Assault on marriage!!!

[Ainustorm]

Did you hear that the standard of marriage is being attacked over in the east. Currently in New Jersey and big one on a Lesbian couple trying to sue a church for not allowing them to use the church for marraige ceremony. Also there is a Rich GAY guy putting tons of money in the candinates, who will side with changing the values of marriage to allow gay and lesbian marriages/ support. He is also using this method to stop candinates wo do have good family values... before they could reach a legal seat. Will we not stand up for those values before it is to late. We need to tell our government where we stand.

site: www.nationformarriage.org

cannot write websites yet, but this is about the attack on marriage.

Did you also know that Gov Arnold passed a law that allows boys and girls to use opposite bathrooms and locker rooms. Which allows shared showers in public shools if they are gay, lesbian, or Bi ??!!!! :o

 

[CoreyTheMagnificent]

What I find disturbing about what you say is that you seem to know very well that who puts money into campains has a say in the policies, but this only bothers you when the person funding the campains doesn't agree with you.

 

[Ainustorm]

What I find disturbing about what you say is that you seem to know very well that who puts money into campains has a say in the policies, but this only bothers you when the person funding the campains doesn't agree with you.

Um actual no... it has nothing to do with the money put to a campain, just the motive behind that upsets me. I have no problem the money being used just the fact that Mr Gill is trying to get those that disagree with him NO Chance of being elected. Because money makes the difference in this world. Without support you could never be elected in a government seat. So He is putting the money in those that agree with his unethical standard of living. He is using the money as a weapon to destroy the marriage. When over 60% of Americans think that Homosexuality is not a sanctioned picture of marriage, then yeah I diagree because it goes against what this nation is founded on. It is our foundation that is being attacked. If you want to be blinded by the truth, go ahead. But when anyone Gay, Lesbian, Islam, Christian, Business man, politician, and any of the varias peoples on this earth. Try and destroy this country, then yes I will stand up for it. Because it is only by the GRACE of GOD we exist, and it is only by Him that we will remain a soveriegn nation. You start destroying the family, you Destroy the nation.

 

[CoreyTheMagnificent]

Firstly, about the money I do believe that you just re-stated what I said. Next, as far as an "unethical" stadard of living goes, I think that you are ignoring the morals of others and not just your own. I do realize that about 60% of Americans do agree, but I see that you did not point out that those numbers have been changing in favor of gay marriage.

Next on my list is a question: what do you mean by what this nation was founded on? The States weren't founded by Christians so I fail to understand.

I really don't think that anyone (except radical terrorist groups) are trying to destroy this country, what they want is to be equal. I think that it is a fair opinion to say that they may be going against what marriage traditionally is, that's your opinion. But I see the alarming amount of divorces doing the same thing and you aren't freaking out about that. So just take a deep breath, maybe get a glass of water, and ask your god about it.

The final thing I would like to say is that I do agree with you that by the grace of god do we exist, of course it's true! How could the creator of the universe not be responsible for it? I think that no matter what laws are passed, the ideals of your religion will go on, so believe what you want to but try not to get so worked up; you might get an ulcer.

 

[gwynedd1]

The real offenses are as follows.

1 Homosexual marriage is fine as a legal status within a state of we so choose. However the religious facades involving those which prohibit homosexual marriage is offensive and deserves to be tossed into the river. It simply cannot be a Christian ceremony.They may do as they wish but expect opposition for doing.
2. This leads to the second offense. It is outrageous to sue a church over their sanctuary on the grounds of religious freedom. It is deserving of a counter suit that should stick.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The real offenses are as follows.

1 Homosexual marriage is fine as a legal status within a state of we so choose. However the religious facades involving those which prohibit homosexual marriage is offensive and deserves to be tossed into the river. It simply cannot be a Christian ceremony.They may do as they wish but expect opposition for doing.
2. This leads to the second offense. It is outrageous to sue a church over their sanctuary on the grounds of religious freedom. It is deserving of a counter suit that should stick.

I'm still trying to figure out how marriage is being assaulted? Will the OP please address this issue?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I'm still trying to figure out how marriage is being assaulted? Will the OP please address this issue?

Actually I picked this up somewhere on another site: Pretty much says it all for me.

12 REASONS WHY HOMOSEXUALS SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO MARRY

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because they world needs more children.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spear's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was so meaningful.
5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all: women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.
6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy likes ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's why we have one religion in America.
8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.
10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays and lesbians.

 

[gwynedd1]

Actually I picked this up somewhere on another site: Pretty much says it all for me.

12 REASONS WHY HOMOSEXUALS SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO MARRY

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because they world needs more children.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spear's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was so meaningful.
5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all: women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.
6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy likes ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's why we have one religion in America.
8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.
10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays and lesbians.

Hello SpiritMeadow,

There is no legal justification. I am not sure why Christians, or anyone else needs affirmation from their government. I might even be for abolishing the concept of civil marriage entirely.

However on a personal level it is quite different.
Now as to Christian faith, we are commanded not to do so by our faith as I have already said.

From a Naturalistic point of view Homosexually is quite poor indeed. I am not sure why context and environment is always left out of it but then I rarely expect true insight. Sex is a biological concession that has risk. It is why most species are quite fussy about partners. Exposure to pathogens is quite a problem.

In the case of the male sex drive it is usually in the context of a female one. Men tend to be polygamous while women tend not to be polyandrous. Imagine a man living in a sorority house. It is typically only imagined because it is women who do not allow this because it certainly tends to be counter to their interests with so few resources from our lucky man. I would guess many men would be willing to have this arrangement. This drive does not happen in isolation in this case. However in the case of homosexuality there is no such resistance. It is as if every man lives in a sorority house with other men who think they live in a sorority house. Not only is their no resistance from women but rather more fuel to the fire. Its like gasoline in a kerosene heater.
Adding to this is that heterosexual contact tends to be a closed system. Men tend to transfer but are more resistant to receive. Women tend to receive but tend not to transfer. In the case of homosexual men they tend to have elements of both and thus are quick conduits by a large margin.

Its just the facts. Here are the results.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/jun/05060606.html

As for cultural relativist perhaps you might want to know exactly what a boundary might be as a benefit. It does tend to refute that homosexuality does not also have a cultural component as the adult homosexuality rate tend to be the western average.

Careful, this is not for the faint of heart and it contains graphic explanations of cultural practices of a tribe in New Guinea called the Sambia. It may be somewhat offensive to some.

http://lrivera0327.tripod.com/
http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/2144/l-papua_new-guinea.htm

I recall one tribe actually needed to kidnap children from other tribes because of depopulation from fear of heterosexuality. It probably was less of a problem in the absence of large Eurasian cultures featuring domesticated animals to be so care free but it will have the negative consequences described in our such society. .

 

[Candide]

Why do we constantly get angry when a secular government does the job of representing it's secular constituents?

This is the way I see it. The government should be in charge of the legal side of things, and they should allow any two adults to reap the benefits (both legal and spiritual) of living in a monogamous, loving relationship. The church (of whatever religion) can then decide which marriages they feel that they need to recognize, and which ones they don't. If you opt for a "no gay marriage" interpretation of Christianity, go to a church that believes the same thing. If gay marriage (as a religious practice) doesn't bother you, go to a church that feels the same way. It's not that hard.

God calls us to love gay people just as much as straight people.

 

[CoreyTheMagnificent]

Amen brother. I can't say this enough: there is no room for hate in this or any other religion.

 

[gwynedd1]

Why do we constantly get angry when a secular government does the job of representing it's secular constituents?

This is the way I see it. The government should be in charge of the legal side of things, and they should allow any two adults to reap the benefits (both legal and spiritual) of living in a monogamous, loving relationship. The church (of whatever religion) can then decide which marriages they feel that they need to recognize, and which ones they don't. If you opt for a "no gay marriage" interpretation of Christianity, go to a church that believes the same thing. If gay marriage (as a religious practice) doesn't bother you, go to a church that feels the same way. It's not that hard.

God calls us to love gay people just as much as straight people.

Hello Candide,

There is no interpretation of Christianity and gay marriage. Its simply apostate. One is free in this country to be apostate however. That is what freedom of religion means. As long as another's civil rights are not infringed that is the system.


Romans 1

26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

It is tantamount to illiteracy to consider otherwise. It is however not any different to other sin such as drunkenness adultery and the like.
Love has nothing to do with any sin other than sin tends to be harmful to those who are loved. Hatred towards any is the greater sin.

 

[wiggsfly]

While I have absolutely no problem with civil marriage of homosexual couples as long as the church isn't forced to recognize them, I have a problem when they try to force it on the church with this kind of garbage.

 

[Stinker]

Hello Candide,

There is no interpretation of Christianity and gay marriage. Its simply apostate. One is free in this country to be apostate however. That is what freedom of religion means. As long as another's civil rights are not infringed that is the system.


Romans 1
Quote:
26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.



It is tantamount to illiteracy to consider otherwise. It is however not any different to other sin such as drunkenness adultery and the like.
Love has nothing to do with any sin other than sin tends to be harmful to those who are loved. Hatred towards any is the greater sin.

Hi gwyn


I used to believe the way you do on the verses from Romans 1

However, after many people kept trying to show how the people of these verses were straight and not gay, I finally saw. The people were heterosexual by nature but were getting off by doing something that was opposite of their nature. The Bible does not address the 'nature' of homosexuality nor does it address the 'nature' of many other subjects. It just starts and stays with heterosexuality.

 

[Rion]

The fact that they're suing the church bothers me.

 

[gwynedd1]

Hi gwyn


I used to believe the way you do on the verses from Romans 1

However, after many people kept trying to show how the people of these verses were straight and not gay, I finally saw. The people were heterosexual by nature but were getting off by doing something that was opposite of their nature. The Bible does not address the 'nature' of homosexuality nor does it address the 'nature' of many other subjects. It just starts and stays with heterosexuality.

Hello Stinker,

One cannot look without context. There was no basis under the law for men to have sexual relations as it would occur out of wedlock. As such it would be fornication just on that basis. There was no facility or institution of marriage to resolve this and two men would be outside the law. So I believe the interpretation is unlikely.
It is certainly in my nature to shower with attractive women. I am fortunate to have so few opportunities. All I know is my own situation so I have no judgment to make on my own, it is up to God but the scripture seems clear.

 

[Lindzhigh]

The fact that they're suing the church bothers me.

Me too. The church has a right to say "no". However, the goverment should keep things equal. Seperation of church and state.

 

[Ainustorm]

You guys do realize there is no law for seperation of church and state. It was a private letter from one polatician to another. Reasoning being, because the foundation of the government was designed to allow any religion, freedom to worship the way they want. The GOVERNMENT should not be sticking its nose in the politics and belief structure of any religion. The Christian (bible believing church) believes Homosexual marriages is sin and an abomination to the structure of the marriage unit. I do not know what other beliefs' stand on this, but my stand is as of GWYNNEDD1 believes. The government should not allow anyone to sue a church for its beliefs. If a gay couple want to get marriage, make it legal, but not thru the church. Justice of the peace, which is controlled by the government. Dont in fringe in the rights of men and freedom of religion. Otherwise this act is a attack on the constitution.

 

[Ainustorm]

Firstly, about the money I do believe that you just re-stated what I said. Next, as far as an "unethical" stadard of living goes, I think that you are ignoring the morals of others and not just your own. I do realize that about 60% of Americans do agree, but I see that you did not point out that those numbers have been changing in favor of gay marriage.

I got numbers from a recent article

Next on my list is a question: what do you mean by what this nation was founded on? The States weren't founded by Christians so I fail to understand.

Buddy, look at your history. The states were not united until years later, but the sovereignty of the individual colony (later state), was as real as when they became a state. The government design was structure by the 10 commandments. The poloticians, all that signed the constitution, believed in God and His Word. Most were of Christian background. The Democratic Republic was structured from the beliefs of Christians. Washington (1st president) himself was a Christian, he prayed before every descision he made, the congress used to pray before ever decision they made (sometimes they do it now), even the House, the courts, judges. All prayed for God (of the Bible) to direct/justly help them make right descisions. Just back then, before the Civil War, each state had its own descision (like a country), to make decisions for their own state. Why did Robert E. Lee fight for the South? Did you know that the Union Government asked him to be there General. He said, "No, his loyalties, and love was to Virgina". The Union would have one the war in days if Lee joined the North. Did you know that Lee also prayed every day and before every decision. The Day we took God out of school, government, life, and family... is the day(s) our country started its decline. To answer your question, YES, this country is based on God word... I sudjest you read the constitution some time.

I really don't think that anyone (except radical terrorist groups) are trying to destroy this country, what they want is to be equal. I think that it is a fair opinion to say that they may be going against what marriage traditionally is, that's your opinion. But I see the alarming amount of divorces doing the same thing and you aren't freaking out about that. So just take a deep breath, maybe get a glass of water, and ask your god about it.

If you want I can talk about that, lets c.... Well divorce is higher because we have taken the values of family out of the home. We have deminished manhood, and told girls they can be like men. I agree women can do things and sometimes better than a man. But we are made different, physically and emotional. We teach boys to be men, and girls to be women. the divorce rate would drop significaly. We are a selfish country, we can get anything we want. So if lust and sex isnt satisfing... divorce and finding another sex partner is the answer. Marriage is not based on sex. It is based on relationships. If sex is the focus of the relationship, that is all it will be based. And when our mate wants it and we dont, and well it is not as good it used to be, we get bored... so find that lustful desire in another relationship, bingo divorce. Build a relationship with someone, is all about sacrifice, putting someone ahead of your wants. Which by the way is not easy, but can be done, when we stop thinking about ourselves for once. Anyones marriage would not fall apart if you put the person u married above yourself.

The final thing I would like to say is that I do agree with you that by the grace of god do we exist, of course it's true! How could the creator of the universe not be responsible for it? I think that no matter what laws are passed, the ideals of your religion will go on, so believe what you want to but try not to get so worked up; you might get an ulcer.

I am not worked up But that is why the family value has dropped. Because the family is not speaking out to the government. When we say our vote, our concerns dont matter. Well that is why minorities get their way, because the majority does not do or say anything. It takes one to stand, and I am just sharing a concern.

 

[CoreyTheMagnificent]

Number one: I said that I know that you are right on the percentage of people but what you failed to mention is that the number of people against gay marriage has been declining.

Number two: We could go ahead and argue about the constitution all day and I could go ahead and bring up the fact that what really shaped the U.S. government were the philosophies of John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and others; but much greater people than me and you have done this and I'm sure we wouldn't do nearly as good of a job.

Number three: So are you blaming this issue on removing family values or removing biblical values? I wonder what you mean by teach boys to be men and girls to be women; I believe that teaching equality is the best thing for us. I agree that the high divorce rates stem from the fact that we, the U.S., are a selfish country and your reasoning there is sufficient to me.

Number four: perhaps you should review your situation. You seem to think that you are in the majority but if that were true then you would get your way. You explain this by saying that the majority doesn't speak out, about this I am almost certain you are wrong. It could be that you really are not part of the majority. Remember that ulcer.

 

[Carey]

“Gods word on “ LIVING in SIN!! “


( If we are going to be legalistic we should pay a dowry and marry if we have sex, Right?? Unless the girl is not a virgin?? )

Exodus 22 : 16 "If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. 17 If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.


( Who married Adam and Eve ?? There is no mention of a ceremony, license, certificate, banquet , feast, or reception. )

Genesis 2 : 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib [j] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
23 The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman, [k] '
for she was taken out of man."
24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh




( Who married Cain and his wife?? It seems the same way as his parents he got married )
( Where did his wife come from?? Who were her parents?? )

Genesis 4 :17 Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch.
( No mention of Jacobs ceremony or certificate here either? )
Genesis 29 : 20 So Jacob served seven years to get Rachel, but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her.
21 Then Jacob said to Laban, "Give me my wife. My time is completed, and I want to lie with her."
( MUST there be a feast first?? It does mention a feast here. )

Genesis 29 : 22 So Laban brought together all the people of the place and gave a feast. 23 But when evening came, he took his daughter Leah and gave her to Jacob, and Jacob lay with her.






( MUST a bride have jewels and wedding ornaments ? are the ornaments for her body????)

Jeremiah 2 : 32 Does a maiden forget her jewelry,
a bride her wedding ornaments?

( must a bride stand on your right side or should she be your” right hand man” meaning assistant??)

Psalms 45 : 9 Daughters of kings are among your honored women;
at your right hand is the royal bride in gold of Ophir.







( MUST Grooms head be adorned and the bride wear jewels?? )

Isaiah 61 : 10 I delight greatly in the LORD;
my soul rejoices in my God.
For he has clothed me with garments of salvation
and arrayed me in a robe of righteousness,
as a bridegroom adorns his head like a priest,
and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.

( MUST only virgins attend the wedding?? Must ONLY virgins be bridesmaids?? )

Matthew 25 : 10"But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet.

( MUST there be wine?? )

John 2 : 1On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus' mother was there, 2and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. 3When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no more wine."

( MUST there be a banquet and banquet master??)

John 2 : 8Then he told them, "Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet." They did so, 9and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine.

( MUST the bride wear fine linen?? )

Revelation 19 : 7Let us rejoice and be glad
and give him glory!
For the wedding of the Lamb has come,
and his bride has made herself ready.
8Fine linen, bright and clean,
was given her to wear." (Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the saints.)












( Can we remarry the wife we divorce? )

Deuteronomy 24

1 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the LORD.

( Can we marry a divorced person?? ) ( Does God recognize marriage of divorced people under any circumstance?)
Matthew 5 : 31"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'[f] 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

The verses below in the word obviously says 2 people in loves remarriage in the Church and with a certificate is just as much “ living in sin “ as 2 people in love living together in monogamous harmony.
The verses below in the word also says those of us ( WHO DARE JUDGE ) the ones we feel are living in sin because of wrong manmade Church doctrines we grew up with or our own interpretation of the Bible . These are the ones in danger of hell fire.











( Can we remarry at all??? Regardless of marriage ceremony and certificate??? ) is it right in Gods eyes???? Does marital unfaithfulness make it right to remarry in Gods eyes?? Or only divorce

Matthew 19 : 8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."
10The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."
11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage[c]because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

( Can we remarry?? Regardless of the ceremony and certificate?? ) is it right in Gods eyes??? Does marital unfaithfulness make it right to remarry in Gods eyes?? Or only divorce

1 Corinthians 7 : 10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.

( Is there any reason divorce can be justified for remarriage?? ) Does marital unfaithfulness make it right to remarry in Gods eyes?? Or only divorce.

12To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
15But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. 16How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?



( Does this apply to the divorced people ?? )Or does this apply only to widows and virgins??

1 Corinthians 7 : 8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.





( Does God recognize remarriage in the church or anywhere?? )

John 4 : 17"I have no husband," she replied.
Jesus said to her, "You are right when you say you have no husband. 18The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true."