Who is head of your house? - Page 16 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

kerry · #**226** 04-10-2013, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

I do. But only because it was agree on by my wife and I.

That's total BS. It's because God requires it not because you and your wife arbitrarily concocted the agreement out of thin air.

aklim · #**227** 04-10-2013, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

We have agreed not to have equal veto power.

Then what do married couples face?

Equal veto power? Is that a new phrase? What is the difference between: I have veto power over your decisons vs My veto power is at a higher level than yours? It's akin to "We are all equal. Some are more equal than others". Help me out here. I couldn't find a definition of "unequal veto power".

It is a different issue altogether. We are discussing whether I have the right to override my wife's wishes or not. How we solve a problem is another question.

martureo · #**228** 04-10-2013, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

Hair splitting is now in high gear. Doublespeak abounds.

Then define what exactly you meant by "pre-existing right to trump".

Are you finally going to hold to your words or like normal are you just going to insult me while avoiding what you've said?

Waiting for you to have any standards....

davidmash · #**229** 04-10-2013, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

David. Just go away.

You can't peruse any better than a monkey, so don't bother trying to keep yourself from looking anything but foolish and stop posting.

You do not even have the ability to comprehend the definition of 'equal' and you are calling me foolish? You are freaking hilarious.

JB3 · #**230** 04-10-2013, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

I do. But only because it was agree on by my wife and I.

im intrigued by this arrangement.

So lets say hypothetically, your wife and you have a serious disagreement on lets say something like what to name your kid.

From what I understand, because she has agreed you have the final say when marrying you, if she and you cannot come to a decision and vehemently disagree, your choice automatically becomes the decision? Im not sure what you mean by unequal veto power
and from what you are further saying, this was NOT the arrangement when you were dating? she voluntarily moved from an equal relationship to an unequal relationship?

kerry · #**231** 04-10-2013, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

that my wife had no say in the relationship. I corrected that.

I never ever wrote that your wife had no say in the relationship. You have the right to trump her and you have repeatedly written that.

aklim · #**232** 04-10-2013, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

When my wife and I were single I did not have any right to "arbitrate".

Upon completing our vows my wife had given me the right to be the head of the house.

Kerry made the statement that such a "right" was inherent or was required of the relationship, that my wife had no say in the relationship. I corrected that.

I think you are intelligent to know what we are trying to say without involving lawyers to split hairs, don't you? I think you understand that he is trying to say that "As HOH, you have the right to trump her will" but all the while you are trying to say "We are equal, just that I am more equal than her".

martureo · #**233** 04-10-2013, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Equal veto power? Is that a new phrase? What is the difference between: I have veto power over your decisons vs My veto power is at a higher level than yours? It's akin to "We are all equal. Some are more equal than others".

xor.

My wife is "a" and I am "b" and we have a yes/no issue. Then:

-if a and b are both yes or no, the decision is made.

-if a says yes and b says no, the decision is unable to be made

-if b says yes and a says no, the decision is unable to be made

Equal vetoing power (that is that either is allowed to negate the decision of the other) gets you nowhere. xor.

Quote:

It is a different issue altogether. We are discussing whether I have the right to override my wife's wishes or not. How we solve a problem is another question.

I'm not talking about specific issues, the problem solving of each situation you mentioned is however exactly the same.

aklim · #**234** 04-10-2013, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

Then define what exactly you meant by "pre-existing right to trump".

Do you or do you not have the right to trump her decisions at will? If so, how is that equal? Can I trump my business partner's decisions and still be equal? Please explain.

kerry · #**235** 04-10-2013, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

Then define what exactly you meant by "pre-existing right to trump".

Are you finally going to hold to your words or like normal are you just going to insult me while avoiding what you've said?

Waiting for you to have any standards....

Jeeezuz you are one obnoxious ass in an argument.

By pre-existing right to trump I mean that when you married your wife she lost her right to equality when you disagree because you, as a male, and as the head of the household, has the right to make the decision and she doesn't.

kerry · #**236** 04-10-2013, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

xor.

My wife is "a" and I am "b" and we have a yes/no issue. Then:

-if a and b are both yes or no, the decision is made.

-if a says yes and b says no, the decision is unable to be made

-if b says yes and a says no, the decision is unable to be made

Equal vetoing power (that is that either is allowed to negate the decision of the other) gets you nowhere. xor. I'm not talking about specific issues, the problem solving of each situation you mentioned is however exactly the same.

But the fact that it gets you nowhere in regards to that decision does not mean that you can't choose not to decide at all.

aklim · #**237** 04-10-2013, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

xor.

My wife is "a" and I am "b" and we have a yes/no issue. Then:

-if a and b are both yes or no, the decision is made.

-if a says yes and b says no, the decision is unable to be made

-if b says yes and a says no, the decision is unable to be made

Equal vetoing power (that is that either is allowed to negate the decision of the other) gets you nowhere. xor.

That is besides the point. You are talking about efficiency of problem solving. What you are saying is "For the sake of efficiency, I will play dictator". Same thing as what Hitler would have wanted. He too listened to his generals but he had veto power. Again, what is the meaning of equal or unequal veto power? I have been unable to find a definition. AFAIK, veto power is giving one party final say over the matter. You are changing the definition of the word "veto"./

martureo · #**238** 04-10-2013, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

im intrigued by this arrangement.

So lets say hypothetically, your wife and you have a serious disagreement on lets say something like what to name your kid.

Which we have..

Quote:

From what I understand, because she has agreed you have the final say when marrying you, if she and you cannot come to a decision and vehemently disagree, your choice automatically becomes the decision?

No. That's not the agreement at all.

Let's put it this way. I come up with a name: "Chaya" (Hebrew pronunciation not "chay-ah") and she comes up with a name: "Hannah". Both are valid options and we debate them for quite some time. But when the time comes I get to choose which of the two was better.

(In the case of both of our kids, I named them what my wife wanted)

Quote:

Im not sure what you mean by unequal veto power

Equal veto power means that both have the power to negate the other.

Quote:

and from what you are further saying, this was NOT the arrangement when you were dating? she voluntarily moved from an equal relationship to an unequal relationship?

Well, when we were dating we were two individuals who had different lives. She owned nothing of mine and I nothing of hers. Neither of us had a financial, spiritual or property holding of the other.

Both of us knew what we wanted out of marriage and had the same idea of how it would work. But nothing was effective until we completed the vows. Then we were no longer two individuals but part of a union.

davidmash · #**239** 04-10-2013, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

But the fact that it gets you nowhere in regards to that decision does not mean that you can't choose not to decide at all.

Or to keep negotiating until a mutually agreed upon decision is reached. That is what we do. There have been cases where it took a while and bribes were involved but in the end we both agreed on the decision.

I would never try and over ride Ms Mash on anything. Not beneficial to my health. I like all my organs inside my body and all my limbs attached at their natural points.

aklim · #**240** 04-10-2013, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

But the fact that it gets you nowhere in regards to that decision does not mean that you can't choose not to decide at all.

I am still trying to wrap my mind around how we can both have veto power but mine is more powerful than yours being different from me having veto power and you DON'T.