No Happy Wife, Happy Life 

Thank you. The first honest and truthful comment by a woman.

Good point

Yes she is

That’s the first thing I said! There is no way she could not tell that man was off and crazy.

😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣💯%TRU FACTS

Not as crazy as she is for deciding to sleep with him.

Talking about he still my friend. Ummm noo!

He's sick

Women have got to stop calling crazy, lazy, and hazy men their friends.

Lol 😆 😆 lmao

Asf. Lol

Omg

Amen to that (No pun)

Strangest case I’ve seen on JM for certain!!😆😂🤣

True Dat. Need to totally disengage

🤣🤣🤣🤣

😂😂😂😂😂😂that took me out

He’s not conspicuous in the least. She knew what she was getting into

Lololol

It’s 2022 ... 😂 you don’t know nobody !! Lies ,con artists and deceit

@@peacefaith560 exactly. Now she knows and is not friends with him anymore.

I have a hard time believing that she didn't see these red flags prior to as he said he told her if they sleep together she's his wife 😂 she just as crazy she just isn't on 10 like him

NOT ASKING…TELLING HER!!😳😳😳

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

🤣🤣🤣🤣

LOOKIN’ FOR WHERE HE LOST HIS MIND…IT’S GOTTA BE IN HERE SOMEWHERE 🧐

To cheap to get a marriage license, but we married

Judge Mathis may need to get one too🤣

That man was crazy as hell and that lady too

LET’S HOPE SO FOR HER SAKE!

Yes he really does

That is scary. Startling.😨

A lot of the Bible thumpers are loud and wrong

He must be an un-alive Islam with 50 wives.

🤣😆

@@The-Mediator don't be ignorant😀. If he did have 50 wives that has nothing to do with Islam. He said he was a Hebrew lol Islam isn't even a person. He's literally speaking in context of the Bible

@@meenahstyles9948 No he’s not speaking on context of the Bible. Unless he was a virgin prior to having sex with the plaintiff, he must be kissing Allah’s with his 50 wives in heaven. Don’t be stupid.

Ready to pop? He has popped and re-popped

😆😆😆

Not the cookie

And at her age....

Lol yes

😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

@ Joshua Desean What he was trying to say was the Bible is not about religion. It never has been. God never gave us religion. He gave us his law as our heritage. (Ecclesiasticus 17:11) when the white man brought us over here, they stripped us of our heritage (Psalms 83:3- 4) (83:1-8 describes the whole conspiracy (v5) listing all the conspirators vs 6-8 ) and presented it to us again as religion. The Bible is our history book. The scripture he was trying to quote declares that we would be afflicted 400 years (Genesis15: 13)

😂😂😂

😂😂😂 I know right. Uneducated people trying to REDEFINE a word because it doesn’t fit their narrative or agenda. If you believe in and worship a deity and you have customs, rituals, standards, or a particular system of how you express your faith in this deity then REALITY CHECK…. You belong to a religion based on the clear definition of the word. Also, the KJV Bible even mentions the word RELIGION in a favorable way when it describes the PURE religion. *JAMES 1:26, 27* Looks like he needs to copy more papers from the Bible.

@@Failur3i5n0tan0pt1on The true believers in the Bible believe there is only "ONE" God, therefore only "ONE" Lord, "ONE" FAITH(religion), and "ONE" baptism. So, he was not referencing the Bible from a religious view point, but from a historical viewpoint and based on the heritage of "ONE" people, the ELECT. By referencing the scripture he called he was trying to show that the ONE God that gave "HIS" people the Bible also declared to Abraham in Genesis 15:13 that "HIS" people would be afflicted for 400 years. When he said he was talking about us, he was declaring that only "ONE" people in all of time fit the description that was described in Genesis, the people of the slave trade beginning in 1619. Since these people are the only people along with the Hispanics and Native Americans that fit the many descriptions of the biblical Israelites, they are indeed the biblical Israelites. You don't have to talk about religion to reference the Bible as what it also is, a history book. Don't get it twisted, this does not take away from it being a book of faith.

ASAP, AND MAKE IT AN EXTENDED ONE

For what. She never said anything to indicate a need for that.

@@ms.a.r.m.3047 she needs one against him.

@@tionnaandrews3864 on what grounds

They probably hooked back up.

@@ms.a.r.m.3047 his behavior is scary to me. He seems a little obsessive and she’s really laid back about it.

😂😂😂

When he started I’m like huh??? What is he talking about????!?

😂😂

That alone was crazy

🤣🤣🤣

And give Your Number 2

LOOKIN’ SO HARD…POSSIBLY TRYING TO FIND WHERE HE LOST HIS MIND…

Nuts you say but then why did she sleep with him. If he's nuts then what does that make her.

🙄🙄🥴 here we go ⬆️

@@adrianprince7266 horny 🙄....still a He-Man Woman hater I see

@@adrianprince7266 Usually nutty people like that don’t show their nutty self until after sex or marriage. Duh.

@@adrianprince7266 they say crazy sec is the best sez

his just trying not to pay because that's not the first woman he slept with.

Morning handsome

possibly escaped from the psych ward…

People share their beliefs about things all the time. You have the choice to listen or walk away

@@YAHsaves777 There’s a difference between share and push.

@@The-Mediator Exactly

The woman knew where he stood and violated his beliefs. The man is clearly trying to walk a righteous path but that jezebel used him and abused him and caused him to Fornicate.

🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Very.

💯

She's crazy too. If she slept with, lived with and were friends with this man and didn't know he was crazy. Judge Mathis figured it out in 5 minutes.

That laugh is for junkies

Lawd Jesus

Yes run indeed

This is going to be all the men who follow Kevin Samuels in about 20 years. Delusional!

Right magine???? 😆 🤣 😂 😹

According to dude, they DID have a soul-tie. Then took that soul-tie a step further by calling it a bonefide marriage 🤦🏽‍♀️🤷🏽‍♀️🥺

Invite her to stay with you in Mzansi, Gal! A whole continent away is what's needed in this situation😂😂😂

@@keamoore5849 lol I think so😂😂😂 she can even get an asylum with ease just by showing this video .... I 1st thought you were saying the guy needs relocation😂

He don't just "look" confused, unstable & dangerous, nombini, he IS all that. That is a "friend" she doesn't need *at all*.

@@kensirhan2 facts 💯

​@@nombinintlahla8325 you guys this woman has said nothing about this man stalking her going to her job bothering her/family members of any kind since he feels like that his wife. J. M. Should have asked how many wives does he have. He used religion as an excuse not to pay her. They both bend their elbows too much. Talking smack doesn’t equate to violence

This. He’s certified.

Exactly.

Looking like a minion 🤓

Truth

Sex is not a sin unless it’s adultery.

@@kissit012 sex is a sin if you're not married. It's called fornication. Look it up!

Just to think this woman slept with him. To me she's worst than he is just for doing that given how he is. Women always make great decisions though.

@@adrianprince7266 you sound bitter

Yet it took her years to figure that out.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

😩😂😂😂😂😂

Not funny at all but y'all be easily entertained, if he was gay he wouldn't have did him like that he shows them the up most respect and we know what the scriptures say about that, embarrassing

@@motivation-hd7mwThe keyword in my comment was “Me” ..He had “Me” in tears..you can’t tell me what’s funny and what’s not funny ..don’t get under my comment with your opinion bc I don’t give af how you feel.. you could’ve made your own comment with your opinion there was no need to get under mine with this nonsense..I said what I said and imma keep laughing tf

So laugh like you did or keep it moving huh?? I see you only responded to me but get this, I can say wtf I want on whatever comment I want too just like you it's public. if I want ppl to see the truth on your lil comment then so be it. I didn't say you can't laugh or don't laugh u said funny right? I said not funny I can say wtf I want too just because y'all ppl are easily entertained by lies I'm not and it's a damn shame, y'all be too scared too show y'all face too I stand on my shyt, we been told too many lies and it's always the scriptures ppl wanna speak on but clearly haven't read, I honestly wasn't trying too attack you I already know my comments won't get a response but yours will haha truth hurts shalom

That's them cigarettes! You can tell she's a drunk and so is he. They both seem a little tipsy during their testimony.

She has smoker's lung...😔

He said they were married because of his religious beliefs, not because they had a ceremony. His point of view is when you have sexual relations with someone, they are entered in a covenant of marriage

@@MsBdoll87 Where is that written or documented anywhere in any religion?

@@The-Mediator refer to previous message, “his point of view.” There are religions that believe this. I do know in Christianity, the two become one when they consummate the marriage through sexual intercourse, not solely because of a ceremony.

"Seems" nuttin, Mr. Murdock, he just plain IS - & a LOT unhinged. "In need of medication!"

It is unfortunate, however, many people tweak the Bible to their understanding.

Sex is what makes them married, not a ceremony

Like all sociopaths and narcissists do.

@@MsBdoll87 Based on what?

Well actually...this is from the bible, we did this before legal unions.

Clearly he is Hebrew Israelite

Amen

I can bet it didn’t have nothing to do with the case. In his mind they married so he doesn’t owe her the money But he will give her the money back 🤷🏽‍♀️ She’s a little touched too and used him for a place to stay and her physical enjoyment.

It reads "I'm coo coo for cocoa puffs"!!!

Shalom. His talking point were in relation to the Laws that were given to us by who you call Moses. A piece of paper does not make you married; its the consemation between a man and a women. The brother has been awaken...however, should not force the truth on anyone. If you noticed he asked her 'didn't I tell you if we had s_x we were martied?'...her reply..nothing. He was going to outline the 613 commandments that arr listed in the bible...and out line who the bible outlines as the people of the book.

She’s a silly woman. He’s a deranged man.

Exactly, of course. Lol.

He's not articulate, which is why they allowed him on the show, had it been me I would have been able to articulate that scripturally the most high considered marriage after sex with a virgin there is no state contract required meaning permission from the state to be the head of your so called marriage, JM continues to promote sex before marriage as fornication because our society has changed the definition to fit their agenda and if you go against it you get talked too like this but if your gay he shows you the up most respect and love. Hmmmm that seems right too y'all?

@@misterbee66 wtf you mean exactly ofcourse?? Haha judge .Mathis is the one with the agenda that the whole world is aligned with and the scriptures tell us 3/4s of this world are gonna perish, y'all have fun with that haha

@@motivation-hd7mw Exactly what I said, of course. Haha

@@misterbee66 haha lame shyt

🤣🤣

🤣😂

💀🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

"That's a good 1!" about Doyle & this crazed drunk loony on whom the color pink don't fit 1 bit.

A ham sandwich and a cup of water

Right😂😂😂

Well, to my understanding of the recent U.S. Supreme Court case, you no longer need to conceal your carry or get a permit to do the same. So long as your firearm is legally obtained and used, one is free to openly carry said firearm in any public setting. Not saying I agree, just simply my understanding of current USA law. And Yes Sharon, I totally understand where you're coming from. We have to be mindful, disengage and protect ourselves from those who are threats to our safety and well-being.

@@keeshabrown7353 not all states are open carry

@@kissit012 oh. I thought when the Supreme Court made it's decision, it applied to all states. Because it wasn't the New York state Supreme Court, but the United States Supreme Court. That's the danger of a case originating from a state dispute being heard before the US Supreme Court: the subsequent ruling applies to the country as a whole and not only the originating state from which the claim arose. I will read and research it's application and implications more

Thus far in my research: The Second Amendment “protect[s] an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home,” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in the majority opinion for Thursday’s ruling. Laws like New York’s, which required people who wanted a license to carry a concealed handgun in public to show they have a good reason, are no longer allowed. That doesn’t mean there is no way to regulate the carrying of guns in public - Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that explicitly in his concurring opinion. But Thursday’s ruling does change the way regulations are evaluated. Thomas’s opinion states regulations need to be historically consistent with the Second Amendment. That means when they look at a modern gun regulation, judges will have to figure out if another, reasonably similar law was passed earlier in the country’s history. Previously, courts had also considered whether a regulation could be justified for other reasons, but that second layer of consideration is no longer allowed. Before Thursday’s ruling, judges had two factors to consider when evaluating the constitutionality of a gun regulation: Does it fit with the history of the Second Amendment? And does the state have another reasonable justification - like social science data suggesting that the law could reduce gun violence? Under the new ruling, state governments can no longer argue that a gun restriction should be upheld because it serves an important interest. Instead, judges will only consider whether “the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” As with many Supreme Court rulings, we won’t understand the full implications of today’s ruling for a long time. Five other states and the District of Columbia have laws like New York’s, and they will have to pass new regulations for people who want to carry handguns in public. “Our holding decides nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his concurring opinion. “Nor does it decide anything about the kinds of weapons that people may possess.” The ruling does, however, create a bunch of new opportunities for advocates who want to limit states’ ability to determine who can carry a gun and where. In his opinion, Thomas said that guns can still be banned in “sensitive places,” but didn’t expand much further on what a “sensitive place” actually is. In his dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer pointed out that with a historical approach, this category could turn out to be pretty limited. “Where does that leave the many locations in a modern city with no obvious 18th- or 19th-century analogue?” he wrote. “What about subways, nightclubs, movie theaters, and sports stadiums?” So the future will depend, at least in part, on what state lawmakers try to do. Lawmakers in a state like New York or California could test the limits of the Supreme Court’s ruling by designating the subway, Broadway theaters or grocery stores as “sensitive places” where heightened restrictions can be applied. The risk for them, of course, is that the next Supreme Court ruling could expand gun rights even further. Source Citation: fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-the-supreme-courts-gun-ruling-means-for-gun-control/ Apologies to any readers I annoy by turning this into a legal analysis. This is in response to another commentator, not Miss Sharon Smalls. I'm still down with protecting ourselves from those of us who are throwed off and pose a threat to our safety.

@@keeshabrown7353 Thank you! I was unaware of the Supreme Court's ruling on Thursday concerning gun control. You are right I do not need a permit to carry a gun outside of my home. Concerning this case, I would have never been in this situation. I'm unaware of the plaintiff's circumstances, and why she would move in with the defendant and have sexual intercourse with him. I wouldn't be able to have a conversation with him. I believe that I should allow fools to be in their follies without interference from me.

Facts!

For real!!! He wasn’t playing! Lol😅

Yessssssss!!! Exactly!!

And perfect example of a person with possible mental and/or emotional issues

Sex outside of marriage isn’t a sin or mentioned in the Bible. Adultery is a sin, and marriage is encouraged, but there are no verses that say that and it is well know that cultural influence and preference are the reason people believe it is. It is not. If people spent more time actually reading the books instead of picking what they want to use to control others, they may find a lot of things are entirely different than what they’ve been taught or choose to believe.

@@kissit012 exactly

This is abuse 101. He feels entitled to a woman because she chooses to lay in bed with him. He thinks he owns her, and is trying to use any tool to justify his horrid behavior. Abuse 101.

😂😂

You should be embarrassed and ashamed for her behavior in deciding to sleep with such a man.

I had a brotha tell me one time that I've been married to every person I've ever had sex with. At that time, I had never of such a teaching/belief so I politely responded with "WELL, I DIVORCE ALL OF THEM!" And shook both my hands in the air like Cinque on Amistad when he said "give us us free". Then I broke those chains, In Jesus' name. So serious

@@keeshabrown7353 😂😂😂😂 thats those men who feel like they own women and women came from a man's rib.

@@MrLenroc82 perhaps. I just know I ain't never been married. And if somebody's definition of marriage is based on a similar belief as in this case, I'm clearly DIVORCED!!! I had a friend who told me that he was of a belief system that said if you told your spouse "I divorce you" three times in a row, then the divorce was immediately official. I just looked at him and thought "don't think that's gonna hold up in a court of law anywhere in America, buddy." 🤦🏽‍♀️🤣

@@keeshabrown7353 omg did he say you had to click your heels 3 times too???

@@MrLenroc82 lol 😆🤣 nope! The "3 times" guy was not the same as the first one. I forget what he said made them married - I think there was an officiant in their place of worship but don't know if they ever register the marriage with the state. If so, I know they'd have to go through the courts to officiate the divorce. As a side note, regardless of how one views themselves as married, it's beneficial to have it recorded with the state. That way, you're opened up to rights and privileges of a spouse, including but not limited to: property rights, trusts & estates in the event of death, medical decisions, visitations... a host of things open up by having what some refer to as "just a piece of paper." (I took family law and trust&estates as electives in law school along with many other classes) There's tons of real life examples of needing to be recognized by the government you live in as "LEGALLY MARRIED" Ok, that's probably my last tangent for the day. I'll see myself out ✌🏽💗😎

kinda like how bw "sacrifice" half a million babies a year?

Yes.... 💯💯💯💯

She's the psycho more than anything else for sleeping with him all the while knowing how he was. You're way off

I tend to disagree with your assessment of JM in this case. I have strong biblical beliefs, but I listen and discuss beliefs, opinions, etc. with anyone. IMO, the defendant implied that his beliefs were based on the Bible. Now I would have been more patient than JM was, but the defendant never clarified his beliefs or demonstrated the Biblical basis for his beliefs. I don't agree with JM's Biblical beliefs most times, but when you say that it's just JM's beliefs about sex between people not married to one another, that's a basic Bible teaching - not JM's doctrine,