views and thoughts on topics, especially ones pertaining to christianity – with an emphasis on how most christians either ignore or discriminate against unmarried christians – and how christians have turned marriage and parenting into IDOLS and how there is no true support for sexual purity, virginity, or celibacy among christians – this is a blog for me to vent; I seldom permit dissenting views. I don't debate dissenters ————-
Mutual Exclusivity on Social Issues by Liberals, Atheists, and Some Moderate Christians
Over the past two years on twitter (and on some blogs), I keep seeing some people – usually liberals, but sometimes atheists and moderate Christians – engage in this game of mutual exclusivity as concerning social issues.
They also seem to have a blind spot or two. They will point out the “sins” committed by Christians, Republicans, or conservatives all damn day long, but then ignore those very same sins when committed by liberals, Democrats, or Muslims, atheists – or whatever other special interest groups they usually pander to.
For example, if you speak out in concern against CIS men using transgender bathroom policies to rape CIS women, trans-activists will say you should be more concerned about churches who harbor child sex abusers.
I think I may have addressed that argument in this post:
The fact that so many churches harbor child rapists, or handle child sex cases improperly, does not automatically make it acceptable to allow CIS men into women’s bathrooms or locker rooms under the guise of being “trans friendly.”
The two are separate topics.
Therefore, I am against this argument from some people that everyone should be more, or only, concerned about child safety at churches than they should be with child welfare at public rest-rooms or public fitting rooms.
It is not a mutually exclusive concept.
An individual can be concerned about CIS men exploiting trans-friendly bathroom rules to rape CIS women, and that same individual can also be concerned about predators using churches to victimize children.
Yes, it’s possible to care about more than one issue at a time.
The Marginalization of the Average Joe and Practice of Selective Compassion by Christian and Secular Americans
I think conservative writer Ann Coulter’s editorial about Christians who shuffle off to assist ebola patients in Africa – which got her all sorts of vitriol by both left and right wingers, Christians and Non Christians – has been proven right.
After American, caucasian movie actor Robin Williams died from suicide a few days ago, on the one hand, there was, yes, a lot of sympathy and sadness expressed for him and his family online in the days that followed, as it should be.
But there were also some very insulting, unsympathetic views published, and at that, based on William’s skin color or his mental health problems, not only by guys like Bill McNorris and Christian Matt Walsh, but by atheist writer P Z Myers.
As far as I can tell, the Bible does not adhere to the concept of “privilege” as believed by liberals. The American progressives harping on “privilege” causes them to refuse to show care and concern for the groups they believe to be in power.
Jesus Christ taught that people’s sins comes from their hearts (from within), not from their environment, and he did not endorse the view that because you or your group has been systematically mistreated or oppressed at the hands of another group, that this excuses your sin, or makes it acceptable for you to hate your oppressor, or for you to refuse to show compassion to that group.
In Jesus’ day, ancient Israel was ruled first and foremost by the ancient Romans, and on a lesser level, by the religious ruling class (the priests and Pharisees).
A lot of American liberals will say it’s impossible for an American woman to be considered sexist, or for female dislike of men to be considered sexist, because men in American society hold all the power. They will say that because whites held all the power in the USA, that one cannot consider a black person’s prejudices against whites a form of racism.
Then we also get into the identity politics and hate crime laws, where liberals believe that someone should receive a harsher, or specific charge of hate, for, say, mugging someone in a certain group that they consider unprivileged.
For example, a crime that is motivated by hatred of skin color, where a white guy punches a black guy in the face, is supposed to be worse than, say, a white guy punching another white guy. A guy murdering someone who happens to be homosexual is supposed to be a hate crime, but the same act is not considered a hate crime if a homosexual or heterosexual murders a heterosexual guy.
I have never understood these positions, because, for one reason of a few, it doesn’t square with the Bible.
Jesus never once taught the Jews of his day that it’s okay for them to hate the Romans, nor did he excuse their dislike of the Romans, on the premise that the Romans held all the “privilege” or “power.”
Liberty Counsel Fears Prom, Losing Freedom To Be Abstinent Before Marriage – their marketing has been jeered by ex Christians, atheists, liberal Christians, and secular left wingers
A few ex Christian, atheist, and liberal Christian sites, which tend to frown on the concept of staying a virgin until marriage, yukked it up over this story, which seems to have first been reported by a secular left wing site; here is the story from that left wing site (I have several observations below the long excerpt):
SUBMITTED BY Brian Tashman on Monday, 2/3/2014 12:45 pm
As Valentine’s Day approaches, the conservative activists at Liberty Counsel are once again promoting the competing “Day of Purity,” an opportunity for those “who strive for sexual purity an opportunity to stand together in opposition to a culture of moral decline.”
Liberty Counsel’s previous attempt to make the Day of Purity cool for kids, a video featuring “Purity Bear,” has unfortunately been removed from YouTube following widespread Internet mockery (but can still be found on (Link): Vimeo).
Now, the group is trying to make abstinence-only-before-marriage hip by calling it the “politically incorrect” (Link): [PDF] thing to do. In a handout (Link): [PDF] about the event, Liberty Counsel even makes the absurd claim that supporters of abstinence before marriage are losing their “right to speak and be heard.”
[ ———- START of LIBERTY COUNSEL QUOTE ——- ]
Defending your rights and the rights of others to express their beliefs and act in accordance with those rights.
There are those in today’s culture that are trying to silence those who believe that sex should be saved until marriage between a husband and a wife.
They say they want tolerance and diversity, but what they really want is to silence anyone who believes in traditional values and traditional family. You have the right to speak and be heard.
Be mature and speak out for what you know is right and true.
[ ———- END of LIBERTY COUNSEL QUOTE ——- ]
We are not exactly sure where it is now a criminal act to be abstinent or to encourage others to be abstinent.
Maybe in the same jurisdictions where Liberty Counsel attorney Matt Barber fears he may soon be forced to choose between participating in gay marriage and death.
Liberty Counsel has more fun tips for the Day of Purity, including a “True Friend” guide [PDF] that warns against maintaining friendships with people who do “not share the same value system.” The group also offers great some great prom theme ideas (Link): [PDF], such as “Chlamydia”:
[photo of couple holding hands with the words “Chlamydia. It Ruins Prom.” in big letters]
[ ———- END of LEFT WING EDITORIAL ——- ] The post also included a few images, which this left wing site made fun of, such as this one (to the right):
I am of two minds about this.
I do think that a lot of Christians and social conservatives are heavy-handed or ridiculous in how they market their message of sexual purity.
I also think a lot of conservative Christians over-play the supposed benefits of marriage and married sex, such as frequently making claims such as, “married sex will be mind blowing, so wait for marriage to have sex!,” or, “married sex keeps you from other sexual sin.”
Obviously, neither claim is true. See examples (Link): here or (Link): here.
I also think some Christian propaganda, which promises stuff like lasting emotional scars, herpes, HIV, and genital crabs, etc, for having pre- marital sex, can be bunk (see (Link): this post). Sometimes, yes, people do get emotional damage or diseases from pre marital sex, but not always.
I also think sometimes it can be bunk to teach, as Christians do, that having pre-marital sex will keep you from nabbing a great spouse later in life (see (Link): this post). Goodness knows being a virgin past your 30s is not a guarantee God will send you a spouse – it didn’t work for me.
Which is not to say that every one gets away with pre- marital sex or casual sex scot-free, because they don’t always (see (Link): this post for examples).
On the other hand, I wonder about the atheist, liberal, emergent, and ex Christian sites (such as the (Link): Friendly Atheist blog, (Link): SCCL (Stuff Christian Culture Likes), etc) which made fun of the message behind the hammy Liberty Counsel purity advertisements.
I did see at least one or two people in the SCCL thread on Facebook (link above) remark they see nothing wrong with staying abstinent, if one chooses to.
Okay, so far, so good.
But at least one or two people on that same thread (or a previous, similar one) said, “People still do that? Who does that?!?!?!? [that = staying a virgin until marriage]”
Yes, some people “still do that.”
There are people who are indeed Christians who are virgins who are over 30, 35, 40 years of age, and these are Baptists and Protestants, not Catholics who took a vow of celibacy.
It’s remarkable, really; many of the types of people who post on SCCL, just like feminist site “Jezebel,” as I have written of before, expect people to respect all manner of sexuality, from homosexuality to transgenderism, but very few of them support the choice by people, especially heteros, to abstain from sexual activity until marriage.