Backroads

Wrong about what? I never argued the current statistics. But I don't understand your disregard of principle.
 
Could it be perhaps that these creeps molest those they have access too...and family members are the most accessible? So now you give strangers more private access and power and you expect what? Less family members abusing kids?

You can say that it keeps the child 'safe' and question why parents would have a problem with it and the answer is simple.
 
Who defines safe?  The atheist who thinks anyone who believes in God is mentally deranged?  Or the religious fundamentalist who thinks to keep a child safe they need to be indoctrinated?  So what
 
As a parent I hear them say they want to keep my kids safe, and I can be behind that...  Until I see what they mean by safe and where they expect to go with it.  That causes concerns, and it is always easier to stop these things before they get entrenched.
 
Then is the whole idea of treating all parent like criminals without the benefit of a trial.

In other words you put your faith and trust in strangers and the state over the bonds of familial love.
 
What if the medical personel, police officer, public school teacher wants to molest your child? If we continue down this road not only will they be able to do so, but they will be able to blame you and throw you in prison.
 
My wife is in the medical profession and has seen horrible things. But in the end knows it's far more dangerous on principle to allow strangers, even professionals, unfettered closeted access to our children. 

Your feelings aside, did you note that this is a local, state law, not a federal one?  This has nothing to do with President Obama's physical stamina.
 
 
My daughters are currently six years old and two-and-a-half years old.  I consciously strive to develop the kind of relationship with them that they will tell me if they become pregnant at a young and/or unmarried age.  But my husband and I are not the only adults that they should be able to trust.  They need to have opportunities to confide in teachers or doctors or other appropriate mentors if necessary.  This issue is completely separate from my parenting.
 
I actually see it very similarly to why I'm against "abstinence only" sex education programs.  Statistically, they do not work.  I think (I could be wrong, it's been awhile since I read up on it) that they're actually less effective than no sex ed at all!  My kids -- all kids -- need to have appropriate sexual education, including anatomy and reproductive processes of both genders, as well as birth control options.  It's my job at home to teach them the moral side of their sex ed training.
 
I just look at this issue differently, I think, than most others in this thread.  This law is about my child, not about me.  It's about my child's rights and safety, not my rights.  I feel that this law is something that makes my (and others') children safer, even if that means keeping them safe from me or my husband.  Having that perspective, I honestly cannot understand any objection to it.

It's not the fact that HER child was 17.  According to that new law it states 12-17.  As a mother, until that child is 18 I have every right to be with my child in a doctor's office while they are asking questions.

In some ways, I will agree with applepansy, though I can certainly empathize with Windseeker. I am reminded of this post just a few days ago by Brad at One Flesh Marriage (http://www.onefleshmarriage.com/2014/06/look-great-no-i-dont.html). For whatever reason, it seems that this is a common problem in our society. How to learn to give and receive honest compliments is difficult enough. Combine with the familiarity of marriage relationships and the outside world's fluctuating, irrational definitions of "beauty", "attractive", etc. and it is probably a wonder that anyone manages to get this right.
 
One observation on Charity Pierce: Even in her case (grossly overweight due to physical illness), we frame the discussion of "is she beautiful" in terms of finding a man who says that she is beautiful and worthy of love and affection. Maybe it is difficult to describe "hotness" without it, but it sometimes seems to me that some of this issue needs to be about our relationship with ourselves. Can we each learn to describe ourselves as attractive, beautiful, valuable, "hot", acceptable, loveable, or whatever on our own terms without needing someone outside of ourselves to prop us up? Can we learn how to do it without deluding ourselves?

Meh, I agree and disagree.
 
Teach your daughter to love herself, foremost, regardless of how she is perceived by others. I get so tired of women calling each other out for what they deem modest and immodest. One mother on my Facebook called-out another mother for allowing her teen daughter to wear a bikini. Spouting stuff like: "If you want your daughter to tempt men, you're on the right track" and "Girls that have self-esteem don't dress like that". Seriously? That irked me so much! Believe it or not, not all females wear alleged immodest clothing to arouse men... And not all females that wear alleged immodest clothing have self-esteem or self-worth issues. So in this context, I very much disagree.
 
What I do agree with is that we should value our daughters, and teach them to value themselves, and in turn (hopefully) they will conduct themselves in a positive way. As we all know, "modesty" varies from person to person, even within our Mormon culture. I had a niece recently marry in the temple and she got a lot of side comments about how low her neckline was because some cleavage was visible. 

Every time I read the title of this thread I read "Ending a relationship WITH a washer and dryer.

I know, right?
 
My husband likes "the girl next door" look.  Which apparently means... what you said. 

When Christy Duffy took her 17-year-old daughter to her local hospital in Michigan, she was stunned to see a notice posted alerting parents that a nurse will need to “have a short 5 minute private conversation with your child.”
 
 In a fiery blog post published on Monday, Duffy took a bold stand in favor of parental rights. She explains how the situation unfolded:
 
 I was there last week for an appointment for Amy. She hurt her foot, which makes dancing difficult, so we had to get that checked out. Amy is 17; I asked if this policy was in effect and if so, how could I opt out. The receptionist told me it’s a new law and there is no opting out. Working to keep my cool, I said, “I’m sure there is.” She said, “No, there isn’t.” At which point I asked if I needed to leave and go to the urgent care center because I was not submitting my daughter to such a conversation.
 
    That did not go over well
 
 
 
Read more here:
 
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/03/i-am-the-mom-it-didnt-go-over-well-when-a-hospital-allegedly-told-a-mother-theyd-need-to-have-a-private-conversation-with-her-teenage-daughter/

When a small amout of butter can cause a person to be spiritually lost, I think not talking to someone over a washer and dryer is fine.  Like ou said, you will forgive and move on.  But forgivness doesn't mean you have to put yourself back into a situation.  Seems she is being petty, and feels it is worth losing the relationship, so I guess you didn't lose much....

Wouldn't it be amazing if looking beautiful required far less work and time then you think. Well this dream can be yours if you do one amazing thing...LISTEN TO YOUR HUSBAND.
 
Women can sometimes be like the old dude with the comb-over, he thinks he looks great, but everyone knows it would look better if he just shaved what's left off. Instead he spends hours picking at it and getting each hair lined up perfectly.....
 
I've given up complimenting my wife when "I" think she's beautiful and now just keep it to when "She" feels beautiful.

Yes, we had a very specific discussion on the returning of the w&d at the time.  They even admitted the "we want to keep this" was a much later development. 
 
I agree that things ought to be clear, but I felt in this case they were.
 
By the way, this has been resolved.

I just used MeMaker, it's a silly open source avatar creater because I'm lazy, plus it's fun to mess around with.
 

I read the blog yesterday.  I agreed.  And because the previous day an endowed young friend posted that modesty standards are outdated, and saying things like showing shoulders shouldn't be a modesty issue, I posted this blog in reply.
 
It saddens me to watch young women (including young married) look for excuses to put modesty aside.  It was refreshing to see a young married do the opposite.

Did you have a specific, talked about or written down, agreement about under what circumstances the w/d would be returned?  If not, it seems silly to get offended when the other party went away with a different understanding than you have.  
 
We are so dang hesitant to bring up stuff like this upfront, but we're so eager to get all ticked off when things don't go our way, even though we never actually got around to communicating what that way was.  (No, using the word "lend" a lot and making powerful eye contact when you did it, doesn't count.)  I struggle with this less now than I used to, but it's still hard sometimes.  
 
Here's all it would have taken: "Oh sure we can leave it with you for a while.  Our new place has one, but I know we'll want them back eventually.  Is it ok if we consider this a short term thing?  You can count on using it for at least three months.  I mean, it may be a few years before we actually ask for it back, but we will eventually. Is this a good deal for you?"
 
Something like that needs to be in place, before I give myself leave to get offended about someone busting a deal.

Legally speaking, I would agree, they don't appear to have a case.  Washers and dryers aren't exactly cheap, depending on how fancy it could be $1500+.  Even basic models can run 200 a pop.  If I were in the same situation and the cost was more than several hundred bucks, I'd probably go small claims.  However, even if one wins in court, one still has to collect.
 
At this point in my life, the time, energy, effort, mental strain, etc. for me to take someone to court over several hundred bucks is just not worth it and I'd count the lost money as part of my tuition in the school of Life. 
 
But everyone is different and has to weigh the costs accordingly, sometimes the amount of money doesn't matter and it is the principle of the matter . . . .just depends.

I would be interested in updates as the OP progresses through some of the suggestions. If that's the direction he wants to go. Which is sounds like it is. 
 
My suggestion to the OP is to not take divorce off the table. Think about the example that is being set for your children, is your relationship with your wife the example of a relationship that you would like them to be in when they grow up and choose their eternal companions? Like it or not you have a very big influence on their decision making process. If you think that they do not notice you and your wife's issues you would be mistaken.
 
3 years without sexual relations? This is unacceptable, granted we are only getting one side of the story here so we can give the OP a 50% discount on whatever he tells us, but a "reasonable" person perspective says that issues lie deeper than house keeping and weight. Lets be honest women are not as focused on the visual side of sex as men are and 25lbs are pretty easy to look past so that excuse flies right out the window for me, it also sounds like the OP already helps keep the house up.
 
So he gets up and goes to work all day to provide for his family, comes home helps around the house, and I'm sure still finds time to spend with the kids, is still sexually attracted to his wife aka wants to have relations.....hmmmmmm run this by a reasonable woman and she would say your a great guy.
 
You have a roommate who does not like you. I would not live with someone who does not like me
 
I would be willing to bet that if you lost the 25 lbs and kept a perfect house, took her out to dinner/movies weekly you still would not get "lucky". Marriages are a 2 way street you can do all of these things and more but if she has emotionally checked out your done for.

This isn't over a washer & dryer.
You did a favor for someone.
Who has now, instead of being grateful for that favor, (much less returning the favor), has spit in your face.
It's not petty, it's;
Thank GOODNESS you've learned what kind of people these individuals are in such an inexpensive venue.
They have no respect for you, your trust, your belongings, or the effort & length you are willing to go to & through for your friends.
To me, friendship is about equality. There's, give, flow back and forth between individuals in a relationship.
While my friends and I differ in many ways, when that dynamic changes (or doesn't exist in the first place) the friendship ceases. There may still be a relationship of some kind, but there is no more friendship. I will not do for them any more than I would do for some random stranger. And if they've hurt me, or mine? Then it's a step lower. Just because I've ended a friendship, after learning that a person isn't my friend... Doesn't make them my enemy. Actively trying to hurt me or mine, does.
Standards.
Those whom we choose to associate with, much less choose to trust, need to meet the bare minimum.
Q

You can forgive, must forgive, and must love them, but that does not mean that you have to like hanging out with them.

Do they have a legal/moral reason for keeping them? Are they claiming them as an offset for a debt you owe them or maintenance they did on your condo, for example?
If not, I'd sue them in small claims court and report them to local police. Yeah, you were a bit of a schmuck; but this is still thievery and they WILL do it to someone else, because that's the kind of people they are. (Right?). I submit that you might have a moral obligation to their future victims. If you won't stop them, then who will?
(As for the original question: no-brainer to me. They swindled you; the relationship's over. You don't need to get all dramatic and tell them why it's over; but you sure as heck don't need to seek out their company anymore. Let them fade out of your life.)

Huh.
I always get hit on the most when I look like I've been tied by rope to the back of a truck and driven around face down through cactus.
And I always think to myself; 'What is WRONG with men?'
Q

I agree that everyone should make such effort. It is the why they should make the effort that I'm concerned with.

Well unless you want me to look like someone from Rocky Horror Picture Show, I'd rather not, being a male and all.

With respect to the article, the author sounds like a teenage bride.  She has promise though.  Give her ten years and perhaps she'll be able to articulate more mature and profound ideas.
 
The core of what she's getting at is something I've seen discussed before.  The "modest is hottest" slogan fails in that it still places cultural expectations on behavior over individuality.  And it still places physical attraction over personality.