Bee Farmers Verbal Masturbation

[ECOCKS]

Oh wow, word etymology, morality and righteousness as guys argue over morality and integrity in a thread about a woman's experiences dating Western Men!


How exciting!


Not.

Yawn.....

[Misha]

Oh wow, word etymology, morality and righteousness as guys argue over morality and integrity in a thread about a woman's experiences dating Western Men!


How exciting!


Not.

Yawn.....

No, but if you do come in and imply that all those who use dating sites are somehow immoral losers because we don't go to church to be set up, then do expect some to object to being denigrated...

[lonedrake]

 Jason, You are correct. It was Lily who appreciated it


 At least I was close.....same sex and everything

[Bee Farmer]

Ahh, a little more honey truth comes out. So you're planning to hopefully be on a cross-pollination cruise with a couple, or a few, willing honey-bees and get the cost of that trip written off, okay! Now we're talkin'...
 
That may anger Obama, but dude, it's your money. I'm with you there.

Nope.  First and foremost, the trip is for the beekeeping aspects.

Oh...so you don't actually practice what you preach, I see. You just like giving out advise without actually knowing if it would work or not, right?

How am I not practicing what I preach?  If I was in Vasilisa's position I would have no problem talking to matchmaking ladies at a church.  I know people who have been introduced through churches, gotten married and remain married.  I'm not in her position though, so the advice is not applicable to me. 

You're lierally at the peak of your manhood and you're trying to convince normal folks that somehow it is YOUR choice to be dateless, desperate and home alone. Yeah, right.

Where do you get the idea that I am desperate and home alone?

There is something known as "class".  For those who have it, they will understand.  For those lacking in class, they will NEVER understand.

I'm not some 50 or 60 year old pervert that chases women significantly younger than him.
I'm not fat or bald.
I'm not a marriage reject - you know, someone who is divorced.  (And there is only one reason for divorce - selfishness.)
I don't have a problem meeting women.

I'm in my 30's.  I'm 5'8" and 165 pounds.  I don't drink, do drugs, or use tobacco.  I have never been married and have no children.  I have zero debt, and am fairly financially secure.  I'm just a decent guy.  I have both good and bad traits.

I AM picky, and I DO have class.  I'm not some low class, geriatric, divorced pervert.  That gives me options.

When I go to shows and farm markets selling honey, I have tons of good looking women coming up to me.  I have an outgoing personality, and when you combine that with free samples of local honey, I have no problems meeting women.

I try to work out 2 or 3 times a week.  I have a membership to a local athletic center 10 minutes away.  I took a couple pictures with my cell phone this evening.





Tons of attractive, young ladies.  A 10 minute drive from home.  And they all speak English.

Now why would I need to go to Ukraine to meet women when there are tons of decent women here at home?  You might have been desperate and home alone.  I'm not. 



And yes, I am a beekeeper.

Really?!? So you're searching for a partner that will never temper the rod? Boil the eggs? or at least get the juices flowing? Farmer, Women WANT to be WANTED. Women WANT to be sexually DESIRED.
 
Of course the caveat there is - YOU have to be the right man. But sorry that reality hasn't worked out well for you so far...

Sex has a place in marriage, but a marriage should NEVER be based upon sex....or money...or any shallow material thing.  Those things fade away.  And then what do you have?  The honest truth revealed - that you never had any respect for marriage.  A divorce is the public admission of being a failure and a reject.

There is only one reason to marry - for love.  If your marriage is based upon true friendship, even when the material things fade away, you will still have a firm foundation to hold the marriage together.

If I ever get married, it will be for love.  It may be a girl from the gym, from a church, a Mennonite girl, or a girl from the other side of the world.  Where she comes from doesn't matter.  True love does.  I hope someday you can understand that.

Try reality sometime, you might just like it and feel so much better about yourself.

I'd suggest the same advice for you GQ, but reality is a bitter pill to swallow.  Don't choke on it.

No, but if you do come in and imply that all those who use dating sites are somehow immoral losers because we don't go to church to be set up, then do expect some to object to being denigrated...

I'm not aware that anyone implied that those who use dating sites are immoral losers because they don't go to church to be set up.  Is your guilty conscience bothering you Misha?

Vasilisa was frustrated with the lack of her success finding a good man though dating websites - so I offered an alternative that seems highly unpopular among many guys.  I suspect they are opposed to it because they recognize that church ladies may not have considered them to be suitable marriage material for a nice lady.

[jone]

Weird????

[Slumba]

Bee Farmer, I used to think like you, before I got married (and later divorced). 

Then something unforeseen got in the way of my cherished delusions:  life.

[Ade]

Weird????

Besides his protestations it's fairly obvious why he's never gotten married. I mean seriously, he comes across as a complete nut and I'm pretty sure most normal women would run a mile.


He'll do well in Ukraine though; the language barrier does wonders to hide peculiarities like his. At least for a short while at any rate.  [size=78%] [/size]

[Ade]

Tons of attractive, young ladies.  A 10 minute drive from home.  And they all speak English.

And do these ladies realize they have a pervert snapping photos of them in the gym?

[Lily]

Ade,
When I took pictures of women on the Russian streets without showing their faces, and put them on my trip report, no one on RWD noted that I might have done something wrong. Except for one person who mentioned some ''double standards'. And no one called me pervert because of doing that.

[Faux Pas]

Weird????

"One rubs the lotion on it's skin or else it gets the hose again"

[Faux Pas]

Ade,
When I took pictures of women on the Russian streets without showing their faces, and put them on my trip report, no one on RWD noted that I might have done something wrong. Except for one person who mentioned some ''double standards'. And no one called me pervert because of doing that.

Lily,
Ade and I have debated this topic a number of times before. However, no matter what he says, there is nothing illegal, immoral or unethical to taking someone's photo and doing whatever you please with it. With or without their permission. Permission is immaterial. Why would one ask permission when it doesn't matter? It is literally done millions of times per day all over the globe 

[Misha]

I'm not aware that anyone implied that those who use dating sites are immoral losers because they don't go to church to be set up.  Is your guilty conscience bothering you Misha?

Are you even capable of even remembering what you yourself wrote? Let me remind you:

I consider match.com to be comparable to trying to pick out the best looking horse in a glue factory.  That's a polite way of saying that if you go digging through a dumpster, you should expect to find garbage.  They are just using internet dating websites because it requires little effort - they aren't putting much effort into the relationship, and aren't expecting to get much back.  The vast majority of guys on match.com are looking for nothing more than a cheap call girl.

[Slumba]

And do these ladies realize they have a pervert snapping photos of them in the gym?

Taking pictures of people in public places, without their faces being shown (so as to make them uniquely and easily identifiable), is not wrong, at least in the USA.

I think Bee-F is wrong on a lot of other counts, but there is nothing wrong with the fully clothed pictures he posted.

Bee-F - you have lousy muscle tone for working out at the gym a lot.  Time to work on the diet and get tougher on yourself.

[Ade]

I guess you guys didn't get the sarcasm and irony in my "pervert" comment. Take a look at who it was aimed at, what he's been preaching and then his posting of those picture. Can anyone say double standards?

[ECOCKS]

Perspectives.....I remember much of what this guy is talking about from 10 years ago but, yes, it seems to be growing in the US and worse, spreading.


http://spectator.org/archives/2012/12/13/romance-in-the-ruins

[jone]

A Note to Bee Farmer: 

I grew up in a small town.  We were a farming community, lots of cows.  Invariably there were a number of fairly nice people, who came in for social activities.  But they had never had the proper social interactions to facilitate mainstream hookups.  Because they did not interact much, their perspectives were fairly skewed. 

Now we have the internet.  All the farms in my hometown are all hooked up.  And at night, when the cows are asleep and the chores are all done, it is a darn sight better to be in a chat room than to be watching 30 year old reruns of the Waltons.

Bee Farmer, you have proved yourself to be a social outcast by many of the things you have said and the people you have offended.  Instead of telling people that they are too old or too fat or skewing their words, accept them for who they are and try to say something nice that builds the conversation.  Use the Thumper Rule for at least a month and you will have much better reception from people. 

Normally I wouldn't become involved or call someone out so directly, but I expect that you need to be hit over the head or you won't listen.

Most of the people here are trying to educate themselves through other people's experience so the questions that we have for each other rely on that experience.  And the topic is FSU/WM relations.  You have no experience with FSU women.  (It is not about how a church is the best place to meet women.)

There are thoughtful people here who really need to learn to improve their FSU interactive skills.  So enjoy the conversation but say little - that which you do say should be not be offensive - and you will be the better for it.

[Bee Farmer]

Bee Farmer, I used to think like you, before I got married (and later divorced).

Then something unforeseen got in the way of my cherished delusions:  life.

Ludwig von Mises talked about this in his book Human Action.  He said that people's expectations for the future are set by their experiences in their immediate past.

It's easy for a small mis-step to end up a chain of events that lead you far from the path you had originally intended to take.   If you get bumped off your intended path, you need to be able to correct your course and get back on track again.  If you get off track and end up somewhere you didn't originally intend to be, whose fault is it?

Quote from: Bee Farmer on December 12, 2012, 11:25:56 PM

    I'm not aware that anyone implied that those who use dating sites are immoral losers because they don't go to church to be set up.  Is your guilty conscience bothering you Misha?



Are you even capable of even remembering what you yourself wrote? Let me remind you:



Quote from: Bee Farmer on December 02, 2012, 09:45:12 PM

    I consider match.com to be comparable to trying to pick out the best looking horse in a glue factory.  That's a polite way of saying that if you go digging through a dumpster, you should expect to find garbage.  They are just using internet dating websites because it requires little effort - they aren't putting much effort into the relationship, and aren't expecting to get much back.  The vast majority of guys on match.com are looking for nothing more than a cheap call girl.

Misha, I believe you are the only person calling people "immoral losers" if they use dating websites or don't meet people through a church.  Those are your words for those people, not mine.

Bee-F - you have lousy muscle tone for working out at the gym a lot. 

Lousy muscle tone compared to what?  Bodybuilders?  Gym rats?  Old fat guys who obsess over FSU women young enough to be their daughters?
I don't work out at the gym a lot.  I try to go 2 or 3 times a week so I don't get too out of shape. (or end up with a shape I don't want.)  I'm not trying to look like a bodybuilder - I just have the self discipline to avoid getting dunlap disease....you know, when a guy's belly done overlapped his belt.

Bee Farmer, you have proved yourself to be a social outcast by many of the things you have said and the people you have offended.

Perhaps the people being offended are the outcasts?  Or maybe they are just jealous?

Normally I wouldn't become involved or call someone out so directly, but I expect that you need to be hit over the head or you won't listen.

Most of the people here are trying to educate themselves through other people's experience so the questions that we have for each other rely on that experience.  And the topic is FSU/WM relations. 

Please allow me to put things a little less succinctly, since you are oblivious to the obvious.

Marriage is for the creation and preservation of family.  I hear a lot about how these WM want a FSU woman who has "family values".  Is that because the WM DON'T have family values?  The WM seem to think that destroying family is ok, but they turn around and say they value family.  Doesn't anyone else see the contradiction?

Divorce is the destruction of family.

Divorce and marriage are diametrically opposites.  It is a contradiction for a divorced person to have family values.  Divorce is the lack of value for the family.  Divorce is the result of people having sexual relationships without the emotional commitment of marriage.

I guess I have to ask what FSUW/WM relations this forum is about, if it isn't about marriage? (and various topics associated with marriage to a FSUW.

I am against "dating", and in favor of courtship.
I am against destroying family (divorce), and in favor of creating and preserving family (marriage).
I am against marriages for shallow, materialistic reasons, and I am in favor of marriages based upon true love and understanding.
Divorce is NEVER ok, and it is NEVER a good thing. 

If advocating that makes me a social outcast, and offends people - that's GREAT. 

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. - George Orwell

[Anotherkiwi]

Divorce is the destruction of family.

How would you know?  You have never been married, let alone divorced, so you are not qualified at all to make such a statement.  In your own simplistic world, where everything to do with marriage and divorce is totally black and white, this may seem an absolute - believe me (as a divorced person), it is not.

Divorce and marriage are diametrically opposites.  It is a contradiction for a divorced person to have family values.  Divorce is the lack of value for the family.

I agree with the first sentence, but the second and third are nonsense.  Why can't a divorced person have family values?  Did you ever stop to consider, from your high and mighty horse, that there are two parties in each divorce?  While one may possibly have no family values, it is highly unlikely that both will not.  Have you also ever thought about the concept that people may have got divorced because they think that they will find better family values elsewhere?
 

Divorce is the result of people having sexual relationships without the emotional commitment of marriage.

Now you've lost me!     Please explain how one can get divorced wthout getting married in the first place.

I am against "dating", and in favor of courtship.
I am against destroying family (divorce), and in favor of creating and preserving family (marriage).
I am against marriages for shallow, materialistic reasons, and I am in favor of marriages based upon true love and understanding.

Based on your theory that "dating" is a euphemism for having sex with a prostitute, I don't actually think that you would find any argument from any of the members. However, those of us who live in the real (modern) world, have moved on past this stage.

Divorce is NEVER ok, and it is NEVER a good thing.

Wrong!  I'll use my own case as an example.  My ex-wife and I married when we were 21, and probably had four very good, very happy years together.  Then friends of hers introduced her to a fundamentalist Pentecostal church and, over the next couple of years, she changed so much that people who hadn't seen her since our wedding wondered if this was even the same girl that I had married.  By this stage we were flatmates rather than husband and wife, and there was simply no point in remaining married.  The church had become her life, and I could have no part of it (or her).  With absolutely no future in the relationship, why on earth would we stay together?
 
There is no "quickie" divorce system in New Zealand - you have to wait a minimum of two years after you separate before a divorce becomes final.  By that time I had found a girlfriend, and my ex had moved to England where she eventually remarried.  I haven't remarried - that experience has made me incredibly picky, and I'm quite content to look for a new wife at my own pace and on my own terms.  If I do find one (whether here or in the FSU), great - if I don't find one, so be it.

[Misha]

Misha, I believe you are the only person calling people "immoral losers" if they use dating websites or don't meet people through a church.  Those are your words for those people, not mine.

Bee Farmer, I [insert expletive of your choice] copied YOUR OWN WORDS verbatim!  How can they be my own words?

[Daveman]

...  Divorce is the result of people having sexual relationships without the emotional commitment of marriage.

Marriage is a legal contract. Nothing more nor less.  There is no inherent emotional commitment.  Now, there could be emotional commitment in an underlying relationship.  Or not.  Individuals define "marriage" as what it means to them.  Some define of 'marriage' as the relationship.  Others as 'family', and perhaps others as 'pain in the ass'. 


Overall, your commentary indicates brushes that are overly broad and vastly sweeping upon far too narrow canvass.

[jone]

Do you guys (Daveman, Anotherkiwi) actually think he's going to listen to you?  Unless you want to keep him around as the court jester or class clown, I say we get out the baseball bat.  Your choice.
 

[Anotherkiwi]

Do you guys (Daveman, Anotherkiwi) actually think he's going to listen to you?  Unless you want to keep him around as the court jester or class clown, I say we get out the baseball bat.  Your choice.
 

One can always hope!     I thought that, if I pontificated at the same sort of length that he uses, he might pay more attention - then decided that I'd better not because I might have other members coming after ME!
 
This guy is as strange in his own way as Americanboy was in his, but at least the youngster got to Russia to have his adventures.  My other candidate for strangeness this year would have to be the one (sorry, but his name escapes me and I don't have time to search the archives now) who appeared to be a paid employee of Facebook and was so certain that nobody would want to be part of VK once they saw the miracle of the US version.
 
I know I've managed to piss off a few members here (are you listening GQ and FP?) when I've tried to understand US politics, but seriously...this guy needs a course of Soviet "re-education!"  I hope (and I do mean this sincerely) that his visit to Kyiv for the bee conference allows him time to see what many of us have actually already experienced - real time in the big, bad FSU!  Mind you, he'll probably find a smokinhot Ukrainian female apiarist and they can settle down in harmony with their millions of little workers. 

[Bee Farmer]

Quote from: Bee Farmer on December 15, 2012, 11:21:31 PM

    Divorce is the destruction of family.


How would you know?  You have never been married, let alone divorced, so you are not qualified at all to make such a statement. 

But I am the result of a family - that's how all of us got here.  Are you implying that people learn nothing about relationships during their childhood?  And that we only learn about marriage and divorce by doing them?

Some folks have to learn the hard way.  They don't learn from observing other's successes and failures.  Those who do not learn from the mistakes of others are likely to repeat those mistakes.

I agree with the first sentence, but the second and third are nonsense.  Why can't a divorced person have family values? 

Because if they valued family, they wouldn't have gotten divorced.

Did you ever stop to consider, from your high and mighty horse, that there are two parties in each divorce? 

No, there are two parties BEFORE the marriage, and two parties AFTER the divorce.  The time in between, they are ONE family.  You can't be a single party, and a married family at the same time.  But when someone tries to be their own individual party in the marriage, their selfishness tends to result in divorce.  Because they never committed to family - their own selfish desires were more important to them.

Have you also ever thought about the concept that people may have got divorced because they think that they will find better family values elsewhere?

That sounds awfully selfish to me.  Most folks find that the grass wasn't as green on the other side of the fence - and if you don't like how your own grass looks, it might be wise to put more effort into grooming it.  You aren't going to get more out of it than you put into it.  If someone thinks they will find better family values elsewhere - I would suggest they look in the mirror to find the reason they aren't happy with what they have.

Quote from: Bee Farmer on December 15, 2012, 11:21:31 PM

    Divorce is the result of people having sexual relationships without the emotional commitment of marriage.


Now you've lost me!     Please explain how one can get divorced wthout getting married in the first place.

You don't have to have an emotional commitment to get married.  When people get married without the emotional commitment, it usually ends in divorce. (or an unhappy marriage)

Quote from: Bee Farmer on December 15, 2012, 11:21:31 PM

    Divorce is NEVER ok, and it is NEVER a good thing.


Wrong!  I'll use my own case as an example.  My ex-wife and I married when we were 21, and probably had four very good, very happy years together.  Then friends of hers introduced her to a fundamentalist Pentecostal church and, over the next couple of years, she changed so much that people who hadn't seen her since our wedding wondered if this was even the same girl that I had married.  By this stage we were flatmates rather than husband and wife, and there was simply no point in remaining married.  The church had become her life, and I could have no part of it (or her).  With absolutely no future in the relationship, why on earth would we stay together?

Let me get this straight.  Your wife didn't do anything wrong per se - it was just that her interests changed, and you refused to adjust or compromise?  I know some fundamental Pentecostals, and I have never knew of one that had a problem with a husband being a part of their church, or being with his wife.  That's actually encouraged.

Maybe a better explanation would be - you were selfish, and when she started expressing her own personality, you threw a fit and refused to tolerate it?  A woman should know her place - how dare she become involved with any religion that encourages people to be better?

I was raised that a person is only as good as their word - and if their word was worthless, that described the person.
The Marines have a slogan - Death before dishonor.
You dishonored your marital vows and obligations - and you somehow think this is good?  Divorce is always bad - even more so when children are involved.

Bee Farmer, I [insert expletive of your choice] copied YOUR OWN WORDS verbatim!  How can they be my own words?

Misha, the ONLY person using the words "immoral losers" to describe people on local dating websites is YOU.  Those are not my words.  They are YOUR words. 

I hope (and I do mean this sincerely) that his visit to Kyiv for the bee conference allows him time to see what many of us have actually already experienced - real time in the big, bad FSU!

There are some good people in the world.  There are also people who have room for improvement.

Don't underestimate the Khazar influence on Ukraine - you know, the descendants of Manassah and Simeon...

[Anotherkiwi]

But I am the result of a family - that's how all of us got here.  Are you implying that people learn nothing about relationships during their childhood?  And that we only learn about marriage and divorce by doing them?

So somebody (or several somebodies) in your family is divorced.  Do they lack family values?  Do you now love them less because they've committed what, in your eyes, is a mortal sin?

Some folks have to learn the hard way.  They don't learn from observing other's successes and failures.  Those who do not learn from the mistakes of others are likely to repeat those mistakes.

At least this part is sensible!

Because if they valued family, they wouldn't have gotten divorced.

What mixed-up planet do you come from?  Just say, for example, that one partner has had a string of extra-marital affairs.  Their spouse eventually says "enough is enough" and files for divorce.  Are you trying to tell us that the wronged party should stay with the cheater forever?  It is BECAUSE they value the family that they want a divorce - they want the chance to create a family with someone else who DOES have the same sort of values.

No, there are two parties BEFORE the marriage, and two parties AFTER the divorce.  The time in between, they are ONE family.  You can't be a single party, and a married family at the same time.  But when someone tries to be their own individual party in the marriage, their selfishness tends to result in divorce.  Because they never committed to family - their own selfish desires were more important to them.

Of course you can - everybody IS.  You may be one family, but your individual traits should not be subsumed by the marriage itself.  Most people marry each other for their individual personalities, and they don't expect their partner to change fundamentally just because they are now a couple.  Of course you're going to act together in the best interests of the marriage, and compromise where necessary, but you can't expect the husband to stop loving "The X-Factor," or the wife to stop playing basketball JUST because they're now married.  If things like this are anathema to the other party, they should never have got married in the first place.

That sounds awfully selfish to me.  Most folks find that the grass wasn't as green on the other side of the fence - and if you don't like how your own grass looks, it might be wise to put more effort into grooming it.  You aren't going to get more out of it than you put into it.  If someone thinks they will find better family values elsewhere - I would suggest they look in the mirror to find the reason they aren't happy with what they have.

Unfortunately mistakes happen, and people marry people they shouldn't have.  Are you suggesting that they should never be allowed the chance to find true love and happiness elsewhere, and that they should stay in a doomed marriage forever?

You don't have to have an emotional commitment to get married.  When people get married without the emotional commitment, it usually ends in divorce. (or an unhappy marriage)

I agree, but why haven't you answered my original question instead of ducking for cover with another platitude?

Let me get this straight.  Your wife didn't do anything wrong per se - it was just that her interests changed, and you refused to adjust or compromise?  I know some fundamental Pentecostals, and I have never knew of one that had a problem with a husband being a part of their church, or being with his wife.  That's actually encouraged.

How can you possibly infer from what I wrote that I never adjusted or compromised?  I bent over backwards to try to understand her new interests and friends but I never had the slightest interest in being a part of her church.  I distrust very much ANY organisation that tries to remove someone from their existing circle of friends and associates, which this one did.

Maybe a better explanation would be - you were selfish, and when she started expressing her own personality, you threw a fit and refused to tolerate it?  A woman should know her place - how dare she become involved with any religion that encourages people to be better?

Huh? Now you're quite happy to chuck out ad hominem insults as if they're the gospel truth.  Again, you're drawing an inference that's totally unsupported by the facts, none of which you know, in any case (other than what I wrote in my earlier post).

I was raised that a person is only as good as their word - and if their word was worthless, that described the person.
The Marines have a slogan - Death before dishonor.
You dishonored your marital vows and obligations - and you somehow think this is good?  Divorce is always bad - even more so when children are involved.

Please explain this so I can understand it.  My wife, who I still loved despite what had happened, stopped having "marital relations" with me, rejected all the friends we had made as a couple, walked out of our home, started an affair with a married man a few weeks later - and I'm the one who dishonoured their marital vows and obligations?  I don't think that there is any emoticon that can describe how I feel when I read such tripe.

[Bee Farmer]

So somebody (or several somebodies) in your family is divorced.  Do they lack family values?  Do you now love them less because they've committed what, in your eyes, is a mortal sin?

I have never said that it is a mortal sin to be divorced.  That is a matter that is between you and your God.

Personally, I don't think that divorce automatically prevents going to heaven.  However, even if something is not a mortal sin does not change the fact that it is still very wrong.

Yes, I have family members who have divorced.  I still care about them, but I would never introduce them to someone who was seriously looking for marriage.  Family members who have divorced and remarried - I would NOT consider those to be a relationship worth having.  Remarriage seems to be about matters of convenience, not about matters of love and creating a family.

Just say, for example, that one partner has had a string of extra-marital affairs.  Their spouse eventually says "enough is enough" and files for divorce.  Are you trying to tell us that the wronged party should stay with the cheater forever?  It is BECAUSE they value the family that they want a divorce - they want the chance to create a family with someone else who DOES have the same sort of values.

A leopard does not change its spots.  If they were a cheater before marriage, and it continued into marriage, you have only yourself to blame for marrying them.  Someone who valued family would not marry someone in such haste that they never got to know them well enough to learn if they are promiscuous or not.

Now if they started sleeping around after they got married - there is a reason.  Folks don't go out for a hamburger when they have steak waiting on them at home.  What did one spouse do to drive the cheater into the arms of another?

There is an old saying - if a man does not take care of his wife, another man will.

You also seem to think in some distorted way that divorcing and pursuing someone else can be valuing family.  When doing that is a dishonor to family obligations you already accepted.

Unfortunately mistakes happen, and people marry people they shouldn't have.

And mistakes have consequences.  Are you suggesting that people should not have to suffer unpleasant consequences of their own decisions?

Are you suggesting that they should never be allowed the chance to find true love and happiness elsewhere, and that they should stay in a doomed marriage forever?

When someone makes that very promise, I believe they should keep their word.
Folks get married for better or for worse - not just for better times. 
Caution and a mature understanding of what leads to a likely successful long term marriage does wonders for avoiding problem marriages.  Look before you leap.

    You don't have to have an emotional commitment to get married.  When people get married without the emotional commitment, it usually ends in divorce. (or an unhappy marriage)


I agree, but why haven't you answered my original question instead of ducking for cover with another platitude?

Your original question was irrelevant to the topic, and appeared to be a deliberate obfuscation so I saw no sense in allowing things to get off track and get on some irrelevant tangent.

How can you possibly infer from what I wrote that I never adjusted or compromised?  I bent over backwards to try to understand her new interests and friends but I never had the slightest interest in being a part of her church.

No need to infer anything when you come right out and admit it so plainly.  How can anyone think you made the slightest token attempt to understand her new interests and friends when you already had your mind made up that you wanted no part of the church?

I distrust very much ANY organisation that tries to remove someone from their existing circle of friends and associates, which this one did.

Perhaps you should look at the quality of the friends and associates that were being distanced.  If you want to better your standing in life, one of the first things you do is to surround yourself with a better class of people, and at the same time distance yourself from the people who were a bad influence on you.

When I was younger, I ran around with some beer drinking partyers.  They never grew up, and still live selfish, immature lives.  I grew up, and surrounded myself with more responsible people - I don't hang out with the partyers of my youth.

Please explain this so I can understand it.  My wife, who I still loved despite what had happened, stopped having "marital relations" with me,

Your idea of "love" and your wife's idea of "love" must have been different.  Normally women don't stop marital relations without there being serious problems.  What were you doing, or not doing, that caused your wife to stop having marital relations?

rejected all the friends we had made as a couple,

Are you saying she had an obligation to retain those friendships?  People tend to let friendships go when those friendships lack something someone needs.  And when people decide to improve themselves, it's perfectly normal to find new friends to associate with. 

Remaining friends with people who drag you down will only drag you back down.  If recovering alcoholics or recovering drug addicts remain friends with their old circle of friends, they relapse.  If they have any hope of breaking free of the bad influences, they have to find a new circle of friends.  Perhaps a better questions would be, what was wrong with the friends you had made that caused your wife to reject them?  Why did she feel they were a bad influence on her?

walked out of our home, started an affair with a married man a few weeks later

That sure doesn't sound like something a fundamental Pentecostal would do (or that the church would approve of).  That sounds more like a situation where there were problems in the relationship the husband wasn't man enough to work on, and the wife finally gave up.  Instead of accepting personal responsibility, the man is trying to blame the failed marriage on church involvement.

and I'm the one who dishonoured their marital vows and obligations?

Did you make a vow "for better or for worse"?  Or did you make a vow that marriage was only for better times?
Did you make a vow, "forsaking all others until death do you part?"

Just because one partner does something wrong, does not make it ok for the other partner to do wrong also.  Two wrongs do not make a right.

At all times, did you continue to put 100% into being a better husband?  (It doesn't matter if she was being a bad wife - you still have the obligation of being a good husband.)  Did you do everything humanly possible to make the marriage work?  After you became separated, did you remain single until her natural death, always trying for reconciliation?

If not, then you dishonored your marriage vows.  You gave your marriage vows "no matter what" - they were not conditional upon how your wife treated you. 

I don't think that there is any emoticon that can describe how I feel when I read such tripe.

Yeah, I agree.  Maybe the solution is to ban remarriage.  That would make people think twice before getting into marriages with people who were not marriage material.   

If you want tripe, go hang around divorced people.  The attitudes are eerily similar to the attitudes of former coworkers in a Union shop years ago.  Then surround yourself with people who have never divorced, and people who are enterprising and entrepreneurial.  After you have been around a better class of people for a while, whenever you get around someone divorced or with a Union mentality, you recognize the true source of the tripe. 

Sadly, divorcees are the same class of people as those who go bankrupt.  They can never be trusted again.  They have proven that they can not handle those responsibilities.  They may be decent people in other areas of their life, but in those things they can't be trusted.
I wouldn't lend money or extend a credit line to someone who defaulted on their prior loans, and I wouldn't trust someone with marriage who had defaulted on prior relationships.  (If they couldn't keep their promises to someone who was the most important person in the world to them, how can anyone else trust them?  How can you ever trust them to be serious about valuing family when they didn't value it the first time they were married?)