a sense of stability and security (in which a healthy spousal relationship is vital), they may mean tough love (in which they get what they need, not what they want), it may mean positive behavior modeling (including modeling a healthy spousal relationship - regular date nights with a spouse instead of fawning over your children 7 nights a week, for example). But I think that if there were an active shooter situation, my wife would want and expect me to take action that would cost me my life so as to protect my children's lives, and I would expect the same from her.
In any event, the spousal relationship and the parent-child relationships are so intricately intertwined that I am not sure that it really makes a ton of sense to try to distinguish between the two..
I agree with every word of this, with the following caveats:
1. You can loving address all of those needs without putting them above the needs of your spouse. The two are not mutually exclusive.
2. I probably WOULD save the child before my spouse, but the tipping point in that awful decision process would be that I know that is what my wife would want.
thejeff wrote:
You and I have very different worldviews, but I will try to address your point from your perspective. Let's assume you are claiming that the spouse is the most likely to "stop loving you". It stands to reason, then, that that relationship should take priority and needs the most investment.
All of that being said, remember: infatuation just happens, but love is a choice. Also, there are plenty of people who have completely disavowed blood relatives, legally or otherwise. I don't think your point is a valid one.
If you are going with the "plenty of people" argument, maybe you should look at other anecdotal evidence like how many people kill their parents/children vs how many kill their spouses. We have stronger innate ties to our parents and children. Period.
zohan wrote:
If you found out your spouse was meeting truckers and giving free bjs at a truck stop would you stay with her?
If your wife took out a ton of credit cards and maxed them out, so she could buy her boyfriend clothes, food, drinks and fun weekend vacations, would you stay with her?
You know stuff like that....
Being married is very much a conditional relationship, having a child is not.
If you found out your daughter was meeting truckers and giving free bjs at a truck stop would you let her stay? If your daughter took out a ton of credit cards and maxed them out, so she could buy her boyfriend clothes, food, drinks and fun weekend vacations, would you let her stay? Or would you cut her off?
You are asking questions that 1. go against mutual unconditional love, and 2. are not exclusive to marital relationships.
The better question is, "why would your wife behave the way you describe if you have been loving her unconditionally?"
For a wife to behave the way you are describing, either 1. she is mentally unstable, or 2. you have been horribly neglecting her.