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 ————-
“She made the courageous decision to choose life, and she definitely should not be shamed,” said Kristan Hawkins, the Students for Life president, who tried unsuccessfully to persuade the administrator of Heritage Academy to reverse the decision. “There has got to be a way to treat a young woman who becomes pregnant in a graceful and loving way.”
…Runkles’ story sheds light on a delicate issue: how Christian schools, which advocate abstinence until marriage, treat pregnant students.
…Navigating that balance is exceedingly difficult for Christian educators, and schools respond in various ways, said Rick Kempton, chairman of the board of the Association of Christian Schools International, which represents about 3,000 schools in the United States and many others overseas.
“There’s a biblical term that many Christian schools use, and it is the whole idea of grace: What would Jesus do?” Kempton said. Of Runkles, he added: “She’s making the right choice. But you don’t want to create a celebration that makes other young ladies feel like, ‘Well, that seems like a pretty good option.’”
…In 2009, the National Association of Evangelicals, drawing on figures from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, reported that 80 percent of young evangelicals engaged in premarital sex. A spokeswoman for the evangelical group said its own research, however, suggested that the figure was much lower.
Slightly more than half of women who have abortions — 54 percent — identify as Christians, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that tracks abortion policy.
Porn Star Angers Churchgoers by Declaring She Is An Evangelical Christian And God Sees Nothing Wrong With Her Work
Talk about making God into your own image.
Some time ago, I posted a link to (Link): an editorial by a Christian sociologist who says Christian single women should not omit men based on the men’s use of porn – he says single women should marry men who use pornography.
Well, then, if a lot of Christian women suddenly started appearing in porn, would this same sociologist tell Christian single men that this should not be a deal breaker?
Would he advise single males that they should go ahead and marry women who appear in porn films?
Granted, there are a lot of perverted Christian men out there who would likely find the idea of marrying a porn film actress a turn-on, but for the tiny portion of those Christian men who actually take the faith seriously, I would assume that the idea of marrying a woman who screwed around a lot, and for money for movies, is a nauseating idea.
Complementarian and Pro Family Values Christians Claim to be Pro Woman and Pro Family But By Their Actions Show They Are Not
Complementarians claim to be respectful of women, but their theological views help to enable mistreatment of women and bar women from taking positions and roles that should go to them, if they have the skills, talents, and education.
Many Christians claim to be pro “Family Values” but in reality treat children and women (you know, who tend to be parts of families) like dirt.
Here are some posts explaining in detail or giving examples:
And by way of WW – that is (Link): Wartburg Watch – (from a February 2017 post entitled, “Ignite: Remove Alleged Rapist, Ben Roethlisberger, and Joe White, Who Is Being Sued for Child Sex Abuse Cover Up, From the Speaker Lineup!”)
Christian Liberty University is holding something called “Ignite,” which pertains to advocating godly manhood or family values, or some such. One of Ignite’s scheduled speakers is a guy named Ben Roethlisberger, who is accused of rape by at least three different women. The guy is, or was, a football player.
A sub-heading on the WW page reads: “The troubling history of rape allegations against Ben Roethlisberger”
The WW blog owners in turn link to this page in their post about this guy here:
American Christians, Liberals, Liberal Pet Groups, and Persecution
(This post has been edited and updated, especially towards the bottom, to add more commentary or links)
For about the past year, I have thinking about blogging about this topic but put it off until now.
I have seen liberal Christians, ex-Christians, left wing Non-Christians, and moderately conservative Christians complain or mock American Christians who claim that American Christians are being persecuted in the United States due to being Christian.
In the past, I’ve seen liberal Christian blogger RHE (Rachel Held Evans) comment on this subject on her blog, on her Twitter account, as well as the Liberal, quasi- Christian, Stephanie Drury bring this up on her (Link): “Stuff Christian Culture Likes” Facebook group from time to time.
I’ve also seen moderately conservative Christians I am acquainted with discuss this in Tweets or on their blogs.
To reiterate a point I’ve made before, I do sometimes agree with SCCL’s Drury on some issues, and I even periodically Tweet her links to news stories I think she may want to share on her Twitter account or on her SCCL Facebook group.
However, I totally part ways with Drury on some topics – like this one.
The view of liberal Christians, ex-Christians, liberal Non-Christians, and even some moderately conservative Christians, is that American Christians are not under persecution in the U.S.A. for being Christian, or for practicing Christian beliefs.
I am not sure if the liberal or moderate conservative disagreement on this issue pertains to semantics (the terminology involved), or if they are actually blind and oblivious to the harassment that Christians, especially conservative, or traditional valued, Christians, face in American culture.
It is my position that American Christians do in fact face harassment – especially from the left wing – in the United States for being Christian, for wanting to practice their faith and carry it out in public, and for defending it in public.
If you are a liberal who objects to the term “persecution,” how about, instead, the words or phrases, “harassment,” “bullying,” “picking on,” “hounding,” or other terms?
I do not see American Christians getting a free pass in the United States to hold certain views or to practice their beliefs.
The left (and I’d include severe anti-theist atheists here, on this point, regardless of their political standing) insist that Christians keep their Christian faith walled off, private, and separate from all other areas of their lives.
Some Liberals Call Gatlinburg Fire Punishment for Trump Support
Well this is a switch.
Usually, we find right wing Christians saying that every natural disaster in the United States is due to homosexuality or abandonment of support to Israel, but here we have liberals saying that the wildfires in TN are due to people voting for Trump.
Evangelical Russell Moore Criticizes Other Conservative Christians For Supporting Sexually Smarmy Donald Trump but Moore Has Attacked Adult Virginity
In the midst of the current election season, we have some conservative Christians who are upset with other conservative Christians for supporting Republican nominee Donald Trump.
The media have been reporting around the clock the last couple of weeks with all sorts of allegations that Trump has groped women and so on. In spite of some of this questionable to clearly sexist behavior, some conservative Christians have spoken up to defend Trump in public, which really angers Russell Moore.
Considering that Moore has criticized adult, Christian virgins in the past (see this postand this post), I find it pretty rich that he wrote an editorial, which was carried by the Washington Post recently, criticizing other Christians for not supporting biblical sexual ethics in light of Donald Trump’s smarmy behavior towards women.
I have additional commentary below this long excerpt:
…Journalist Mark Halperin (Link): noted this weekend that virtually all of the “reaffirmation of support” for Trump, following the disclosure of his sexually predatory recorded comments, were from religious conservative leaders. This is a scandal and a disgrace, but it should not be a surprise.
…We know nothing new about Donald Trump. He has told us about his view of women, his view of sexuality, his views of marriage and family for more than 30 years. He has gloried in reality television decadence before reality television was even invented, in his boasts to tabloid reporters. He reaffirmed who he is over and over again, even during this campaign — from misogynistic statements to racist invective to crazed conspiracy theorizing.
And yet here stands the old-guard Religious Right establishment. Some are defending or waving this away, with the same old tropes they’ve used throughout this campaign.
“My boyfriend was intimidated by my sexual history. So I dumped him.” by T. Hornung
I’m not going to take the usual, secular, left wing feminist standard here (for one thing, I’m right wing and don’t always agree with secular feminists), where I’m supposed to say a woman’s sexual history is not a boyfriend’s business, or the boyfriend should not be upset by his girlfriend’s sexual past, and say, “Rah rah, women’s sexual freedom.”
I am forever amazed that “sex positive” feminists, whether they are men or women, assume that their previous sexual choices should not, or will not, have any consequences upon them or the people around them.
Some of us are more “serious” about sex than other people – sex actually means something to us, so yes, we find it troubling, and I suppose this is doubly so, if we are virgins over 35 years of age, and have to grapple with the fact that our current partner has had sex with other people in the past.
WashPost Columnist: ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters Are ‘Virgin Losers’ – (via NewsBusters Site); Both the Right and Left Wing Get Some things Wrong About This
This story comes from NewsBusters, which is discussing a column written for Washington Post newspaper by columnist Kristen Page-Kirby about the new Ghostbusters movie.
The original Ghostbusters movie, released in the 1980s, contained four male leads. The reboot version of the movie, which was released July 15, 2016, contains four women leads instead.
Unfortunately, over a year or more ago, when news came out that there would be four women leads in the film, some of the sexist jerkwads who inhabit the internet started lambasting the movie all over You Tube, Twitter, and where ever else – not because the move was bad (it wasn’t even released yet), but because they were incensed that Hollywood was cramming some form of feminism down their throats.
Interestingly, I didn’t see as much backlash over the main character of the new Star Wars film, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” being a woman – Rey.
At any rate, I will be discussing two or three different topics in this post that are related to this new film, or mentioned by the conservative essayist at the NewsBusters site.
This is another story where I am in the middle. I can’t say as though I’m completely on one side or another in regards to some aspects of this story, depending on what is under discussion.
I am currently a moderate right-winger (I used to be more to the right than I am currently. In the last few years, I’ve been reconsidering if some of my former political and Christian beliefs are wrong.)
I’ve been more open the last few years to hearing the criticisms and views of liberals and Non-Christians – which is not to say I agree with everything I see left wingers and Non-Christians espousing or arguing in favor of.
I sometimes think secular, liberal feminists have good points on some topics, but I normally disagree with them.
As far as the Ghostbusters film reboot is concerned, I do think some of the backlash against the movie does in fact stem from sexism. But then, I do think some people may honestly feel that the movie is genuinely bad due to having a poor story line, or what have you.
I have not seen the movie yet. I don’t go to movie theaters that much anymore.
I usually wait until movies air on cable television; I’m willing to bet that this Ghostbusters reboot will probably be shown on F/X channel, or SyFy, or some other cable network in the next two years, and I have cable television, so I don’t know if I want to invest my time and cash into driving down to a theater to see this, since it will eventually be on television.
I saw the original Ghostbusters in a movie theater when it was in theaters in the 1980s. I was a kid at the time.
The original was okay, it was quite enjoyable and plenty of fun, but it was no movie masterpiece, so to all the men online who were griping about the reboot featuring all women leads: get the hell over it already.
And yes, you were, or are, being sexist douche bags about it. I don’t buy for a moment that ALL male griping about the film is based on non-sexist reasons, like shoddy trailers, or supposed poor CG work.
The vast majority of the professional reviews (and I have read a ton of them) for the new Ghostbusters film have deemed it “okay.” -Not terrible. Not great. But just “meh.” It’s so-so, most reviews have said.
What I don’t appreciate is that the columnist for WaPo who was discussing male backlash about the movie is using virginity as an insult.
Church Tries to Punish Girls Who Sued Over Sex Abuse by Outing Them – Singles: Don’t Take Dating Advice from Religious Groups Who Think It’s Acceptable to Harass Rape Victims – And Dump Equally Yoked Teaching
This story is horrible enough as it is, and another indicator of how unsympathetic and awful churches are towards abuse victims of all kinds.
However, I also wanted to add this observation, as outlined in the next few paragraphs.
I was taught as a kid that Christian singles are only to marry other Christians, which is sometimes called “being equally yoked.”
My parents, who were Christians, would advise me when I was younger to seek out a spouse in a local church, if I wanted to marry.
In light of stories like the one I’m posting here, I don’t think I consider churches a good place to meet potential dates or mates any longer. I am questioning that.
If church members think it’s compassionate or acceptable to be hostile to child sex abusive victims and to protect the pedophile who assaulted them, one wonders how heartless and immoral the persons at that church must be in other areas, and how terrible their judgement concerning other things is.
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.
Christian Charity Head Admits Using Donations for Sex Habit
This article says that this guy is married (or was at one point; I have no idea if he’s still married to his wife or not).
Christians often think that married people are more sexually pure and moral than adult singles – they will often refuse to allow adult singles to serve in leadership positions in churches, one reason being, they assume that the single will “hit on” or start affairs with other people.
But if you will notice, the majority of news stories about Christians who are involved in affairs or looking at child porn and what have you, are MARRIED persons, NOT singles.
Which is not to say there are not self-professing Christian singles who aren’t sexually sinning, because there sure as heck are, but I’m so tired of this Christian stereotype that married people are as pure as the freshly driven snow, while we singles are supposedly a bunch of over-sexed horn dogs.
I myself am over the age of 40, and I am celibate. I am more sexually up-right than a lot of Christian married people. So Christians who harbor these stereotypes about singles being Jezebel harlots and married people being sexually pure can kiss my butt.
By the way, does the “be equally yoked” rule Christians apply to marriage REALLY MATTER when the “Christian” husband ends up cheating on his wife by using pornography or prostitutes or he has a mistress?
Does this example REALLY up-hold the Christian teaching that God expects a person to be mature or godly before he will permit him or her to have a spouse? No, it does not.
If God expected people to be totally moral, ethical, mature, and godly before allowing them to have a spouse, the idiot in this news story would still be single – but he’s not. He has a wife (or did. I am not clear if the wife is still with him or not).
But the Obama administration and transgender activists have shown no interest in sensible compromises that give any weight to the privacy or safety interests of others.
Never mind that the transgender policy on restrooms and showers makes it much easier for any man or boy with nefarious or mischievous purposes to gain access to the girls’ facilities.
I have a friend on Twitter who I sometimes have private conversations with via Direct Messaging on Twitter.
One very disturbing and annoying tendency among liberals has grabbed her attention and mine, that we’ve discussed privately:
Many Liberals not only build a hierarchy of which groups of people they believe are more worthy of protection, consideration, and respect than other groups (which I find odd and troubling), but they further go on to almost always place hetero, cisgender (and ones who happen to be caucasian) women at the very bottom of this hierarchy.
Women in general seem to go at the bottom of this liberal pyramid, regardless of ethnic group, skin color, or nationality – I guess it can depend on the specific context under consideration.
Conservatives, Christians, Transgenders, and Bathrooms – Addressing Libby Anne’s “Love, Joy, Feminism” Post About Transgenders
I really don’t feel like devoting too much time on my blog to the topic of Transgenderism.
To date, I’ve done only 2 or 3 posts on the subject, one defending transgender people from criticisms by some Southern Baptist guy, and another that is critical of the transgender phenomenon.
Much farther down this post, I address a recent post by Libby Anne (of the “Love, Joy, Feminism” blog on Patheos) that pertains to Christians, child sexual abuse, and Transgender persons and the bathroom debate.
I would say I am mostly on the conservative side of the Transgender issue but appreciate that some conservatives can be too harsh towards Transgender people and may find myself agreeing with liberals on some of their comments on this sort of topic.
In other words, this is another subject where I neither totally agree with either conservatives or liberals, and I think both sides make good points in favor of their positions, and both sides sometimes make bad, unfair, rude, or stupid points.
I see a lot of misunderstanding by liberals of the conservative position on Transgender people using public restrooms.
I can’t speak to every single conservative or Christian who is opposed to Trans people using bathrooms, but there is definitely one component of conservatives and Christians who aren’t opposed to Trans people using opposite gender bathrooms per se.
In my case (as a conservative), I don’t know if I care if a biological male who wears a skirt uses a woman’s bathroom or not – it might make me uncomfortable, but that is not my big problem with this issue.
My problem resides in the fact that – damn, I don’t know all the liberal alphabet soup labels they slap on everything, is it Hetero CIS men? – my problem is that Hetero CIS men who are rapists will PRETEND to be Trans women so that they can have access to more female victims.
Pro-Rape Pastor Defends Church’s Hiring of Child Rapist – Adult Singles: Dump the Equally Yoked Teaching
I spotted this link (shared farther down page) when it was shared on WatchKeep’s Twitter today. My blog is not about child sexual abuse per se. I tend to focus, most often, on issues surrounding adult singleness.
If you are an adult Christian single who wants to be married, please reconsider following the “Be equally yoked” teaching. Whether or not the guy in this news story I have in this blog post is a “true” Christian or not is beside the point.
You can date a Christian man who you believe to be a “true” Christian – maybe you met him at church (which is pretty rare because single males do not attend churches), or maybe you met him on a Christian dating site (which some Christian men have used to select rape victims), and he shows all the outward signs of “loving the Lord” and so on and so forth – but then it is revealed he is a child rapist.
Would you really want to discover the guy you married is a child rapist, or views child porn?
I also question the pastor of this church who is defending the child rapist: could you imagine marrying a preacher, who you would assume is a godly man, only to find out he blames child rape victims for having been raped?
Also be aware that pedophiles actively seek wife material at churches. That’s right, single Christian lady: some guy who is a pedophile may start flirting with you at church or in Sunday School, hoping you will date and marry him. I did (Link): a post about thisseveral days ago.
Some churches are refusing to hire people who admit on their job applications to having been sexually abused
If You Were Sexually Abused, You Cannot Work At These Churches
Not only is child sexual abuse addressed on some of these employment forms, but according to these articles (links farther below), some churches ask applicants about their views on fornication, or if they’ve ever been accused of homosexuality.
I find this pretty hypocritical. If you’ve followed this blog before, you know I was waiting until marriage to have sex – as a result, I am now over 40 years of age and still a virgin, because I never married.
What I have observed as I’ve gotten older is that while many Christians pay “lip service” to respecting adult virginity or celibacy, that in practice, they do not.
Sometimes, some Christians (conservatives, no less, but also most progressives) ridicule and mock virginity, and they ridicule or put down adult virgins for being virgins. (Please see the links under the “Related Posts” at the bottom of this post for examples.)
Not only is there little to no philosophical, theological, or intellectual support for adult virginity (and by extension, adult singleness past one’s mid 20s or so), but there is no concrete support – churches and Christians seldom have ministries to meet the needs of adult single celibates.
There are rarely sermons preached on a regular basis on adult single celibacy – compare that to the topic of marriage. Most churches offer a “ten steps to a stronger marriage” type sermon series once every few weeks but never sermonize about singleness.
Christian Author of a “Dude’s Guide to Marriage” Book Fired From Church Pastor Job for Inappropriate Behavior With Two Women
I hope I am understanding this story correctly. This guy who was fired – the church who fired him (I think it was a church) – is being rather vague about it.
They did say in one of their released statements that this married pastor is not guilty of adultery, but that he did something inappropriate with two women.
Knowing what I know about conservative, evangelical Christianity and some of these Reformed guys, they will nit pick over how they describe sexual sin: this guy may not have strictly performed penis in the vagina sex on these other women, but I bet you anything he probably performed some other sexual sin.
Maybe this dude-bro pastor sent these women dirty text messages, unsolicited penis photos, they performed oral sex on him (or vice versa), or something else.
Christians who cover up sexual sins by pastors, or who try to diminish them, tend to be like former American president Bill Clinton when confronted on his dalliance with Lewinisky: they finely parse their language about it. They won’t come right out and say “this married pastor got a blow job from a hooker,” or what not, so they use euphemisms.
What kills me about this guy is that he’s apparently a gender complementarian preacher who has written books with titles such as “A Dude’s Guide to Marriage,” and some other book with a title like “How to Be a Manly Man.”
Family Values Republican Politician Hastert in Trouble for Sexual Assault of Kids / On Liberals and Not Having Sexual Standards
This politician, Hastert, is now in his 70s and is in poor health. Some of his victims have stepped forward to say he sexually assaulted them when they were kids.
I’ve seen several articles say that he was a “family values” type of Republican.
Below is a report about it – probably by a left winger. I am right wing, but in the last few years, I’ve had some changing feelings about the Republican Party, conservative Christians, and how much they push this “family values” rhetoric.
This author does spend part of her report taking Bill Clinton to task for taking advantage of Lewinsky.
I will be placing more articles about this story below this first link and excerpt.
I’m not terribly fond of how so many right-wing “Family Values” spokespersons and figure heads later turn out to be hypocrites.
On the other hand, I’m not a supporter of the left wing – many of them not only participate in sexually immoral activity or champion sexual hedonism, but they have few to no sexual standards in the first place. And they don’t want any.
Maybe there is something positive to be said in having sexual standards in the first place, even if it means a person (or group of persons) who claim to believe in them occasionally violates them.
Single, Adult Woman Lies on Church Employment Form About Pre-Marital Sex and Sexual Orientation, Says Friend – Letter to Ask Amy Advice Column
I’ll paste in the letter below, and probably Amy’s response. I think Amy dropped the ball on her reply, for the most part.
I’m using this letter not so much as it pertains to homosexuality, but the phenomenon of singles (or anyone, I guess) lying about their sexual habits or pasts, especially in a church context.
When I was growing up, my parents encouraged me to seek a marital partner at church. The thought being that I could meet a decent, kind, stable man at a church and marry the guy.
The problem is (as I’ve detailed on this blog time and again) is that churches attract all sorts of weirdos, perverts, and losers (and liars).
If you are a single Christian woman who insists on meeting a single man at a church, you better be well aware that just because a guy is attending church, works at said church, or says he loves Jesus and is a Christian, does not mean he is a nice guy or is honest. He might be a child rapist, a woman abuser, or have a raging pornography addiction.
The letter below is about a lesbian woman who misrepresented herself (her sexual nature / sexual history) to a church to get hired, contra to Ask Amy’s spin on it (you can read a copy of this letterhere):
I have a huge dilemma. “Jane” and I have been good friends since middle school. I love her like a sister.
Recently, Jane accepted a job at a church as the youth director in the town where we attend college. She is good with youth and is very outgoing.
However, Jane was not fully truthful when applying for this job.
The church asked all applicants to affirm its faith statement and a code of behavior that prohibits premarital sex. Jane signed the code of behavior, indicating that she would not have premarital sex.
To further confuse the issue, she told them that she did not have a boyfriend. In truth, Jane does have sex. However, she is a (quiet) lesbian.