Posted on 09/15/2011 5:07:38 AM PDT by Not gonna take it anymore
Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson told his "700 Club" viewers that divorcing a spouse with Alzheimer's is justifiable because the disease is "a kind of death." During the portion of the show where the one-time Republican presidential candidate takes questions from viewers, Robertson was asked what advice a man should give to a friend who began seeing another woman after his wife started suffering from the incurable neurological disorder.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
No, certainly not.
Alzheimers is not a type of death. That thinking diminishes the humanity of the person and turns them into nothing more than a material possession which can discarded at will. A coma can be said to be the same “type of death” he considers.
One cannot discard another person simply because of the inconvenience of taking care of them through a debilitating illness.
Is Pat’s wife losing her faculties, btw?
The source is CBS News; the Left’s #1 goal is to hold us to our values and “catch” us when we don’t. I seriously doubt the quote was taken in its context. I’d have to see the video. Till death do you part is likely what he still holds to.
Christian’s can be wrong. I believe that Robertson is both.
A Holly Roller" preacher would preach a whole sermon sending that guy straight to hell.
Divorce is not justifiable unless the spouse is an evil person who endangers your life — and even then, there are wives and husbands who have brought that person to Christ.
I have never faced this horrible situation my expectations are that I stick by her side until the end and join her as soon as practicle. I have no way of living without her.
Thank you, Mark!
That is a timely reminder. We believe little of what the MSM and certainly CBS news and its ilk print and say in politics and that must also extend to religion.
Unless the statement is verified by CBS and Pat Robertson, it should be given little credence.
There is no telling how badly Pat Robertson’s statements could have been twisted beyond what he actually said.
This free-for-all-divorce has devalued marriage opening the way to “gay marriage”
Wow. If this is true, it’s a disgusting display of selfish relativism.
Years ago, I cared for an ICU patient who had a devastating brain injury from a car accident. None of us expected her to survive, but she did. This woman, in her early 20s, ended up in a skilled nursing facility. She wasn’t on a ventilator, but did have a feeding tube and wasn’t interactive, although she was awake. She had several very small children & a husband.
He stood by her throughout this. A year after her accident, I ran into him. He was still married to her & visited her when he could while raising their young children. The thought of divorcing her was not an option to him. This was in 2002......I wonder where he is today. I think about him from time to time, and pray for him. God bless him for staying true to his vows in a society that wouldn’t be very supportive of his lifestyle.
Endorsements don’t mean squat.
I’m shocked. This is wrong.
Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold
Matthew 24:12
IMHO, addiction is tantamount to abandonment. The alcoholic or addict places the object of their obsession at the center of their existence. Their drug of choice replaces God, their spouse, their vocation, etc. as their reason for being. One needn't physically pack up and move to another state to "abandon" somebody.
—Ok, so some physical abuse is ok? Must it be “SEVERE”? I don’t understand...—
I was just trying to dance around the subjectivity of the phrase “abuse” in general. And, to be frank, the word “severe” is even more subjective. My bad.
I had a friend whose wife tried to get him to hit her (but he didn’t) and filed for divorce a few days later. She confessed to him that her attorney had told her that if she could get a 911 call for domestic violence it would really help her in court.
Interestingly, my ex divorced me a few years later and just before she did she started antagonizing me and at one point walked up to me and pushed me against the chest as hard as she could. She literally fell backward as though she had pushed hard against the wall. It was so far out of character I asked her why she was apparently trying to start a fight out of thin air. It turned out she was several months into planning to divorce me and I got the papers just a few days later.
I can’t be sure, but I suspect she was doing the same thing my friends wife was trying to do. We never, EVER talked after that. When one side of a marriage believes very much in what marriage vows mean, it means the chord that ties the two together is a big steel cable. When one of those snaps, it is not pretty.
It was not an amicable thing. Even at one daughters wedding and two college graduations, I refuse to make eye contact with this person. To this day her name is “you know who” even around my children.
I’ve forgiven her, but recognise her for what she is. She is dangerous to me, my wife and my daughters. Especially my wife.
Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Mat 19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
Mat 19:11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
Mat 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
I don't think anybody could accuse me of being a fan of Robertson.
But I am less of a fan of the MSM.
Until I know, in context, his actual words, I think it is safe to assume calumny...considering past performance of the AP.
You should finish a project before you start another.....Pat
Based on the scripture you cite and your situations, I think it is obvious that being abandoned means the covenant was broken by the other spouse.
A covenant is a sort of a contract. When broken by the other party, the offendended party is released from it and is free to remarry.
Sorry, but in my book, the contract of marriage does not extend to allowing somebody to purposefully destroy you.
It's not what we think; it's what is Biblical. Pat Robertson is full of crap.
He is not even remotely correct. Hugh Hefner would be as correct on marriage issues as this statement by Robertson.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.