 |
| Adoption Law | Child Custody | Child Support | Divorce Law | Family Law | Marriage Law |
Innocent Spouse Innocent Spouse RuleSection 434(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code protects an innocent spouse from tax liability if certain conditions are met: 1. A joint return was filed 2. The return contained a ?grossly erroneous? error 3. The innocent spouse establishes ?lack of knowledge 4. In light of all the ?facts and circumstances? it would be ?inequitable? to impose the tax on the innocent spouse Tax counsel should be consulted. Question: tax question, should i notify the IRS and claim innocent spouse rule, please read and help? my wife owns a hair salon that is incorporated for 6 years, she has written her car off every year even though the corp does not own the car its only in her name, she claims no tips and only writes herself a check for 1000 dollars a month, for personal income, even though she pays half the mortgage, 850, she has 2 car payments one car she bought for her dad and is 300 a month and her car is 500 a month, she makes her credit card payments about 800 a month, it just does not add up is this all legal
Question: What are the rules for claiming an innocent spouse claim with the IRS? Recently, my husband and I received a certified letter from the IRS that there was about $33K in unreported income on our federal tax forms for 2007 resulting in an additional tax liability of $12K for myself and my husband (who filed jointly that year). I was aware that my husband did earn the income as part of his business earnings and as such he informed me that he paid taxes on the income as part of his business tax filing. I just checked with his business partner and the partner informed to me that my husband also knew of the income but my husband never gave him the 1099 to file as part of the 2007 business tax filing. The question is then this: Can I file (and do you think that I would be granted) a Innocent Spouse Tax Relief claim from the IRS due to my situation. I have a good job and have the maximum in taxes taken out of my paycheck but it always seems that I am supporting my husband's delinquent tax debt however we have separate finances and I pay most of the household bills.
Sincerely,
Tax Frustrated
Question: IRS Tax Question Cancellation of Debt HELP ME please? Can the IRS come back on my new husband and I ten years AFTER my divorce for from my 1st husband cancellation of debt. My ex continued to charge on a credit card that he was awarded in our divorce. Iwanted the card shut down but he demanded it be left open so they left it open. Then he filed bankruptcy in 2006 and now the IRS is coming after me in 2008 for the taxable difference. It was 10 years ago that credit card was issued to him. It was no longer my bill. I paid my half of the debt and he gets out of his while my husband and I pay for his debt? Do I fall in the lines of the innocent spouse rule on this case? Please help any help would so greatly appreciated
Question: I owe back taxes, and was recently married.? she has two children that I am claiming and we just had a 3rd. I owe some back taxes. Back taxes owed are around 16, and my cpa projects a refund of 10,500 I'm currently making good on payment arrangements with the irs. will the entire refund go to cover the taxes? Secondly How does the innocent spouse rule apply to this situation? She didnt work this year.. can she claim the kids and file separately?
PS~ keep the snide stupid remarks to yourself... otherwise ill be flicking u off thru the screen lol.
We're in California.. how do the laws apply to me here? and are those applicable laws just to state or federal tax refunds or both?
Question: I have been the "victim" of a CON ARTIST, will I have to ammend my IRS Tax Return? I was swindled by my "ex" wife!
Since her "con" actually started PRIOR to her coming over here to the U.S.A. on a Fiance Visa she was not entitled to, our marriage was considered "invalid" by Immigration.
If the marriage has been ruled "invalid" because of her CON, do I now have to file an ammended Tax Return for the year I claimed her and her son, and REPAY the difference I received verses what I should have received on my return without them on it?
I have already prepared a "Request for Innocent Spouse Relief" for her failure to disclose the money she earned illegally (no work permit), during that year, but do I now need to include this evidence of her FRAUD to protect myself?
Question: does the state of missouri have a statute or rule in the divorce section called innocent man statute? regarding missouri divorce law, if a spouse is found to have cheated on the other spouse several times, would that have an effect on any maintenance that may be ordered?
Question: What is worse? Unfaithful spouse or extremely indulgent parent? This situation started in 2003. (I'm using letters rather than names to protect the innocent and disguise the genders. This may or may not be relevant: couple married 20 years ago.)
One spouse (A) goes on dialysis for 2 years. The illness causes them to be angry and at one point, sex is refused for a period of 6 months, part of which followed a kidney transplant. Because "A" feels they won't live as long as "B", A becomes more of a friend than a parent to the teenaged boy/girl twins. The opposite sex child gets A to allow the child to break rules such as curfew, phone call limits, chores/homework/practice time (in a way that chores are not getting done), disrespectful behavior toward parent B, letting child out of grounding from phone or going out, etc.
Parent B says the treatment they are receiving from the child is a serious problem but A denies this and doesn't want to "partner" with B in parenting. The other children see A favoring the child and become angry and uncooperative.
At some point, parent B started communicating with a married, opposite sex, person. "B" and other person (X) discuss lack of sex, but love for their spouses. Of course, one thing leads to another and that leads to a 6-month period of oral satisfaction.
B says once A was ready to resume their sexual relationship, B stopped cheating with X (in 2004) but continued email communication with X, some of which were somewhat sexual in nature.
In the mean time, the indulgent relationship between A and the teen child continue through high school and college freshman year. B feels A has ruined B's relationship with the child, because the child says B could not be counted on or trusted (like child could count on A). In January 2008, B gets fed up with A and they split up.
In October, 2008, "A" gets in to B's email account, mainly to look for what went on during the split. "A" finds some of the emails between B and X that mention BJs and oral sex, dating from 2005.
B insists nothing happened between B and X after A and B resumed their sexual relationship.
"A" is having a difficult time letting the cheating incident go which makes B angry because the incidents happened 4 years ago.
What should this couple do? Split up for good? Forgive and repair? "B" should cheat to make it even?
Which was worse? Cheating? or Undermining the other parent?
(I originally posted this using “A” for “Chris”, “B” for “Pat” and “X” for “Kelly”. The "Algebra equation" comment prompted me to change to names. Thanks for your input!) Same story using "names" follows.
One spouse (Chris) goes on dialysis for 2 years. The illness causes them to be angry and at one point, sex is refused for a period of 6 months, part of which followed a kidney transplant. Because "Chris" feels they won't live as long as "Pat", Chris becomes more of a friend than a parent to the teenaged boy/girl twins. The opposite sex child gets Chris to allow the child to break rules such as curfew, phone call limits, chores/homework/practice time (in a way that chores are not getting done), disrespectful behavior toward parent Pat, letting child out of grounding from phone or going out, etc.
Pat says the treatment Pat is receiving from the child is a serious problem but Chris
denies this and doesn't want to "partner" with Pat in parenting. The other children see Chris favoring the child and become angry and uncooperative.
At some point, parent Pat started communicating with a married, opposite sex, person. "Pat" and other person (Kelly) discuss lack of sex, but love for their spouses. Of course, one thing leads to another and that leads to a 6-month period of oral satisfaction.
Pat says once Chris was ready to resume their sexual relationship, Pat stopped cheating with Kelly (in 2004) but continued email communication with Kelly, some of which were somewhat sexual in nature.
In the mean time, the indulgent relationship between Chris and the teen child continue through high school and college freshman year. Pat feels Chris has ruined Pat's relationship with the child, because the child says Pat could not be counted on or trusted (like child could count on Chris). In January 2008, Pat gets fed up with Chris and they split up.
In October, 2008, "Chris" ge
In October, 2008, "Chris" gets in to Pat's email account, mainly to look for what went on during the split. "Chris" finds some of the emails between Pat and Kelly that mention BJs and oral sex, dating from 2005.
Pat insists nothing happened between Pat and Kelly after Chris and Pat resumed their sexual relationship.
"Chris" is having a difficult time letting the cheating incident go which makes Pat angry because the incidents happened 4 years ago.
Question: Scenerio....daughter's other mother in law leave husband who has drinking problem.? The year before she left he drained his 401K and gambled the money away. She left moved 5 states away and found out 5 years later when she tried to get a divorce that he had been dead for 6 months. NOW the IRS wants her to pay the tax on the 401k money. Would she be eligible for the Innocent or injured spouse rule?
Question: Definitions For The Modern World (not for those who suffer from short term memory)? Affirmative Action: A politically correct term for reverse discrimination. If the state says that some discrimination is good then, clearly, more must be better … so …
Anti-Semitic: An individual who doesn’t fawn over those of Jewish descent.
Battered Spouse Syndrome: Originally called “Battered Wife Syndrome” but was recast as a unisex term to disguise the intended gender bias.
Battered Wife Syndrome: It is an end run around justice for women guilty of revenge killings, mutilations etc. Note that ‘battered’ need only be alleged. See also ‘Positive Spin’.
Blind Justice: Said to mean that race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, etc. will not enter into the legal judgment process. Actually means that truth and fairness won’t.
Coalition of the Willing: Quantril’s Raiders, the Jesse James Gang, the Axis Powers, etc.
Collateral Damage: When we attacked, some innocent civilians got killed. What the hell were they doing in their own country anyway?
Communism: A political system that seeks to make all citizens equal … at the bottom of the economic ladder.
Credit: A way of getting the money you won’t have tomorrow (because of high interest costs) to pay for the “must have” wants of today.
Dangerous Offender: An individual given a sentence of an indefinite duration. Lest anyone think that the law is being totally capricious, it should be noted that there are strict requirements before this label is applied: the individual must be male and must have done something or other.
Defense Department: Military organization that oversees the creation and maintenance of offensive capabilities.
Democracy: Fascist rule by the largest misinformed minority.
Due Process: Long, involved and very costly legal proceedings the courts must undertake in a case against you. i.e. innocent or guilty, you lose.
Easy Credit: Credit that is easy to obtain. Retirement for you and the debt will be another story.
English Common Law: Laws applied to the common folk; the rich are accorded better treatment.
Entertainment: Consists of a wide variety of media presentations: movies, music, television shows, sporting events, etc. A pacifier for adults.
Executive Action: Probably a criminal activity.
Executive Compensation: The amount of money it would take to feed most impoverished nations.
Executive Decision: Consensus opinion expressed by the person with the highest position in an organization.
Free Enterprise: A system whereby commercial enterprises attempt, by means fair and foul, to corner the money supply.
Free Press: Media that is unhampered by obligations to objectivity and responsible journalism. Trades on the myth that ‘free’ implies unbiased.
Free Trade: An import/export arrangement between two or more countries. Defines the starting point for cheating by all parties to the agreement.
Free Vote: A multi-billion dollar poll used to determine if the populace has been subjected to sufficient propaganda.
Freedom Fighter: A terrorist who sees things our way.
Hollywood: A center for the production of films and documentaries. Also known as ‘The Dream Factory’. Happily, its fictional portrayals clearly show that our way of life is superior.
Income Tax: You work and the government shares the reward with you.
Intelligentsia: Clearly not the press, the media, sports stars, the judiciary, politicians or the military. Must be the rest of us.
Judicial Latitude: The mechanism that allows courts to come up with radically different verdicts in two or more cases with identical facts and circumstances. Flipping a coin would yield fairer, more consistent results.
Legal Precedent: The first judge got it wrong and it has been done that way ever since.
No Taxation without Representation: Expression made popular during the American War of Independence. The public has since been given a token number of representatives who don’t listen in exchange for an exorbitant amount of taxes.
Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity: The accused is guilty but is set free because the individual appeared before an insane judge and/or jury.
Not-for-profit Organization: The people running the operation are being honest: they are in it only to fill their own pockets without attempting to delude stakeholders into believing otherwise.
Peace Keeping Force: Keeping two sides in line by the implied use of a force greater than the one that either side had to contend with previously.
Physician: A mechanic that works on humans. They know so much about maintaining health that they are immortal. Okay, so the bad ones only live twice as long as the rest of us do.
Policing Action: Military action to combat a nation or rogue state. Could also be described as “naked aggression” but that’s harder to sell.
Politically Correct: First word appropriate, second one an outright lie. An oxymoron of gargantuan proportions.
Positive Spin: Putting a positive face on a negative action or event that is wrong (by our own definition) so that we can continue to get away with it.
Presumption of Innocence: Often encapsulated in the expression: “Innocent until proven guilty”. It’s just coincidence that the mere accusation permanently destroys the reputation of those subsequently found innocent.
Professional Athlete: Individual, one generation removed from walking on his/her knuckles, who makes a fortune at a sport without which the universe could not exist.
Propaganda: False, misleading or incomplete information disseminated by our enemies. Our system would never allow that. See also ‘Free Press’.
Reality Show: A television show produced by people who clearly do not originate in this galaxy.
Socialism: A less forceful, less efficient form of communism.
Statutory law: We didn’t like the way that the common law was unfolding so we “plugged it”.
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Chemical, nuclear and biological weapons in the possession of our enemies. Ours are defensive in nature.
United Nations: Countries that are united in their inability to come up with useful solutions to the world’s problems.
Utopia: A perfect world … we aren’t there yet. Hang a left at Saturn and keep straight for three trillion light years.
Question: Why are people so against Islam? Do people not realize that these so called "Muslim" terrorist make up less than one percent of a religoin that has 1.8 billion believers. There is no such thing as a terrorist Muslim, same thing that there is no such thing as a terrorist Christian or Jew. Killing the innocent goes against every major religion in the world. These terrorist have twisted and misconstrued a beautiful religion which in no way condones violence.
Have people forgotten about the Crusades where millions of people were killed for not being Christian? Almost every Christian would not condone that now and say that it goes against there beliefs, its the same with Muslims. These terrorists are an extreme minority, who for the most part have been brain washed.
Islam was one of the first religions to allow womans rights. Islam insists on the free consent of both bride and groom, so such marriages could even be deemed illegal under religious law.
A woman forbidden from driving a car in Riyadh will cheerfully take the wheel when abroad, confident that her country's bizarre law has nothing to do with Islam. Afghan women educated before the Taliban rule know that banning girls from school is forbidden in Islam, which encourages all Muslims to seek knowledge from cradle to grave, from every source possible.
The Koran is addressed to all Muslims, and for the most part it does not differentiate between male and female. Man and woman, it says, "were created of a single soul," and are moral equals in the sight of God. Women have the right to divorce, to inherit property, to conduct business and to have access to knowledge.
Since women are under all the same obligations and rules of conduct as the men, differences emerge most strongly when it comes to pregnancy, child-bearing and rearing, menstruation and, to a certain extent, clothing.
Some of the commands are alien to Western tradition. Requirements of ritual purity may seem to restrict a woman's access to religious life, but are viewed as concessions. The veiling of Muslim women is a more complex issue. Certainly, the Koran requires them to behave and dress modestly - but these strictures apply equally to men. A Muslim who has a genuine reason for divorce can get one, only if a spouse's behaviour goes against the sunnah of Islam - in other words, if he or she has become cruel, vindictive, abusive, unfaithful, neglectful, selfish, sexually abusive, tyrannical, perverted - and so on. A womans husband is not her master; a Muslim woman has only one Master, and that is God. If her husband does not represent God's will in the home, the marriage contract is broken.
The Prophet never hit a woman, child or old person, and was emphatic that those who did could hardly regard themselves as the best of Muslims. Moreover, he also stated that a man should never hit "one of God's handmaidens". Nor, it must be said, should wives beat their husbands or become inveterate nags.
I already explained that these people are an extreme minority.
THere are bad people in every religion. The religion with the most murderers in the world are Christians. Dont get me wrong I respect every religion, but why do people blame billions for the acts of thousands?
Question: Do you ever try to understand the opposing person's point of view? I am socially liberal and am libertarian minded, but I sometimes put myself in the social conservative's shoes and try to understand their point of view. I can see why they are against abortion and why they support the death penalty. Why are innocents killed and why are the guilty spared? If society doesn't have the right to practice the death penalty, then what rules/laws does society have to follow? If people can go around killing each other, not following laws themselves, and not being killed for it, then why does anyone have to follow laws? If society doesn't have the right to kill, then why does society have the right to imprison anyone?
I can also see why they are against gay marriage. If marriage isn't defined as a legal and religious matrimony between a man and a woman, marriage can be defined as anything. Fathers and daughters, brothers and sisters can get married... it's their "choice". People can practice polygamy and have as many spouses as they want... it's their "choice". If marriage doesn't have a clear definition, then marriage can be anything and involve anyone.
I am generally pro-choice and pro gay marriage, but I can understand the opposing person's point of view, even if I may not agree with them. I am fiscally conservative, but I can understand why marxist-minded people think the way they do, I can understand their values and ideals. I understand that things are not that black and white. Are people simply conditioned to react to "controversial" topics emotionally rather than rationally? Is that it?
Mutterhals, I'm open-minded and tolerant except for when I'm dealing with the closed-minded and intolerant... so does that also make me closed-minded and intolerant? There is a limit I'll go to before becoming closed-minded and intolerant myself. I don't really care what people do or believe as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others... I used to have a kneejerk reaction to religion too but I've tried to stop doing that.
Question: tax question, should i notify the IRS and claim innocent spouse rule, please read and help? my wife owns a hair salon that is incorporated for 6 years, she has written her car off every year even though the corp does not own the car its only in her name, she claims no tips and only writes herself a check for 1000 dollars a month, for personal income, even though she pays half the mortgage, 850, she has 2 car payments one car she bought for her dad and is 300 a month and her car is 500 a month, she makes her credit card payments about 800 a month, it just does not add up is this all legal
Question: tax question, should i notify the IRS and claim innocent spouse rule, please read and help? my wife owns a hair salon that is incorporated for 6 years, she has written her car off every year even though the corp does not own the car its only in her name, she claims no tips and only writes herself a check for 1000 dollars a month, for personal income, even though she pays half the mortgage, 850, she has 2 car payments one car she bought for her dad and is 300 a month and her car is 500 a month, she makes her credit card payments about 800 a month, it just does not add up is this all legal
THE OWNER GETS TIPPED IF SHE CUTS THE HAIR AND ALSO DOES OTHER SERVICES,,WOULD YOU TURN AWAY A TEN SPOT
Question: Is it human nature for us to justify making questionable decisions? A better question would be: Should we *always* expect consequences for our actions?
The three major religions of the world clearly state that people should always expect to receive a "reward" for their actions. For good and bad.
Karma: What goes around comes around. Yin and Yang. Balance must be kept.
If you ain't spiritual here you go.
Newton's law says: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Now let's talk about real world examples of actions and consequences.
1. Default on a car loan: Consequence. Lose car and take a bad hit to your credit.
2. Don't pay you energy bill: Consequence. Spend time in the dark.
3. Shoplift and get caught: Consequence. Face possible prosecution.
Now all of that brings me to this. When a person makes a decision that violates rules of common respect, e.g.
1. Flirting and openly pursuing another person's s/o
2. Peeping in the opposite gender's changing room
3. Spending private time with a married person...at the married person's house. While the spouse is away.
Should these actions be subject to consequences? Would damage to reputation of the person/persons involved be expected? Yes it can be argued that these examples were not as they seemed to be, but why should "innocent" actions be without consequence? Why do we try to change the laws when they put us in a bad light?
Sorry about the length. Your thoughts.
Question: Innocent spouse? I have a question a friend of mines got married this year and she is worried about when she files taxes next year. Her husband owes on child support andshe wants to know if he has not caught up on the back support by the end of the year how shuld she file. Together or married filing seperate. And if the innocent spouse rule would apply to her?
Firstof all girlwhoknowsitstrue who r u to say shame on someone. He DOES take care of his two children and 1 step child it just That he is hurt right now and is UNABLE to work and this time this man is n ot a DEAD BEAT DAD. Question: Bible Info, Religious Questions? Well i recently finished the bible for the first time (long read BTW) and it surprised me.
Now i haven't devoted years to it's study but i came up w a few questions as it seems many of Christianities major rules are not mentioned.
1. Where does it say that 2 people cannot have sex until they are married? (i know it says do not commit adultary but premarital sex is not adultary, cheating on your spouse is)
2. Where does it say that marriage has to be between a man and a women (gay marriage) (i know it says that laying w a man is wrong but thats sex not marriage)
3. Does it define life anywhere (as an argument for abortion)
4. What does it have to say about soldiers, they kill which god does not like, do they burn in hell?
5. It seems to condemn eating shellfish, whats up with that?
Anyway feel free to answer all or just a few, i figure theirs probably a bunch of bible nuts out there who know it better then me so thanks in advance for the help.
Extra Points: How was the bible put together, who decided what went in/didn't?
Additional Details
I dont know if the words involving betrayin innocent blood cover abortion, that could refer to an innocent person who has already been born, sounds a little sketchy
Again, it says that each man should be married, it DOES not say that you cant have sex with others until then though Question: What do you think the outcome will be? What do you think the out come of an experiment like this would be?
Have an on-line affair with your spouse. Here's the rules and how you go about this.
You both create bogus email accounts on something like Yahoo. One of you goes first by sending an innocent email to the other. You will need to make up a subject for the first email to get things started. Something like, "I found you on the WEB and think you may be an old High School friend".
Here are the rules:
You can never talk about this at home. From the time the first email is sent and received, you never mention the topics discussed with your spouse. The whole point is that this is someone random you just met on the internet. Your emails/conversations should reflect that. You would eventually discuss things happening in your marriage, how you feel and interact with your spouse, love life, sex and family. People do this all the time, except it usually is with a stranger. It is important that you not word your emails/conversations like you would if you knew it was your spouse. Eventually leading to an on-line affair. If that's what turns out.
What do you think? Could this turn out to be good couples counseling or do you think it has the potential to damage a marriage? Question: Prosecutor procedure, in domestic violence preceding where does the prosecutor violate procedure? P (vic) claims domestic violence on the day that P and D (accused) are set to split and exchange keys to residence. P secures an EPO and temp. restraining order based on her allegation that D is going to kill her. Prosecution reviews claim and sends back to police for further investigation, P claims a need for surgery from being pushed into a wall although no one witness the abuse (Parties have a young child). In police statement (1 month post allegation) P claims, "_______ _______(insert DA name) says that D (accused) is claiming that he is innocent did not happen. I thought he was just going to try and plea down from a felony to misdemeanor, but if he says this didn't happen, let's do this." Later, fact findings show D had made no statements or pleas prior to said meeting. Can a DA instruct P that D is entering a not guilty claim at arraignment, if there has been no communication. Is this an effort to manipulate allegations?
Later, D is charged with felony DV, after P's claim(at interview referred to in prior paragraph) builds from a single incident to a weekly occurrence, with death threats, of DV for 4 years. However, there were no reported incidents. The new claim is that D threatened, beat, and now abused the young child(2 years of age) by pushing. P is claiming that there is a need for surgery to an initial scrape type injury.
Later, post 2 MRI's, surgery is discounted and the orthopedist cannot account for P's pain, attempts are made at injection therapy, but P continues to visit physician with complaints. Shortly after surgery is ruled out P begins calling the former partners of D, whom facts now show had never spoken to P prior to the current claims. P befriends the ex spouse of D and is able to secure, through email, statements that she may remember an incident where D had thrown a hairspray bottle at her when upset. Absent the ex spouses knowledge, P is turning emails into the DA.
Can the DA employ their own "victim" to attempt to secure damaging testimony or possible witnesses, is this protocol? Is P endangered by this act.
What bearing does a former spouses "memory" have on a current claim of domestic violence. Thanks. Question: Did you know this about the Devil? The following is what I've discovered about the Devil. The first part is taken from Chapter III of my book India Is the Real Jewish and Christian Holy Land:
"Satan Was Really a Saintly Indian King. In Chapter II, I explained that Satana was in reality a Gujarati city-state that lost a war to the Seunas or Zionists. The name of this city was probably derived from that of a Jaina king and founder of a small Jaina sect. We are wrongly taught that a holy man named Mahavira founded Jainism. He was in reality a later reformer. Jainism itself existed millenniums before Mahavira was born. No one really knows exactly when Mahavira lived. I believe that he achieved his enlightenment around 1000 B.C. Some years after his death, a pious Jaina king named Satan-ikas (Satan of Kasi?) began expounding his own version of Jainism. He succeeded in getting only 11 converts. They distinguished themselves from other Jainists by wearing blood-red robes and occasionally bull-horn headresses. Because the sect was (and still is) so very small, it was probably rejected by Jainists as demoniacal and heretical. In those days, the different Indian sects often fought one another, as, indeed, their non-Indian descendants do even today. Over the centuries, this saint and his red clothing evolved to the red-colored monster that the TV preachers use to scare fanatical Christian fundamentalists and convince them to unload their bank accounts and wallets.
The following are the "evil" teachings that this "Satan" used to ensnare innocent victims:
1. The senses are not the seat of wisdom.
2. The Law of Karma (the effect of our past deeds, whether good or bad) is a reality.
3. The world and the beings in it are realities; not illusions.
4. The spiritual dimension is also real.
5. No one should kill animals.
6. We must endure patiently the life conditons that we cannot change.
7. Do not mortify the body.
8. Always be truthful, sincere, and pure of conduct.
9. Do not steal.
10. Do not be unfaithful to your spouse. Control all earthly desires.
If Satan-ikas were to return to see what he has become in the minds of Baptist preachers and Jehovah's Witnesses, he'd truly be saddened to learn that he is remembered as The Great Tempter - the man that everyone loves to hate. The preachers need not worry overmuch. Very few people have ever fallen into the clutches of Satan-ikas.
"The Sanskrit/Kashmiri word for "devil" is exactly as in English: dev-il (condition of being a devil). The amazing similarities between English and Sanskrit prompted Indian historian A. K. Mazumdar to write, ".English is essentially Rig-Vedic Sanskrit in disguise." (The Hindu History; p. 349.) For more information about this anomaly, see my book India Once Ruled the World." Question: Is it human nature for us to justify making questionable decisions? A better question would be: Should we *always* expect consequences for our actions?
The three major religions of the world clearly state that people should always expect to receive a "reward" for their actions. For good and bad.
Karma: What goes around comes around. Yin and Yang. Balance must be kept.
If you ain't spiritual here you go.
Newton's law says: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Now let's talk about real world examples of actions and consequences.
1. Default on a car loan: Consequence. Lose car and take a bad hit to your credit.
2. Don't pay you energy bill: Consequence. Spend time in the dark.
3. Shoplift and get caught: Consequence. Face possible prosecution.
Now all of that brings me to this. When a person makes a decision that violates rules of common respect, e.g.
1. Flirting and openly pursuing another person's s/o
2. Peeping in the opposite gender's changing room
3. Spending private time with a married person...at the married person's house. While the spouse is away.
Should these actions be subject to consequences? Would damage to reputation of the person/persons involved be expected? Yes it can be argued that these examples were not as they seemed to be, but why should "innocent" actions be without consequence? Why do we try to change the laws when they put us in a bad light?
Sorry about the length. Your thoughts.
Jay I am in the same boat. The point of this post was not to prove my infallibility, but to show that when we fuq up we should always expect consequences.
Trust me I have done some shaddy things in the past. I've even unknowingly violated the respect of myself and others, but I've always accepted the consequences.
Thank you.
|
|||||||
