cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375 
|
Post by cycworker on Jul 25, 2017 19:45:35 GMT
As always, open to input from anyone. It's just I'm trying to come up with my own secular version of a Biblical idea. What would be a secular equivalent to being 'unequally yoked?' I know that this particular phrase is used specifically used to refer to Christians not marrying non-Christians, but I'm trying to think of it more broadly. Basically, I'm looking for a nice, short, easy to understand phrase, that broadly speaking, describes two people being in a relationship where in order to make it work, one of the two people has to compromise a core value/values. The only thing I can come up with is 'selling out' and that doesn't really go with 'speaking truth with love.'   |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 25, 2017 19:52:43 GMT
I'm not a Christian but I'd still call it unequally yoked.  The term has entered the lexicon. |
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
|
Post by cycworker on Jul 25, 2017 20:01:06 GMT
I'm not a Christian but I'd still call it unequally yoked. The term has entered the lexicon. Excellent. I may just do that. It's certainly the phrase that's been stuck in my head as the correct one. |
|
|
|
Post by Zee on Jul 25, 2017 20:07:44 GMT
I've never heard the term. I don't think it has to be hard, you do you and don't expect to change your spouse. I wouldn't consider myself a "Christian", more of an agnostic married to an atheist. I think he's awfully smug in KNOWING there is nothing out there, but whatever. We don't really discuss it much.
I guess if you need to share the same beliefs and are devout, it probably wouldn't work unless you could be willing to not try and change your spouse.
Actually, I typed all that out and realized I was wrong--I could never be married to a devoutly religious person no matter what the religion. I am not at all interested in organized religion.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustCallMeMommy on Jul 25, 2017 20:12:13 GMT
This is not the nicest way to put it, but maybe "marrying up" or "marrying down."
|
|
|
|
Post by pondrunner on Jul 25, 2017 20:21:00 GMT
I think unequally yoked is a specific term.
I see nothing inadequate about "in a relationship where one person has to compromise a core value". It still says what it is without creating the unnecessary implication of religious difference.
Politically mismatched, morally mismatched, of differing beliefs on significant matters. I know many couples like this and would not use unequally yoked to describe these non-religious differences.
|
|
|
|
Post by mom on Jul 25, 2017 20:25:32 GMT
This is not the nicest way to put it, but maybe "marrying up" or "marrying down." I disagree. 'Equally yoked', in my mind, has nothing to do with marrying up or down. Equally yoked means surrounding yourself with those who have the morals and values. Surrounding yourself with those who align with what you believe religiously. |
|
|
|
Post by JustCallMeMommy on Jul 25, 2017 20:36:49 GMT
This is not the nicest way to put it, but maybe "marrying up" or "marrying down." I disagree. 'Equally yoked', in my mind, has nothing to do with marrying up or down. Equally yoked means surrounding yourself with those who have the morals and values. Surrounding yourself with those who align with what you believe religiously. I think of equally yoked being a religious thing - you are in a similar point of your spiritual journey. It could be differing denominations, religious vs. non-religious, or even a new believer and someone established in their faith. The new believer may very well have the same morals and values as the established believer, but they may still be unequally yoked spiritually speaking. To come up with a secular equivalent description, I was trying to think of other places where a similar differentiation in status applies. The librarian and the axe murderer...not to say that a librarian always has different values than an axe murder, but I think most people would makes that assumption. I don't know that there is a handy phrase that accurately describes a secular equivalent. |
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 25, 2017 20:39:49 GMT
used to refer to Christians not marrying non-Christians ^^^ unequally yoked: "When oxen are unequally yoked, they cannot perform the task set before them. Instead of working together, they are at odds with one another." -- from my brief Google search, this phrase is used Biblically in a context to discourage the practice, yes? to discourage a believer from marrying a non-believer? total opposites, with nothing in common at all? If that's the case, then I don't think there IS a secular term or secular circumstances that fit this description. I am 'politically mismatched' with my boyfriend because he is a conservative Republican, but that is NOT the be-all, end-all situation on which our relationship is based, so I don't see that as the same as being 'unequally yoked.' In the sense that a relationship between two such individuals wouldn't work out, I mean... there are plenty of circumstances where the two people having different values still have a successful relationship. There are plenty of circumstances where it WOULDN'T, too, but I can't think of a different short phrase or term that describes that. |
|
|
|
Post by ntsf on Jul 25, 2017 20:54:07 GMT
well.. I don't think it is really very biblical.. as in some thing maybe taken out of context and not to be universally applied.. I am a christian married to an non believer.. but we agree on politics, values, etc..
I think it would apply to a friend whose husband supports trump and she can't stand him.. unequal and sort of stuck...
in my view.. Love rules..
|
|
|
|
Post by internetmama on Jul 25, 2017 21:05:14 GMT
It's hard to say. Maybe something like "unequal balance of..."
...power
...financial responsibility, core beliefs, etc
Or "different life goals". "Different places in life." "Different core beliefs."
Or simply, "Not an equal match."
But I'd have to question why you need to speak up and if the person in the relationship doesn't already know these things or even welcomes the opinion. Tread carefully.
|
|
flute4peace
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,757
Jul 3, 2014 14:38:35 GMT
|
Post by flute4peace on Jul 25, 2017 21:15:59 GMT
Incompatible?
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
|
Post by cycworker on Jul 25, 2017 21:16:57 GMT
It's hard to say. Maybe something like "unequal balance of..." ...power ...financial responsibility, core beliefs, etc Or "different life goals". "Different places in life." "Different core beliefs." Or simply, "Not an equal match." But I'd have to question why you need to speak up and if the person in the relationship doesn't already know these things or even welcomes the opinion. Tread carefully. Fair point. Personally - and this could well be a different/separate conversation - but I don't think a relationship CAN survive not sharing core values. I think one person can be right leaning & and one can be left leaning & still the two people can share the same values. I have Republican friends with whom I'm very close. I have couple friends who vote differently. The key is they're each voting the way they are for the same reason. They want to achieve the same goals. One simply has more faith in the capitalism to achieve those goals, and the other believes we need a strong welfare state to achieve them. But they genuinely want the same results. Where I would struggle if I were in a close relationship with a Trump supporter is that I'd begin to wonder if we not only see different means of achieving the same objectives, we simply don't believe in the same things. Because Trump is pretty awful. He has no morals. And even if a person's life partner didn't actually share some of Trump's more vile points of view, the fact that my partner was willing to overlook them says that, "You are not the person I thought you were." Voting for Trump would be a deal breaker for me, personally. |
|
Peamac
Pearl Clutcher
Refupea # 418
Posts: 4,218
|
Post by Peamac on Jul 25, 2017 21:35:21 GMT
Where I would struggle if I were in a close relationship with a Trump supporter is that I'd begin to wonder if we not only see different means of achieving the same objectives, we simply don't believe in the same things. Because Trump is pretty awful. He has no morals. And even if a person's life partner didn't actually share some of Trump's more vile points of view, the fact that my partner was willing to overlook them says that, "You are not the person I thought you were." Voting for Trump would be a deal breaker for me, personally. Keep in mind though, that to many many people, voting for Trump was slightly less repugnant that voting for Hillary. A lot of people voted for who they felt was the lesser of two evils. That certainly does not mean that they overlook Trump's morals or points of view. It doesn't mean they are bad people. And a lot of people never heard much negative stuff about Trump either. As internetmama said, tread carefully. To cut someone out of your life because they had crappy options on who to vote for isn't fair at all. Now if they are immoral, loud-mouth people who spew hatred and venom wherever they go, that's a different story. That has nothing to do with who they did or did not vote for (there are plenty of those people in both major political parties). |
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
|
Post by cycworker on Jul 25, 2017 21:47:14 GMT
Peamac - Fair point. I guess were I in that situation - and I've been in that situation where I just could NOT in good conscience vote for my party because it would've meant supporting a leader I was morally opposed to - I would simply have stayed home, rather than vote for Trump. And I say that whether the person normally votes Democrat & couldn't stomach voting for Clinton, or a Republican who couldn't accept Trump as their candidate. Just don't vote rather than plugging your nose & voting for someone this vile.
|
|
Peamac
Pearl Clutcher
Refupea # 418
Posts: 4,218
|
Post by Peamac on Jul 25, 2017 22:11:28 GMT
Peamac - Fair point. I guess were I in that situation - and I've been in that situation where I just could NOT in good conscience vote for my party because it would've meant supporting a leader I was morally opposed to - I would simply have stayed home, rather than vote for Trump. And I say that whether the person normally votes Democrat & couldn't stomach voting for Clinton, or a Republican who couldn't accept Trump as their candidate. Just don't vote rather than plugging your nose & voting for someone this vile. And I get that, but to many people, staying home and not voting becomes a vote for the more vile opponent. That's why so many see it as a "lesser of two evils"- they don't like either candidate, so they vote for the one that to them is less bad. Not just that candidate's morals, but also their politcs, campaign promises, etc. Many people vote for a candidate because of just one or two issues, but those are the most important issues for those voters. |
|
quiltz
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,712
Location: CANADA
Jun 29, 2014 16:13:28 GMT
|
Post by quiltz on Jul 25, 2017 22:24:37 GMT
Peamac - Fair point. I guess were I in that situation - and I've been in that situation where I just could NOT in good conscience vote for my party because it would've meant supporting a leader I was morally opposed to - I would simply have stayed home, rather than vote for Trump. And I say that whether the person normally votes Democrat & couldn't stomach voting for Clinton, or a Republican who couldn't accept Trump as their candidate. Just don't vote rather than plugging your nose & voting for someone this vile. I see your point as for not voting in a good conscience situation, however, if a person chooses not to vote, they do not get to share their opinions about the end result of a vote. Only participants in the vote can comment, as they have made an active and not a passive action. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 29, 2024 5:52:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2017 0:12:07 GMT
Unequally yoked
A dentist being married to someone with no teeth.
A pastor being married to a stripper.
A vegetarian being married to a cattle rancher
A police officer being married to a mob boss
A fitness trainer being married to someone who weighs 300 pounds
It's a state of being diametrically opposed.
|
|
gottapeanow
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,760
|
Post by gottapeanow on Jul 26, 2017 0:19:57 GMT
I think unequally yoked is a specific term. I see nothing inadequate about "in a relationship where one person has to compromise a core value". It still says what it is without creating the unnecessary implication of religious difference. Politically mismatched, morally mismatched, of differing beliefs on significant matters. I know many couples like this and would not use unequally yoked to describe these non-religious differences. Bolding is mine. That's how I would put it as well. I would also say that spiritually mismatched = unequally yoked. Lisa |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 29, 2024 5:52:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2017 0:23:57 GMT
Not fond of the term "yoked" in any variation. I am not an ox. Nor is my spouse. I resent being considered "yoked". We stay together because we love and support one another. Not because someone has arranged us into a situation (a yoke) which we are too stupid to work ourselves out of or which we just ignorantly plow forward w/no ability to change.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
|
Post by cycworker on Jul 26, 2017 0:27:59 GMT
Unequally yoked A dentist being married to someone with no teeth. A pastor being married to a stripper. A vegetarian being married to a cattle rancher A police officer being married to a mob boss A fitness trainer being married to someone who weighs 300 pounds It's a state of being diametrically opposed. What about both, say, believing racism is wrong, but one is willing to be socially active for change & the other see it as, 'not my problem to solve?' |
|
|
|
Post by anniefb on Jul 26, 2017 1:52:05 GMT
Unequally yoked A dentist being married to someone with no teeth. A pastor being married to a stripper. A vegetarian being married to a cattle rancher A police officer being married to a mob boss A fitness trainer being married to someone who weighs 300 pounds It's a state of being diametrically opposed. I don't see that as a 'mismatch'. Both have the same belief/viewpoint. |
|
|
|
Post by txdancermom on Jul 26, 2017 1:57:38 GMT
I can't say I have heard the term. But having been married for 30+ years, all marriages are full of compromises, because each person brings their own faith and beliefs into the marriage. I wouldn't call it "uneaqually yoked" - while one partner may have "more" of one thing, the other will have "more" of another and it is part of dealing with everyday life.
|
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 26, 2017 1:59:23 GMT
Unequally yoked A dentist being married to someone with no teeth. A pastor being married to a stripper. A vegetarian being married to a cattle rancher A police officer being married to a mob boss A fitness trainer being married to someone who weighs 300 pounds It's a state of being diametrically opposed. What about both, say, believing racism is wrong, but one is willing to be socially active for change & the other see it as, 'not my problem to solve?' You want to choose someone who loves you, values the same things you value, etc. Not your clone. You don't need to choose someone who is exactly like you. |
|
|
|
Post by anniefb on Jul 26, 2017 2:02:20 GMT
I agree with @stamptastic that being 'unequally yoked' is being in a situation where you are diametrically opposed to or completely incompatible with another person - whether it's in terms of belief, behaviour, moral code etc - with the result that your own beliefs/values/behaviour can be compromised.
This doesn't just apply in terms of marriage - could apply to friendships or going into business with someone when you have completely different views about the nature of the business, how it should be run etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by pondrunner on Jul 26, 2017 2:13:45 GMT
Unequally yoked A dentist being married to someone with no teeth. A pastor being married to a stripper. A vegetarian being married to a cattle rancher A police officer being married to a mob boss A fitness trainer being married to someone who weighs 300 pounds It's a state of being diametrically opposed. What about both, say, believing racism is wrong, but one is willing to be socially active for change & the other see it as, 'not my problem to solve?' My question would be how this affects the couple. Is it a problem for them? If no then it a simple difference in perspective. If yes it is an incompatible viewpoint on social issues that makes the relationship difficult. If the problem is other people's expectations then that's a whole different matter. |
|
|
|
Post by jenjie on Jul 26, 2017 2:30:44 GMT
What about both, say, believing racism is wrong, but one is willing to be socially active for change & the other see it as, 'not my problem to solve?' You want to choose someone who loves you, values the same things you value, etc. Not your clone. You don't need to choose someone who is exactly like you. This. It all depends on what each person's "deal breaker" is. In your example, not of different votes but of racism, a stronger divide would be where one party wants to create change and the other is a closet (or open) KKK member. Just because, using your quoted example, both people don't have the same degree of passion about an issue or one is more quiet than the other, doesn't mean they have opposite values. |
|
|
|
Post by grammadee on Jul 26, 2017 3:31:29 GMT
Unequally yoked A dentist being married to someone with no teeth. A pastor being married to a stripper. A vegetarian being married to a cattle rancher A police officer being married to a mob boss A fitness trainer being married to someone who weighs 300 pounds It's a state of being diametrically opposed. What about both, say, believing racism is wrong, but one is willing to be socially active for change & the other see it as, 'not my problem to solve?' If the activist can refrain from nagging the partner to join him or her in projects, and the partner does not hold the activist back, then it can continue to work as a partnership. |
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jul 26, 2017 6:06:29 GMT
DH and I would be considered 'unequally yoked' but neither of us has to compromise a core value in order to make it work. Our core values, our morals, are the same. He just happens to believe in a god, and I don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by dockmaster on Jul 26, 2017 15:39:30 GMT
Put-up-manship...relationships are about give and take. How much are you willing to give or put up with in a relationship? Somethings are small others are huge. Put-up-manship speaks to how much is too much.
|
|
The term has entered the lexicon.
