Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Special Student Discount for WORLD!
Humility regarding what man does. Faith in what God does. That means skepticism about politicians' plans to run health care.
Click to Print
Include Comments
Stand by your womanizer
Over at the Culture and Media Institute, Jan LaRue is disgusted. Why, she wants to know, do philandering politicians insist on having their cuckolded wives at their sides when they appear before the television cameras to babble their mea culpas? Granted, it could be that the wives of Bill Clinton, Bob Livingston, David Vitter, Jim McGreevey, Larry Craig, and now Monsieur Spitzer wanted to publicly stand by their men. Still, LaRue writes:
Even if the wife wants to be there, you’d think [the men would] have the guts to stand alone and take the heat. It would feel less egregious if he hired another “escort” for the occasion. But the wife is there because the wimp’s personal ambitions and desire for public rehabilitation apparently outweigh his desire for marital reconciliation. He doesn’t get it-the public ride is over, or should be…
And to any wife who appears as a prop beside her meandering man because she values status, power, and a lucrative lifestyle more than her self-respect, you might want to reflect on the message you’re sending your children. If he’s guilty, let him stand alone for awhile until he gets it. They call it tough love. After all, he didn’t want you by his side on the night in question, someone else was.
Thoughts?
back to top31 Comments to “Stand by your womanizer”
Right on. It’s disgusting that the men want their wives there, when it’s their betrayal of their wives that caused the whole situation. And it’s pathetic that the wives show up.
Report comment to moderator
I imagine that some of these women already sold their souls before that moment. They probably represent lots of unknown women who “stand by their man” for whatever benefits they gain.
I’m not suggesting that the couple should not work through their problems and eventually reconcile. That is always the ideal solution. I am only saying that an immediate separation, at least a temporary one, is justified and, I think, necessary.
Report comment to moderator
Night Train and I agree on this. Silda Spitzer just did it again.
Report comment to moderator
I’m sure I would try to save my marriage, but I’m not sure I’d stand next to my husband while he faced the world. And I know I would say, “You explain it to your daughters.”
It’s painful to look at the faces on those women.
Also on this issue, since I haven’t commented on it before, I’d like to know what the feminists who so strongly support men like this are thinking?
Spitzer gained his power in part because of strong push from Planned Parenthood, and he acted on that support by immediately going after crisis pregnancy centers when he became Attorney General of NY.
This behavior, to me, suggests the man holds women in contempt and sees them as objects to be used. Isn’t that the exact type of man radical feminists object to? Then why do they allow themselves to be used as political pawns at the altar of abortion?
Horrifying to me on several levels.
I wish the family the best and yes, I should probably be praying for them.
Report comment to moderator
For anyone interested, I replied to Anlir on yesterday’s “Hillary’s Problem” thread.
I should think these cases are the perfect example of the evil patriarchy that we hear so much about. Where is the outrage from the feminists and their liberal allies?
Report comment to moderator
I agree that the dear wife should not be subjected to such publicity. She has been shamed enough. Thankfully, I have an Advocate in Jesus Christ, who is willing to identify with my shame and does not treat me as I deserve, though I fail Him far worse than Spitzer failed his wife. And this on a daily basis.
Report comment to moderator
I’ve always been mystified that the spouse has a role to play in a politicians life. Instead of being used as a prop to solidify a particular image for an election campaign, the spouse should have their own life.
Report comment to moderator
Letterman said it best last night: “Client #9 will soon be looking for wife #2.”
Report comment to moderator
I suspect a lot of these guys want the wife up there with them as a buffer, of sorts. I cannot remember Gary Hart’s wife’s name, but it was noticed how visible she suddenly became in his campaign after all the monkey business was disclosed. Hart had her at his side constantly in the days that followed his announcement that he was still in the race; after all, those reporters with a bit of decorum could hardly blurt out the really embarrassing questions in front of her.
I see this as cynical manipulation on the part of politician husbands, and sadly docile going-along-to-get-along on the part of their offended wives.
Report comment to moderator
I would like to think that each of the stand up women mentioned in the cases above did so on their own accord, and did so because they still loved their husband and that despite their pain and hurt, they wanted to do whatever they could to start the healing – “to death do us part”. Probably naivity on my part, but that’s what I’d like to think.
While I’m not a public figure, several years ago I had to deal with infidelity in our relationship, she strayed. Enough people in our circle new about this such that it was ‘public’ enough. I eventually became the healer, the forgiver, and led us out of the situation, but it was very difficult for me at first. My initial reaction was to turn away. Had we been public figures, I don’t know if I could have initially stood on the stage and supported her, like Mrs Spitzer is doing. I’m not proud of that, but it’s true.
Curious to see how this will play out down the road when it is exposed that a powerful woman politician has been unfaithful. Would her husband stand with her? My sense is that women are more forgiving of men who cheat, than men are forgiving of women that cheat. No data, just based on my experiences and gut feel.
I still think Silda looks like Jennifer Aniston.
Report comment to moderator
She does look like Jennifer Aniston in a few years. I thought that as soon as I saw her picture.
Report comment to moderator
Pretty much what NightTrain alluded to on yesterday’s “Spitzer Busted” thread!
And Michelle makes several excellent points in # 4 above! It just doesn’t add up.
Report comment to moderator
Politics is the only profession where the wife of a man caught with a prostitute has to stand by his side, Leno said.
“If this guy was a plumber … he would have his wife’s SUV tire tracks over his head,” he said.
Report comment to moderator
I would like to send all these women a copy of the book When Your Lover Is a Liar. Has helped me immensely
Report comment to moderator
A couple of things come to mind:
First, every family “circles the wagons” when things happen. When a child is arrested, most parents arrange their bail and get them an attorney. They may be furious at their kid and the kid may be guilty as all get out, but families still gather round and deal with it.
Second, people on the outside looking in tend to be harsh and judgmental (”she should kick him to the curb!”). We don’t know their lives or what kind of a relationship these couples have. For all we know, Mrs. Spitzer could be very much in love with him in spite of what he’s done. None of us knows what really goes on behind the closed doors of a couple’s relationship.
We should always hope (and pray) for the best, even for the men who have broken their marriage vows. We’re talking about human beings and in many cases we’re talking about their children. It would be wrong to wish for anything other than the best outcome for all of the parties. We should remember our own humanity and our own failings.
Report comment to moderator
A cuckold is always the husband of an adulteress, because women don’t get left with other women’s children.
Before concluding that the wives of adulterers deserve to be the objects of derision, check out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/nyregion/12wife.html
The article claims that standing by their man gives the women several rational benefits.
Report comment to moderator
I feel badly for the woman (and kids) but I understand that she might stand by him – at least initially (while she sorts out what all happened and what she intends to do about it long term).
Marriage is hard, and every one has some sort of hurts and baggage in theirs. This is a really big one, but some marriages survive even this.
Report comment to moderator
wow Jan LaRue sure does have too much time on her hands. Why doesn’t she mind her own business?
it seems that you folks are overlooking a startling possibility MAYBE SHE KNEW
As I’ve noted before, politicians are slimeballs and dirt bags. Why expect any less of the people they sleep with?
Report comment to moderator
What follows I just got done commenting on another blog.
I know this comes from The New York Times, but it may be helpful anyway: “Close aides to the governor suggested on Tuesday that the mood in the Spitzer home was tense, with the governor’s wife, Silda Wall Spitzer, recommending that he not step down….”
Yesterday, in thinking about this thread, I thought along these lines: “Maybe the governor’s wife is practicing forgiveness and this is her way of turning the other cheek and returning good for evil.” Frankly, I find that highly dubious, but it is an intriguing — and perhaps even convicting — thought.
Report comment to moderator
Lynn, Webster’s defines cuckold as ‘a man whose wife is unfaithful.’ So, which is it? Are you suggesting Silda is unfaithful too, or are you neutering the meaning to ‘a spouse whose spouse is unfaithful’?
Report comment to moderator
hile there is a kernel of truth that morality cannot be legislated, the law should to some extent uphold moral values; British common law, the foundation for American law, certainly had a strong moral component without pretending to be anything like Islamic Sharia law.
Prostitution is a serious sin that ought to be illegal, notwithstanding the bleatings of libertarians.
As to Spitzer, I couldn’t be more pleased about his exposure as a hypocritical tyrant. His legal proceedings against Wall Street, especially against Greenberg and Grasso, proved him to be a brutal and wrong zealot. He deserves zero sympathy.
Report comment to moderator
For the record, Lyle Lovett does a much better version of Stand by Your Man than Tammy Wynette.
Report comment to moderator
Excellent post at #10, TRAVIS BIRKENSTOCK. I wanted you to get your props for that one.
Report comment to moderator
Wonder what Hugh Grant would say to Spitzer?? Other than “I say old chap, you were ripped off!!”
Report comment to moderator
I have been praying that the Lord will use this to reach Spitzer’s heart. True repentance would go a long way to heal a lot of pain he has caused for himself but especially for wife and children.
I would hope that we all could say a little prayer for the Spitzers.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir made some very good points in #15. I’d like to think, if I were ever in “her” position, I would stand beside my husband no matter what.
Here’s a thought (but by no means am I justifying any kind of physical affair, believe me). I got to wondering, how many women are involved in “emotional” affairs that never get “found out.” A woman desires that loving attention, etc., and I think its very easy to get caught up in an emotional affair. While not as noticable as a physical affair, could it be almost as bad?? Truly just a wondering of mine…
Report comment to moderator
On divorce putting away and fornication
The word translated “putting away” in Malachi 2:16 is not keriythuwth, the Hebrew word for divorce, but is shalach. See Malachi 2:14-16 in the American Standard Version, 1901, (google for this ). The practice of not legally divorcing, but only putting away (living in adultery) was cruel and adulterous, but it was not a legal divorce. It was much worse for it ignored the wife’s welfare. She was cast aside and not lived with as a true spouse. (It can apply to both genders).
Scholars today say you can make no distinction between the two words because they were used synonymously. Yes, they were by hard-hearted men. That is what Deut. 24:1-2 and Matt. 19:7-8 were all about. They are not synonymous words; they are actually antonymous. They are the difference between slavery and freedom for one-half of humanity, women, (or as happens in our society, either gender)
Many of us have heard numerous sermons on “God Hates Divorce” based on this passage in Malachi on “putting away.” My thought is that God wants the situation legal. If you are living together, you should be legally married. If you are not living with each other as true spouses, then make it legal by getting divorced so that real marriage can occur with someone else.
In Leviticus 21:14, 22:13, and Numbers 30:9, some isolated references to divorced women. The word translated divorce in all these cases is another word, the Hebrew word garash, meaning “to drive out from a possession,” and was divorce only in the sense that the women had been driven out. The word used is the very same word used repeatedly in Exodus 6:1, 23:28, 29, 30, 31, 33:2, 34:11, when the Bible spoke of driving out the Canaanites and Hivites from the land. It also, like shalach, is a harsh word, “to thrust out,” containing none of the protection for women of Deut. 24:1-3, and the word for written divorce, keriythuwth, in her hand.
Luke 16:18, Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery. The New Testament word translated “put away” is a form of the Greek word, apoluo. It is the Greek word apostasion which is the technical term for a bill or writing of divorce as far back as 258 BC. Again, many, who are hard-hearted, and don’t believe in the rights of both spouses, use these two terms as synonyms. The distinction between “put away” and “divorce” between these Greek words is critical. Apoluo dismissed the woman, but left her married, put away, with no rights, no recourse, and deprived of the basic right to monogamous marriage. Apostasion ended marriage and permitted a legal subsequent marriage.
In 1611, the KJV inconsistently translated apoluo in Matt. 5:31-32,”…and marrieth her that is divorced comitteth adultery. In the New Testament, forms of apoluo appear 69 times but only in this one instance, (in KJV) is it translated divorce. If it had been traslated in harmony with the rest of the KJV, it would say, “And whosoever shall marry her who has been put away (or abandoned or dismissed, etc.) committeth adultery.”
The Holy Bible from the Ancient Eastern Text, Matt. 5:32b reads, “And whosoever marries a woman who is separated, but not divorced, commits adultery.” Luke 16:18b reads, “He who marries the one who is illegally separated commits adultery.” This translation highlights the misunderstanding made possible by that inconsistent KJV translation of Matt. 5:32.
The translation error was corrected in the American Standard Version of the Bible, 1901. Imagine overcoming 270 years of reading “divorced”. that 1611 KJV mistranslation in this one instance has so dominated our thinking that virtually all modern translations sya “divorced,” not just in that one place, but in ALL 11 places. They completely ignore the correction provided by the 1901 American Standard Version, and ignore the distinction between the two words.
With “divorced” in our minds instead of “separated, but not divorced” or “put away” we have assumed that anyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. We have assumed “divorced” was said in these passages when in every instance the Greek text actually says “put away.” Woud our theology be different today is that word had been translated “put away?”
I haven’t looked at the NASV on this subject. In Young’s Analytical Concordance, the following verses use “putting away.” or apoluo
Mtt.1:19, 5:31,32, (but not at the end of the verse), 19:3, 7,8,9,9, Mark 10:2,4,11,12, Luke 16:18, 18(compare this to Matt. 5:32
In the Old Testament, shalach, “to send forth” is found in
Deut. 22:19, Isaiah 50:1, Jer. 3:1, 8
Mt. 19:9
Whosoever shall put away (separate from) his wife, except for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her when she is put away (separated–NOT DIVORCED) committeth adultery.
This verse says nothing about WHY one can get divorced. It simply says not to marry someone who is (separated) not legally divorced.
It told the men that they had to obey rules, just like the court does with my ex-husband today.
You have to read it with the use of the phrase putting away, which is in the original and which you will NOT find in most modern translations.
Part of our problem here is that we can’t allow for the possibility that OUR TRADITIONS could be wrong.
“As long as the parents aren’t abusing each other it’s not a bad idea to stay together for the sake of the children”
No DUH!!! What a novel idea, God came up with it first though,
This is what God is saying in Mal. 2:15,16 when he talks about the fact that He made the two one because “He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. FOR I HATE PUTTING AWAY…”
abusing, neglecting, putting away…God hates it
Report comment to moderator
7-
Like some politician’s wives, pastor’s wives also have no lives or happiness or friends of their own. They are the possessions of the burned out ones, the ones from whom we require a holiness that we observe weekly.
Report comment to moderator
4-
Just because it is legally, by our standards, a marriage does not mean that it is worth saving at all costs. What you maybe savng is your right to get std’s over and over; is THAT really what GOD wants? What really is the benefit of a woman getting std’s over the span of years?
Report comment to moderator
14-Kim,
I read something else you wrote yesterday, but I cannot find it today. You told about someone that you dated. Do you know where this post is?
And by the way, if more people would be open and honest like you are that way, the benefit of our interactions would really increase.
Report comment to moderator
If Silda Spitzer had known, she wouldn’t have had the reactions she had as one “body language” authority has noted, as in the way she didn’t look up.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!