View Single Post
  #12  
Old 04-05-2011, 05:09 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 4,811
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
As a secondary involved with a couple who have a child, I would completely accept the concept of Veto Power for them if the stability of their family was at stake. The child and those who are responsible to provide a stable and healthy environment come first. Then again I believe marriages come first as well...I would just go into a relationship with my eyes open to the idea that my impact would be less than that of the married/established or parenting couple. In order to do that you have to "want" to be with the partner and not "need" to be with them in a specific way.

I'm weird..I know
I dont know if you are weird or not. I agree that the stability of the family has to come first.
BUT-if my husband isn't providing a stable environment for the family-it's HIM that needs to go, not his lover that needs to be veto'd by me.

IF his lover is a detriment to the family-then he should handle that.

Of course-that's not an issue for me, because his lover is the most amazing woman I've met.

BUT-I still hold to it being his responsibility to make that decision as a responsible party in the family.

Likewise-it's my responsibility in the family.

Veto power allows the wrong person to have 100% control over the staying or going of another. (IMHO)

But-you know I love you Mon. So you be your weird self. hehehe
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote