The Real Bully: Not Tolerating and Misrepresenting Trump Voters and All Who Are Concerned About Islamic Terrorism Via Refugee Programs

The Real Bully: Not Tolerating and Misrepresenting Trump Voters and All Who Are Concerned About Islamic Terrorism Via Refugee Programs

The woman whose blog post I am addressing is guilty of the very things she accuses others of. The irony.

I am not positive, but I believe the following was written by the same woman who I had to un-follow or mute on Twitter over her non-stop ‘Never Trump’ ranting several months ago (and/or she Tweeted me several times disagreeing with my links to news stories about Islamic refugees who had raped women or killed people). (I believe she is on Twitter here (Link): @MYsongofpraise )

April 8, 2016 , UPDATE

As of a few moments ago, “@MYsongofpraise” blocked me on Twitter. LOL. My goodness.

I think I had her on mute myself, or else unfollowed her, but I didn’t block her. But she has blocked me from following her Twitter tonight.

I cannot grasp the mentality: she feels that Trump is a bully, but she uses her blog and Twitter account to bully anyone who voted for Trump, or who is not naive about Islamic migration and Muslim refugees (as she is).

I called her out on all that via this blog post (which I shared on Twitter, and just a few minutes ago on Twitter), and she must have just seen one of my Tweets, because she only just blocked me a few moments ago.

// end update

I am neither strongly for or against Trump.

I did not like Trump’s sexist comments or behavior, as reported in the media. I do think that gender complementarian Christians should have spoken out more forcefully against Trump’s sexism than they did.

In my view, some who support Trump go over board, but then, so do people who are opposed to Trump.

You have Trump supporters who get vitriolic over the mildest criticisms of Trump or his policies, and they seem to feel Trump is the second coming of Jesus and can walk on water and do no wrong.

On the other hand, Liberal Anti- Trumpers and conservative Never Trumpers are equally bad, but in the opposite direction – they behave as though Trump is the reincarnation of Hitler, which he is most certainly not (and the non-stop comparisons by them of Trump to Hitler cheapens the horror of the Holocaust).

Here is the person and blog post I am responding to (I will include excerpts from the post further below):

(Link): Watchblogging and #evangelicalbetrayal – from the “On Hope” blog, the URL contains the phrase “atckmelodythoughts”

The individual who is behind that blog post – I shall refer to her as “Hope” (is her name Melody?) – describes herself as a moderate conservative.

If I remember correctly, and unless I am confusing her with another person, I followed “Hope” on Twitter several months ago ((Link): @MYsongofpraise ) ) but had to un-follow her, as she is a rabid Never-Trumper. The frequent anti-Trump rants, and their companion worst-case assumptions of Trump supporters or Trump voters, got tiresome to read.

This blogger is (again, assuming this is the same person I encountered on Twitter months ago), very naive concerning Islamic-motivated terrorism in Western nations.

She’s the sort who wants Americans (and others) willy nilly accepting refugees from Islamic nations, without seemingly caring about the possible negative ramifications involved.

She thinks it’s mean, cruel, or un-Christlike to exercise caution and prudence into accepting migrants, refugees, and immigrants into one’s nation. We’re supposed to allow touchie-feelie, bleeding heart sentiments over-ride caution and good sense in regards to national security.

Continue reading “The Real Bully: Not Tolerating and Misrepresenting Trump Voters and All Who Are Concerned About Islamic Terrorism Via Refugee Programs”

Too Cool for School: The Ex, Quasi, or Liberal Christians (and Atheists) Who Think Their Snarkiness Against Christians Makes Them Clever (But It Doesn’t)

Too Cool for School: The Ex, Quasi, or Liberal Christians (and Atheists) Who Think Their Snarkiness Against Christians Makes Them Clever (But It Doesn’t)

This post contains some vulgar language.

edited to add: I’ve already been told by two different people that this post is too long. Sorry, being concise has never been a talent of mine.

Someone also informed me that this blog post of mine has been linked to at a sub thread on Reddit (Link): here / on (Link): Reason and Faith on Reddit

Someone in that Reddit thread thinks my title of this post is “an atrocity,” but I feel it pretty much accurately sums up what I’ve seen online the last decade or more


In my faith crisis of the last few years, I’ve visited more sites, blogs, groups, and forums that are critical of Christians or Christianity. I sometimes find myself agreeing with some of their criticisms of evangelical, Protestant Christianity (sometimes not).

One of the recurrent tendencies that crops up in such blogs, forums, and groups that disturbs or annoys me  (or has me doing a lot of eye rolls) are that many of the people who post to these types of groups act as though they are Too Cool for School.

Continue reading “Too Cool for School: The Ex, Quasi, or Liberal Christians (and Atheists) Who Think Their Snarkiness Against Christians Makes Them Clever (But It Doesn’t)”

Jezebel Site and xoJane Site: Pot Meet Kettle – On Supporting All Women’s Voices

Jezebel Site and xoJane Site: Pot Meet Kettle – On Supporting All Women’s Voices

I saw this paragraph or so in (Link): an article on Jezebel’s site (by S. Edwards; title: “xoJane Publishes Terrible Article By a Woman Who’s Glad Her Friend Died, Then Deletes Her Byline“):

  • It’s a well-known fact that outrageous confessionals—the kind that populate xoJane’s section, It Happened to Me — garner traffic. Outrage, disgust and anger are the stuff of going viral (a phrase that conjures up disease as much as anything else). Yet xoJane seems to consistently cross an unspoken line, confusing any woman’s opinion as one inherently worth publishing, no matter the opinion, or its costs.

Continue reading “Jezebel Site and xoJane Site: Pot Meet Kettle – On Supporting All Women’s Voices”

Mommy Blogger Confesses in Blog Post that Mommy Blogging is a Bunch of Fake, Happy-Clappy B.S. – Kind of Like Most Christian Adult Singleness Blogs

Mommy Blogger Confesses in Blog Post that Mommy Blogging is a Bunch of Fake, Happy-Clappy B.S. – Kind of Like Most Christian Adult Singleness Blogs

I first got wind of this story via SCCL Facebook group ((Link): Conversation about this topic at SCCL FB Group).

A link to a news article about the Mommy Blogger is much farther below. I wanted to say a few things before getting to the article.

The (ex?) mommy blogger in question, Josi Denise, says in one of her blog posts that a lot of mommy blogging is fake and too happy-clappy.

Denise’s critique of Mommy Blogging is reminiscent of my views on blogs or magazine articles by Christians pertaining to adult singleness, which you can read here:

I find that a lot of Christian-written material for adult singles is too sickeningly sweet.

There is an absence in most Christian-penned material for singles that honestly, really gets into and grapples with, how hard, painful, or disappointing it can be to be single into your 30s and older, when you had really expected or had hoped to marry.

Continue reading “Mommy Blogger Confesses in Blog Post that Mommy Blogging is a Bunch of Fake, Happy-Clappy B.S. – Kind of Like Most Christian Adult Singleness Blogs”

This Blog’s Most Popular Posts of 2015 (according to Word Press)

This Blog’s Most Popular Posts of 2015

The folks at Word Press sent me an e-mail with a link to an annual report about this blog.

It seems like everyone and his grandma who blogs is making a post like this one, so I figured, why not.

Here are a few of the things that the review says about this blog:

Continue reading “This Blog’s Most Popular Posts of 2015 (according to Word Press)”

A Response To J D Hall’s Vomit-tastic Post about Village Church’s Handling of Certain Members, Covenants, and Marriages

A Response To J D Hall’s Vomit-tastic Post about Village Church’s Handling of Certain Members, Covenants, and Marriages 

Before we get to the post by J D Hall:

Background:

  • The Village Church (TVC) of Texas has placed Karen, who was once a member of theirs, under church discipline because she did not, according to them, abide by the church covenant she signed.
  • Instead of conferring with the church on what to do, Karen, on her own, sought an annulment from the state of Texas, once she discovered her then-spouse, Jordan, was a pedophile.
  • Karen said she spent about 50 days conferring with other Christians (not from the TVC), and in prayer, mulling over what to do, before seeking the annulment.
  • This action of hers has ticked off TVC leadership, because Karen did not get their permission to get the annulment.
  • Matt Chandler is the lead preacher of TVC.

You can read additional reporting of this situation here (additional material is at the bottom of this post):

Here is the page I am responding to:

(Link, off site): A Rational Response to the Criticism of Village Church  by  J D Hall, Pulpit and Pen blog

The covenant that Hall is so rigorously defending – TVC’s membership covenant – here does not even mention annulments.

As Karen explains (off site Link, Source):

  • …it is worth noting here that although The Village Church claims [in their e-mail] that “We see an annulment as a subcategory of what Scripture defines as a divorce in Mark 10:9” …, this cannot be found anywhere in their Membership Covenant or Bylaws.
  • In signing their Membership Covenant shortly after my 24th birthday, I had agreed to nothing in regards to the possibility of annulment should I come to realize that my marriage had been a complete sham from the beginning.
  • There is a vast difference between a divorce and a marriage that is voided on the grounds of fraud, and I had no way of knowing that the leadership of The Village Church would respond to it in this fashion.

Continue reading “A Response To J D Hall’s Vomit-tastic Post about Village Church’s Handling of Certain Members, Covenants, and Marriages”

Some Christians Have Some Very Strange, Unsettling, Creepy, or Authoritarian Ideas About Marriage, Divorce, or Mate Selection – and they think they should make your life choices for you

Some Christians Have Some Very Strange, Unsettling,  Creepy, or Authoritarian Ideas About Marriage, Divorce, or Mate Selection – and they think they should make your life choices for you

This isn’t a post I want to spend a lot of time on.

I was planning on maybe later doing a post about the church – Village Church – who has put a Christian wife, Karen, into discipline because she anulled her marriage to her spouse, Jordan Root, as soon as she discovered he was a pedophile.

Root admitted to being a pedophile, according to different sources I read.

Root was not only using child porn, but if I remember right, some sources say he admitted to his wife he molested two young girls.

You can read more about that story here (post on Watchkeep blog):

(Link): She Speaks: The Village Church protects a confessed pedophile and “disciplines” his wife, a brave young woman and missionary

Most women would in fact dump a husband the moment they learned their spouse is a pedophile, and most normal fathers of those women would want their daughter to dump their pedo husband pronto.

But not the fathers and other men of Village Church, oh no.

Yes, as if all that is not bad enough, there are a bunch of screw ball and naive Christians on social media scolding Karen for leaving her spouse – they keep insisting it was wrong for her to divorce the man (she got an annulment, not a divorce).
Some Christians want to treat you as though you are a five year old child, incapable of making choices for yourself, and they even want to exert this control over your marital status.
These control freak Christians believe they or their church should be able to call the shots and tell you who, when, or if you marry, or when or how or if you may divorce.
It’s utterly insane and very creepy and highly unbiblical.
There are Christians who apparently feel it is wrong for a person to divorce another person for any reason, or even in the extreme case of pedophilia.

I have noticed that some Christians have some very shoddy ideas of mate selection, or reasons they feel a person can divorce, that border on the absurd.

Take this, for example:

Yes, that thar is an example of Christian men who think Christian single women should marry a male Christian pornography user or addict, even if  those things are personal deal breakers for the women in question, and all to bolster the falling marriage rate among Christians.

That Christian sociologist, Regnerus, wants women to set aside their right to make their choices for their own lives, in who they marry, to satisfy his and evangelical Christianity’s preferences and insecurities.

It’s none of this joker’s business if you decide to forgo marrying a Christian porn user.

Next up, we have this lunacy, Christians who think Christian singles should marry Muslims in order to bridge a gap between Muslims and Christians:

Then there was this July 2012 headline from (Link): The Wartburg Watch blog:

  • The Real Doug Wilson Encouraged & Presided Over the Marriage of Serial Pedophile

In that case, we have preachers or Christian personalities encouraging young, single Christian women to marry known pedophiles, and one even presided over the marriage of a pedophile to a woman.

 In regards to the situation of The Village Church, where a lady named Karen left her spouse Jordan, who admitted being a pedophile:

Then there’s insanity such as this (link to Tweet):

(Tweet by) JB @tallangrybob

A response to that:

(Tweet by) Dee Parsons (Link):

  •  We should all marry pedophiles and prostitutes ala Hosea. Great TVC exegesis.

First of all, the New Testament says it is actually better to stay single than to marry (see (link): 1 Corinthians 7).

Secondly, God permits divorce in both the Old and New Testaments:

  • Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. (Matthew 19)

Churches may not like divorce. You personally reading this may not like divorce. But the fact is, God allows people to get divorces.

God permits divorce not just in cases of adultery, but in other cases as well:

You know, part of me would still like to marry one day, but I see the utter nonsense, or weirdness, or horrifying legalism some Christians insist other Christians should live through marriage-wise, and I am so glad I have never married.

From Christians expecting Christian women to marry pornography addicts, pedophiles, and Muslims, to Christians who say Christian women cannot or should not divorce pedophiles or abusers, there seems to be no end to the heavy yokes and bondage some Christians and churches want to place on women.

Jesus would not have approved of any of it.

I think a lot of these Christians and churches care more about the institution of marriage, or how the world perceives their churches, than they do in how women are treated.

A clue that Christians have turned marriage into an idol is that it is obvious they care more about a couple maintaining an empty, hollow, shell of a marriage, to keep up appearances with the world, or within their own culture, than they do the welfare of the people in said marriage.

As far as equally yoked teachings are concerned, I am convinced now more than ever that character matters more than religious self identity; if I ever come across a smart, cute, atheist who treats me well, I would marry him in a heart beat, not Mr. “I Molest Children” Christian, or Mr. “I Think It’s OK For Me To Abuse Any Wife Of Mine” Christian, or Mr. “I Look At Porn All Day” Christian.

If you are a single Christian woman contemplating marriage: be very cautious. First, don’t let these Christian writers and preachers advise you who to marry. Determine for yourself who you want to marry.

Secondly, be aware that if you marry a pervert or abuser, most churches are going to expect you to stay with the creep, no matter what. Most churches are very keen on keeping even the most abusive marriages intact, because they believe divorce is the unpardonable sin and sets a bad example.

Most churches will not care about you, your welfare, or your mental or physical health if you are in an abusive marriage, or some other kind of troubled marriage – all they care about is shaming and guilt tripping you into staying with your loser of a spouse, should you marry a loser.

———————–

Related Posts:

(Link):  Stupid Things Naive Christians Say (About Adultery, Divorce) from Divorce Minister Blog

(Link): Divorce. Unpardonable sin? (from CWO) / How Churches Fail the Divorced (article)

Celibacy is Not Just for Homosexuals or Roman Catholic Priests / and a critique of a post at another blog

Celibacy is Not Just for Homosexuals or Roman Catholic Priests / and a critique of a post at another blog

I will start this post out in general terms and then proceed to offer a critique of a post by John Morgan, so excerpts from his post will be much farther below.

It appears to me that the Bible says that sex is reserved for married couples, with marriage being defined by Jesus Christ as being between one man and one woman.

When responding to a question about marriage by religious critics, Jesus referred back to Adam and Eve in the Garden, pointing out that it was God’s original intent for marriage to be comprised of one man, one woman.

However, it appears that many people associate the practice of, or the word, “Celibacy” with only homosexual singles these days, and for hundreds of years, with Roman Catholic priests.

I’ve seen several articles where some Roman Catholics are asking their church to repeal the celibacy requirement from priests.

Here are some examples of the recent discussion of celibacy in regards to homosexuality:

(Link):  Number of celibate gay Christians rises in traditional churches

(Link): Growing movement of gay Christians choosing celibacy

(Link):  Gay Christians choosing celibacy

(Link): Gay, Celibate, Christian?

(Link):  FDA Favors Year Of Celibacy Rule For Gay Male Donors

I follow the conservative blog “Hot Air” on Twitter. Hot Air moderators recently posted a blog page about celibate homosexuals. Here it is,

(Link): Gay Christians choosing celibacy emerge from the shadows – from Hot Air’s blog

I have more to say about this Hot Air article farther below.

At any rate. Since so many homosexuals claim they were born homosexual and cannot change their sexual orientation, I proposed over a year ago, before the “celibacy” topic became popular in various news outlets, that homosexual Christians practice celibacy.

I think it is a workable compromise: if you have homosexual leanings, feel attracted to the same gender, I don’t think that means you have to act upon sexual urges.

I have no idea why this idea would be considered controversial, but according to several news articles I have read, it is in fact considered a controversial idea among Christians, heterosexuals, and homosexuals.

I do not see why, as HETEROsexuals are also commanded by the Bible to remain celibate, unless they are married to an opposite gender person; people are permitted, by God, teaches the Bible, to have sex with their opposite gender partner, but in no other circumstances.

Lifelong celibacy is NOT impossible.

For example, see this post on this blog:

(Link): Typical Erroneous Teaching About Adult Celibacy Rears Its Head Again: To Paraphrase Speaker at Ethics and Public Policy Center: Lifelong Celibacy is “heroic ethical standard that is not expected of heteros, so it should not be expected of homosexuals” (ie, it’s supposedly an impossible feat for any human being to achieve)

Lifelong celibacy can be difficult at times, yes, but not impossible, yet many Christians keep depicting a life without sex as being a Herculean task only a tiny few are capable of, because, they wrongly assume, God sprinkles magic dust on celibate singles to remove sexual desire. This is false.

Celibates still experience sexual urges and desires and attraction, they simply choose not to act upon those feelings or attractions.

When married people are apart, they are expected, by the Bible, to abstain from sex.

Continue reading “Celibacy is Not Just for Homosexuals or Roman Catholic Priests / and a critique of a post at another blog”