Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner
(Note: the specific mentions of Moore and Kushiner and how both are attacking the Bible’s teachings on virginity / sexual purity come farther down in this opinion piece, after my introduction)
Jan 1 2015 update:
I just noticed today that Moore has blocked me from his Twitter account, which I never followed to start with (the notice on his page says I cannot follow his Twitter feed, which I never did. I don’t know when he blocked me, but it was sometime over 2014).
I only tweeted at him a handful of times over 2014, with links to this blog page you are reading. And he blocked me over THAT?
Edit: See the update after you read this post: (Link): Anti Virginity Moore Opines on Dirty Web Sites * Irony Alert *
I am still amazed by emergents, liberal Christians, and even a strain of conservative Christians, who feel as though Christendom has made an “idol of virginity,” when I see so many self-professing Christians these days mocking or questioning the very concepts of virginity, celibacy, and sexual purity, concepts which are taught in the Bible.
Oh sure, I hear the occasional sermon on marriage where the preacher tosses out the obligatory “sex is for marriage only” sentiment (just today, TV preacher Jack Graham delivered such commentary in his broadcast sermon on marriage).
However, in practice and in reality, many Christians do not believe in virginity, celibacy, or sexual purity, and many of them do not practice it.
See: (Link): No, Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity By extension, most Christians do not support Christian singles, who are told in the Bible to practice celibacy. Most Christians today, their churches and organizations, are too busy worshipping marriage and the traditional, nuclear family and lamenting the decay of “traditional marriage.”
Singles get overlooked in all the marriage and family worship, or all the hand-wringing over the fall of the nuclear family. Churches and the Christian community as a whole do not support Christians who are never- married, past the age of 30, and who are still virgins.
I became a Christian before reaching the age of ten (lately, though, I have considered leaving the faith, over the sex and singles issue, among other reasons). From a young age, I took Christianity and its teachings on sexual purity to heart.
I made a choice at very young age that I would wait until marriage to have sex. When you are below age 25, the church will applaud you for being a virgin.
Once you get to to your late 20s or into your 30s, the support you see in this area disappears. It dries up. (You will actually be attacked by Christians for being single and a virgin into your 30s and beyond.)
Other than Christianity, I did have one or two other reasons why I was determined to remain chaste (which I will not get into here).
My decision to remain chaste in adolescence coincides with the repeated sermonizing I heard in the 1980s and part of the 1990s of preachers ranting and raving against the sexual immorality of the day, and how a Christian should remain sexually pure. I also read the Bible as a teen, and I could not help but notice all the passages saying sex was for marriage only. I also heard or read works by authors such as Christian apologist Josh McDowell about how sex was for marriage only.
Works such as these, and sermons I heard, were one reason of several, I did not have sex.
Much of Christian dating, sex, and marriage articles and books I read as a teenager, and many of the sermons I heard on those topics, either stated out right, or implied very strongly, that if a Christian female remains sexually pure, seeks after God, stays skinny and pretty, prays to God, and has faith in God for a spouse, that God will send that young woman a “Christian Mr. Right” by the time she reaches mid or late 20s. I did all of those things and still find myself single in my early 40s.
I have seen other never-married Christian ladies in their 30s, 40s, and 50s give the same witness on other blogs: they too were sold a false bill of goods.
They were told by preachers, Christian relationship books and so forth, that if they trusted God for a spouse and did not have sex, that God would grant them, or reward them, with a spouse, and that the spouse would likely also be another Christian virgin.
However, in the last few years, I’ve seen Christians on TV shows, radio shows, and on blogs, declaring that all of us are sexual sinners (i.e. fornicators, who have literally had sexual intercourse).
Or, there is this understanding among some Christians that all people have had sex outside of marriage (or else are porn addicts), so, their philosophy is to present an “Easy Forgivism Sex Gospel” to soothe any guilt or shame feelings sexual sinners may have.
I find these constant appeals of “let sexual sinners off the hook and be all forgive-y to them, because all of us have sexual sin” confusing and discouraging, because I am in my early 40s and have not had sexual intercourse. It is simply not true that “all of us are fornicators.”
These easy forgivism attitudes towards sexual sin amounts to telling Christians they should not judge people’s sexual pasts, or hold their sexual pasts against them, nor should they adhere to biblical sexual standards, or expect others to live by them. Christians are further given the message – by other Christians – that they should not make an idol of virginity, and if you yourself have fornicated (had sex outside of marriage), to forgive yourself and move on.
The thinking is that nobody but nobody can hold out and resist sexual urges into their twenties and beyond, that we’re all guilty of fornicating, or habitually visiting X-rated sites.
Even though all of us are not guilty of these things – it is wrongly assumed all of us are, though.
The liberals and emergents think that Christians should cease with the virginity teachings and sexual purity teachings because some women, who chose to have sex as teens or as college students, feel guilty, ashamed, or dirty when they hear in sermons or Christian programs that sex outside of marriage is a sin.
Then your sexual abuse victims, who were fondled at age six by their Uncle Harry, say these sexual purity teachings hurt their feelings.
According to this “sensitive, delicate flower doctrinal” view point, Christians are to allow their emotions to dictate and influence which doctrines and morals Christians should accept, teach, and practice, and specifically, shame and guilt emotions should regulate how, when, or if biblical standards of sexual behavior are discussed, taught, or maintained.
Christian author and journalist Julia Duin is among one of the few who I’ve seen speak out or about the devaluing of sexual purity teachings and the mistreatment of Christian virgins.
Here is one post where Duin discussed the issue, and where she was rightfully critical of Russell D. Moore’s easy dismissal of virginity:
(Link): Where are America’s virgins? Discouraging the virtuous, by Julia Duin Here is an excerpt, the part where she mentions Moore:
- This past spring in Touchstone, a conservative Christian publication, Russell Moore, a Southern Baptist minister who is dean of Southern Seminary’s School of Theology in Louisville, penned “Like, A Virgin?” His essay criticized a chaste female who wanted her husband to be a virgin like she is. He hinted she was being unrealistic and judgmental for judging a potential mate on his sexual history rather than his Christian commitment. This hapless woman resisted the spirit of the age and yet, her Christian leader denigrated her values. So much for seeking out a pastor’s advice.
If I’m not mistaken, Duin was responding to this column by Moore (or one similar to it):
That Duin piece above, was, in turn criticized by this James Kushiner guy:
Here are excerpts from the page by Kushiner, who is critical of Duin for criticizing Moore’s views:
He [Moore] is clear throughout the article about the Christian teaching about sexual activity, that fornication is “damnable”, and the sad necessity that couples even have to have “the conversation,”….
The problem, my dear Mr. Kushiner, is that Christians speak out of both sides of their mouth on the celibacy and virginity and all related issues (eg, marriage/ singleness/ gender roles, etc etc). It’s all fine and good if Moore mentions in passing that ((Link): source)
- What’s important for you to know is how he [the letter writer’s fiance] views sexual immorality. A man who will brush off past fornication as “no big deal” from which he’s “moved on” is a man with a conscience trained to do the same thing with future adultery.
But then Moore’s next commentary betrays a true support of sexual purity when he condescendingly lectures this young woman that,
- On the other hand, your dismissing him automatically on the basis of immorality is also dangerous. If he is repentant, seeing his past sin as hell-deserving but crucified, then you should receive him (all else being equal), just as you have been received.
- You are not “owed” a virgin because you are.
- Your sexual purity wasn’t part of a quid pro quo in which God would guarantee you a sexually unbroken man.
- Your sexual purity is your obligation as a creature of God. And you have rebelled at other points, and been forgiven. If you believe the gospel, you believe the gospel for everyone, and not just for yourself.
It’s very easy for those who have fornicated themselves, or who are currently married (they were a virgin when they wed, but are currently getting their sexual needs met in marriage), and I am guessing Moore and Kushiner fall into either one of those groups, to be so blithe and dismissive of sexual sin, and/or to lecture a single virgin who wants marriage that it is selfish or unforgiving to be concerned about a potential partner’s sexual past or to desire a virgin to marry.
Really, Mr. Moore, if a person’s sexual past is basically “no biggie,” as you make it out to be (despite your “fornication is not good” spiel in the same column), and a person should just drop the matter and let it go as though it’s nothing, if the person has repented of it, what then, is the point in me personally staying a virgin?
The message I receive from these views is that I might as well be having sex right now with various men, or just one steady boyfriend, since according to Moore, if I do get a marriage proposal from a Christian man in the future, he should just overlook my fornication with some other guy. As I mentioned above, the Bible, and contrary to Moore’s position, does seem to teach in places, especially the Old Testament, in a ‘quid pro quo’ relationship with God: if one is obedient, then God will reward that person.
Even in sermons by Baptist pastor Charles Stanley these days, he emphasizes “being obedient to God,” as though this obedience will guarantee a happy ending, or God will work all things out for the obedient believer – this is implied in Stanley’s teaching on obedience.
Christian females get inundated with messages from Christian sources from their youth on-wards (in sermons, Christian dating books, etc), that staying a virgin (and being “godly” and other criteria) are guarantees that they will receive a spouse from God.
But when we females, who were raised Christian, who stayed virgins and trusted in God for a mate, find ourselves never- married virgins at age 35+, who truly bought into and lived this Christian sexual- and- marriage propaganda, we in turn get these insulting, demeaning, condescending, judgmental, pour- salt- into- the- wound, anti-virginity type lectures from yet other Christians (such as Moore, Kushiner, and Mohler and Maken, who tell us being single and not popping out kids is “sinful”
(Link): see this page for more, there are also other links out there about Mohler and Maken saying singleness = sinful).
It is intellectually dishonest for Moore to paint the young woman’s specific concern (sexual purity) with the overall teaching of redemption, repentance, and salvation.
The young lady letter writer was not questioning if her boyfriend was saved or not, or arguing that fornication keeps a person from being forgiven by God, but she was expressing concern and hurt that he was not a virgin, and virginity is a trait in a potential spouse that is important to her, since it means so much to her, she is still a virgin herself.
The church has really pulled a “bait and switch” on the virgins. Christians tell you when you are ten years old and eating cookies and drinking Kool-Aid in Sunday School classes that sex is for marriage only, and again when you are fifteen, they give you these messages; they imply if you “wait and stay pure,” God will give you a Christian spouse.
When you find yourself still a virgin in your 40s and no spouse on hand, and you see a virgin female being dressed down by a Southern Baptist leader (Moore) in an advice column for lamenting she may not get a virgin spouse, you begin to realize just how false Christian teachings are about sex, marriage, dating, celibacy, and virginity. Ms. Duin was rightfully calling Moore out on his dismal attitudes towards virginity, and Kushiner has the audacity to fault Duin, when he should be on her side. Moore wrote,
- If your future husband is repentant, and forgiven, and yet you are “tortured” by the thoughts of his past, then the issue for you is one of personal pride and a refusal to see oneself as a gospel-forgiven sinner.
Who is Moore to say it’s pride? She sounded more hurt and disappointed than “prideful.” If you are going to tell all virgins every where to stop expecting, or feeling, entitled to a virgin because they are virgins, because hey, we’re all sinners, if not in sexual areas, than at some other issue, what is the point in staying a virgin, then?
If you cite the following reasons: Because God says so; or it’s a pledge we make to God; or our sexuality impacts the community – it is not a personal issue, etc, ring hollow to me. Especially the older I get, these sort of answers sound naive and are not satisfactory.
These types of answers may sound convincing to a fifteen year old, but you are talking to a 40- something who has life experience. It’s very unfair and obnoxious to shame or lecture someone who has walked the walk -stayed a virgin into adulthood- for so many reasons.
Christians, from the time they are kids, are fed this “no sex until marriage” propaganda.
Despite professions by Moore, Kushiner, and other Christians of respect for sexual purity, most Christians do not truly expect anyone to stay a virgin; or, sexual sin is just seen by these types of Christians as no worse than any other sort of sin, so what’s the big deal if some guy sleeps around before marriage.
His fiance’, they feel, should just remember she’s a sinner too, and let it go. And shame, shame on her for having sexual standards and actually doing what the Bible says about sex, and for doing what the stupid church has been preaching at her since she was ten years old.
Do you Christians, or do you not, want people to stay virgins until marriage?
Because you keep saying you do, especially to all the 13 and 20 year olds in the congregation.
But once those kids reach age 35 and are still virgins, you bad mouth them, treat them like weirdos, or shame them for being virgins, and you judge them for rightfully wanting or expecting a virgin to marry – YOU HYPOCRITES.
If you don’t feel a virgin should want another virgin in marriage… If you think it is judgmental or unrealistic of a virgin to want another virgin as a spouse, or… You feel it’s wrong, unloving, or judgmental for a virgin to be upset that their fiance was sticking his penis in other women in years past, while she herself has remained pure, stop presenting virginity, celibacy, and sexual purity as a standard to teens and 20 year old kids, which you do constantly.
Someone who has stayed a virgin into their 20s or beyond has every right to feel cheated, ripped off, and lied to in this area. They have every right to feel angry they may end up marrying a fornicator.
Jesus may forgive all sin, and a virgin may be guilty of non-sexual sin, but to shame a virgin for wanting a virgin in marriage and then pointing to all sin as a reason to dismiss fornication out of hand, is mixing apples and oranges.
Some of this also comes down to personal preferences and personal choice: it just may so happen that virginity is a “top five must have” quality a person is hoping for in a spouse, while “must be a big NASCAR fan” may be a requirement for another person. Neither one is wrong.
Who is Moore to chastise someone who wants quality “X” in a partner?
If the woman who wrote in to Moore does not want to marry a fornicator or is disappointed that he may be one, that is her right, and it is perfectly understandable that she should feel that way. She is not being “prideful” or “sinful” for having preferences, hopes or expectations in that area.
And, these are sexual expectations that people like Moore, preachers, and churches create in young women: you Christians tell females from the time they are children, or it is strongly implied, that if they are chaste and godly, then God will reward them with a virginal male spouse.
(It has not been until later in life I realize that the male Christians don’t get hit as hard with the “stay a virgin until marriage” shtick. Females seem to get hit harder with it.)
Regardless, it is the conservative Christian community, in books, pamphlets, sermons, Sunday School classes and other venues, that tell young girls if they stay virginal, pure, and godly and have faith in the Lord, that they will receive a godly, virginal spouse.
So where in the hell does Moore, or any other Christian, get off for lecturing a 20-something virgin Christian female that she feels let down or frustrated that her finace’ is not also a virgin?
It is the Moores of the world, the conservative Christians, who are creating the expectation among Christian singles that they will get virgin spouses as adults if they remain a virgin.
Then you have the nerve to scold the woman for being angry, disappointed, or hurt that she may not get a virgin, when she herself hung in there and did the right thing? You are an absolute HYPOCRITE.
And not just Moore specifically, but any Christian who does this. It is amazing, the depth of hypocrisy, and the cruelty: some Christians hold ‘virginity until marriage’ up to children and teenagers as the standard to strive for, but when those kids succeed in adhering to that sexual standard, they get treated like absolute trash by the rest of the Christian community for it.
I guess I was not meant to take sexual purity teachings seriously when I was a Christian teenager? The whole thing was one big joke, was it? This comment by Moore:
- Jesus was a virgin. His Bride wasn’t. He loved us anyway.
-makes little sense. While Jesus did not have sexual intercourse while on earth, sexualizing Jesus in that manner is creepy and weird. (Related: (Link): The Sexualization of God and Jesus )
Secondly, yes, some of Christi’s brides are literally virgins, Moore. I am literally a virgin, pal. Don’t mix up your ‘Jesus- as- groom, church- as- bride’ metaphor to say, “Well, no penis has been in your vagina, lady, but I’m sure you’re guilty of some other type of sin, so who cares about your virginity still being intact!”
If my virginity means so little, Moore, than why should I bother staying one? Why should I not go to a bar this weekend and pick up some guy and take him back to a hotel for some casual sex, since Jesus will forgive me of that sin, and according to you, any future spouse should be fine with it, so long as I say to future spouse, “sorry hon, it won’t happen again”?
Telling me that the Bible is ‘anti premarital sex’ is circular reasoning. I already know that teaching is in there, but you’re telling me if I fail at sexual purity teachings, that is peachy fine in the long run, because ‘we are all sinners,’ and ‘Jesus forgives everyone, if you just “repent.”‘
One thing has nothing to do with the other. Me being guilty of sin ‘X’ (say, for example, robbing a bank) does not negate that fact I have not slept around.
— SERIAL KILLERS AND CHILD MOLESTERS and CHOOSING A SPOUSE —-
I have read several news stories over the years of married women who later found out that their spouse was a pedophile, or, one lady found out her husband was a serial killer (the “BTK” killer, and he used to go to church weekly).
Now, according to Moore, and I suppose this James M. Kushiner guy, it would be wrong for such wives to divorce their spouses, or to have issues about it, or a hard time getting past it – Moore would accuse these wives of “being prideful.”
Or, perhaps Moore and Kushiner would think it wrong that a Christian woman has on her “List O’ Traits I Do Want in a Spouse” the following items:
1. Man I marry must not fondle children
2. Man I marry must not murder people Not that I find it terribly relevant, but suppose in our example that one reason these women hold these criteria is that because they themselves had never fondled a child (and never would), and they would never murder people.
And let us further suppose that thus far in life, the women in this example have never murdered or fondled anyone.
According to Moore and Kushiner, because all of us have sinned in one area or another, but probably not in murder or child molesting in particular, we should be totally open to marrying a serial killer or a child molester.
This is very bizarre reasoning. If we balk at this idea, and expect and hope to marry a decent person (i.e., a non- killer, a non- child -molesting man), and the mere thought of child molesting makes us want to barf from disgust or horror, so we’d rather not marry a molester, this means, according to Moore-Kushiner, we are “prideful.”
Or, according to Moore-Kushiner, we do not truly believe that all are sinners, or we do not believe in the Gospel, which entails repentance, forgiveness, and mercy.
This rather reminds me of the stupid, unbiblical, dangerous attitudes by Neo Calvinists and other groups of Christians who often hide, cover up, or excuse child sexual abuse in churches, or spousal abuse among church members.
Such groups teach and believe that because ALL of us are sinners, that nobody has a right to confront another professing believer, or to hold him accountable for his or her sin, not even the guilty wife beater or child molester in the pew. All sins are not equal.
Every one may be a sinner, according to the Bible, but it does not follow that stealing a ball point pen from your office job is on par with a man who rapes a three year old child. One action is clearly more reprehensible than the other.
Even Jesus Christ acted as though sins against children were worse than those against adults, and Christ seemed especially angry at ruling elites who ignored or took advantage of the lower class (widows, the “unclean,” etc).
Jesus did not equate the sins of the prostitutes to that of the Pharisees, and say they were ‘equally bad.’ Christ did not let the Pharisees off because, “Hey, you Pharisee guys are sinners just like the prostitutes are – your sins may be pride, and not sexual, but hey, all sin is alike, so I’ll let your infractions slide.”
Jesus did not let sexual sin off the hook either; he told the woman caught in adultery not to do it again.
While it is true that God is willing to forgive a person’s sin, and as I’ve said in previous posts, while I do not advocate the church line fornicators up and bash them in the head with rocks until they die, I am quite appalled at the “easy forgivism” of sexual sin I see among Christians these days.
This whole idea that all sins are equal, so Christians should be all lovey, overlook them, and excuse them (“if the person repents”), is what is contributing to an explosion of sexual sin among Christians.
The increase in Christian sexual sin is not, contrary to the Christian shows and blogs, due to factors such as readily- available, online pornography, but that Christians have become too lax regarding sexual sin, just like Moore has in his reply to the young, virginal Christian woman who wrote it him for advice.
Daniel in the Old Testament was shipped off to a foreign, pagan culture and despite being surrounded by sinful people and sinful practices day and night, chose to remain pure, and he succeeded. Same is true of Joseph who was made a slave in Egypt.
So I don’t buy into the common argument, “Christian men are surrounded by porn all day, they can’t help but get hooked!”
No, they most certainly can help it and control it – they choose to get hooked and to stay hooked.
Getting back to Moore’s incorrect point that it’s wrong or sinful for a virgin to desire to marry a fellow virgin: I do not care if a man has repented of child molesting and child raping, I most certainly would not ignore that information and marry him anyway.
I have never molested or raped a child in my life, nor would I ever. I think, therefore, that I have a reasonable right and expectation that I get a spouse who is not a child rapist or molester.
Moore would disagree with me on that score, and would think it makes me “prideful” not to consider marriage to a child rapist. I see that situation as being somewhat parallel to a virgin not feeling right about marrying a fornicator.
On a side note, it would probably also disturb Christians of Moore’s ilk, and the marriage guru Mark Gungor, that I also would not marry a fat, ugly man, either, even if that fat, ugly man was the world’s most devout Christian, who reads the Bible daily and who rescues kittens from trees.
My standards are what they are. (Read more about that here: (Link): The Right One – Do Unmarried Christians Only Need Jesus in Common to Marry ?)
It is so dishonest for Christians to keep lecturing other Christians, when they are young, that sex is for marriage only, but when those same Christians get past their teen years and 20s, and only doing what they were told by their preachers and Christian literature in regards to sex, by abstaining from it, they then get shamed or dressed down for wanting or expecting a virgin as a spouse. It’s amazing.
If you are a Christian young person reading this:
Your preacher, and other Christian sources will tell you fornication is a sin. But if you hold out and stay a virgin into your 30s, they will shame you or tell you that you are a sinner for wanting a virgin as a spouse.
Even though you walked the walk and carried out virginity, you’re supposed to be totally open and accepting of marrying a fornicator, just because he or she claims to have “repented” of it.
It’s a double standard, and it makes the church’s teaching on purity irrelevant. You may as well start having sex before marriage, because, according to the Moores of the world (who pay but lip service to purity), your future spouse should be willing to marry you even though you’ve already had sex.
And despite the fact a lot of Christian dating, sex, and marriage material implies if you stay a virgin until marriage that
1. God will send you a spouse, that spouse will also be a virgin and 2. the sex will be great
That is all false advertising, which I’ve blogged about before. Here are just a few of the many posts I’ve written about these Christian fables about sex, dating, marriage:
The end lesson learned: if you decide to have pre-marital sex, and it must be your decision, to not let a boyfriend pressure you into it – the church does not care; Douglass and Moore will tell you it’s fine and understandable, because your future spouse should not expect you to be a virgin, and nobody can resist sex forever. So go ahead and have pre-marital sex.
Remember (according to Moore and Kushiner), if you believe the Bible’s teachings about virginity, and you have lived them out (you are still a virgin in your 30s or older), you have (according to Moore and other Christians), made virginity into an idol.
(According to Moore and Kushiner) If you are literally a virgin and feel worthy of another virgin, or would prefer a virgin for a partner you also have rejected the Bible’s teaching on grace and salvation. So fornication is okay, and it is not to be judged or held against anyone.
- Go ahead and have sex before marriage.
Out of one side of their mouths, Christians will feel obliged to write in their blogs, “Of course people should wait until marriage to have sex, virginity is great!,” but then, moments into the same conversation or article, you will inevitably get the attitudes and comments that completely, or about completely, negate the previous reassurances that the author support biblical sexual purity. The attitudes and comments typically consist of (and some of these are based on falsehoods),
1. -“well, every one is boinking these days; nobody is sexually pure anymore,”
2. -“nobody can resist sex for more than a week ! It would take someone with supernatural superpowers granted by God, via the ‘Gift of Celibacy’ to resist sex! No mere mortal can resist sex for more than three seconds!!”
3. -“gosh, these sexual purity teachings are so shaming and hurtful to some people, so let’s stop supporting them,”
4. – “golly, it’s so judgmental for Christians who have literally stayed virgins to express disappointment, anger, or confusion that the rest of the Christian culture is not supporting them, or not supporting and defending teachings of purity anymore… let’s shame and judge the virgins for being upset over not getting a virgin spouse,” and,
5. – “we’re all sinners, maybe not at sex, but at something else, so let’s just lower the bar in the sex area and not be so hard on fornication”
Yeah, everything on that list essentially cancels out your, “oh, but I do agree the Bible is against fornication, really I do, honest” commentary.
Christians are entirely too soft and lukewarm regarding sexual sin. Christians who murder other people are still expected to pay a penalty in this life: which may be a life sentence in jail, or the death penalty under secular authorities.
Someone like Moore would probably say, “Now now, let’s forgive the murderer! We’re all sinners. Let him repent, and if he repents, then let him off death row.”
There is no accountability in Christianity today in regards to sexual sin; there is no fall out or reprcussion by the larger body over sexual sin.
Apostle Paul, if I remember right (see (Link): 1 Corinthians 5), told a church to kick out a man from their midst, to turn him over to Satan, who was having sex with his step-mother.
Paul did not reason with these church members, “Well guys, he’s a sinner too, but then so are all of you, so don’t correct the guy; leave him be. So long as he says, ‘sorry’ let him continue on.”
If it’s unrealistic or ‘prideful’ for me to expect, want, or hope for a virgin as a spouse, conversely, you’re telling me it’s equally unrealistic or ‘prideful’ for the the man who marries me to expect me to still be a virgin: you, my friend, have just given me a free pass to start fornicating with impunity, all your “oh no, really, I think the Bible is anti fornication, your body belongs to God” type comments to the contrary.
Not that I need another Christian’s permission or approval to start sleeping around, but I am pointing out that these ‘easy forgivism,’ “or God has grace on us, let us too have grace towards others in sexual sin” types have left me with no solid, compelling reason to stay a virgin.
Cue also my previous post about Christian bimbos: people who said in televised interviews on Christian shows they were Christians, who knew fornicating was wrong, did so anyway, they whored around – but later still got great spouses, are living the American dream.
All the evangelical and fundamentalist boogie-men about, “oh, if you have sex before marriage you will get genital crabs and STDs, no man will ever want you, you will have hang ups” did not come true for these Christian fornicators!
There is no penalty for fornication from God or church. There is no incentive from God or church to stay a virgin.
And these Moore guys, and his defenders, such as Kushiner, who keep writing these blogs and articles criticizing adult virgins for being virgins, and/or for expecting other Christians to hold to the same level of sexual purity (and essentially, that is what he was doing), are further knocking down any incentive or reason for me and other virgins to hold on to sexual purity.
From Jan 1, 2015:
I’m not sure when he blocked me, but it was sometime over 2014. What a douche nozzle.
Other related posts, this blog:
(Link): Preacher Mark Driscoll Disparages Virgins and Virginity (Again) – The Feelings of Fornicators Always Take Precedence With the Anti-Purity Culture, Anti-Slut- Shaming, and Pro- Cheap Grace Crowd