The Myth of the Good Ole Days by A. Bevere
Here are just a few excerpts from this other blog. Please click the link to visit the other blog if you’d like to see the entire article:
(Link): The Myth of the Good Ole Days
The Myth of the Good Ole Days by A. Bevere
Here are just a few excerpts from this other blog. Please click the link to visit the other blog if you’d like to see the entire article:
(Link): The Myth of the Good Ole Days
Salvation Army Bans Duggar / Quivering Cult’s ‘Retreat’ (Called ‘Get Them Married’) that Promoted Arranged Marriages for Teen Girls – Quivering Advocates Are Anti-Adult Singleness and Anti-Celibacy
Before I present you with the links to the news reports about this story (which are much farther down the page), I wanted to make some introductory comments in general, and a few specific comments refuting a few points from a pro-Quivering page about celibacy.
In regards to the specific news story I am blogging about today, this Quivering group is completely overlooking Apostle Paul’s comments in (Link): 1 Corinthians 7 that it is better for people to remain single than it is to marry – and Paul does not say that this teaching is in regards only to “a few,” or only a “minority” of people.
The Bible nowhere states that marriage is “a norm,” or that God expects or wants all, or most, people to marry.
It just so happens that in other cultures thousands of years ago, most people did happen to marry – one should not deduce from this cultural situation that God supported it or wanted it to be so. It just was what it was.
If the Bible said that all or most ancient Jews painted their bodies green once a year and balanced weasels on their heads while jumping up and down on a watermelon one week out of a year, one should not assume from this that
The Quivering group’s position on marriage, celibacy, and singleness is unbiblical, not to mention disturbing.
According to this article (linked to much farther below), the Quivering group was going to call this event, (where they set up marriages for little girls to marry), “Get Them Married.”
Why not have an event called, per 1 Corinthians 7, “It Is Better To Stay Unmarried”?
Am I opposed to marriage? No.
Is the God of the Bible against marriage? No.
But the Bible does not say that being married is better or more holy for girls, women, or culture, than being single, but a lot of Christian groups, and these wacky Christian cults, insist otherwise.
Christians need to do a better job of recognizing adult singleness and celibacy as legitimate, godly, biblical lifestyles and choices for all persons (and not only meant for a small minority of people who were supposedly “gifted” with it), instead of promoting marriage and natalism as the only legitimate avenues or as ways of fixing culture, the nation, or as pleasing God.
Continue reading “Salvation Army Bans Duggar / Quivering Cult’s ‘Retreat’ (Called ‘Get Them Married’) that Promoted Arranged Marriages for Teen Girls – Quivering Advocates Are Anti-Adult Singleness and Anti-Celibacy”
Christian Radio Host Busted for Slapping Woman’s ‘Butt Cheek’ Inside Target Restroom – And How This Conflicts With Preacher Doug Wilson’s Propriety of Rape Commentary
First, here is a link to the news story with some excerpts, followed by some observations by me:
(Link): Christian Radio Host Busted for Slapping Woman’s ‘Butt Cheek’ Inside Target Restroom by B P Markus
Before I tie this in with pastor Doug Wilson (much farther below), I wanted to reiterate a few points I normally make about such stories when I post them.
I don’t know if this Howington guy is married or not, or a father. If he is either one or both, I can tell you this is another example of how being married or a parent are not indicators of maturity or godliness, as many Christians say they are. Nor is being married a guarantee a man is not going to pull sexual shenanigans on people who aren’t his wife.
Married people also sexually sin at times. Sexual sin is not the lone province of single adults.
Not only am I, a never married adult not having sex (I have chosen to stay celibate so far into my life), but I don’t go around doing things like slapping other people on their butts.
Why “Family Values” Defined Conservative Christianity (and Why “Religious Liberty” has Replaced It) – by E C Miller
I am right wing, somewhat Christian, and believe that many Christians and secular conservatives have made the nuclear family and marriage into idols, which is wrong.
I am not opposed out-right to the traditional family, marriage, or to motherhood, and so forth, in and of themselves, but I am in disagreement at how so many right wingers and Christians elevate all those things to the point that they end up marginalizing anyone who does not fit the mould of “married with children.”
Anyone who is infertile, child free, divorced, never married, widowed, and what have you, is excluded or treated shabbily by the majority of “family values” obsessed right wingers and Christians, which again, in my view, is terribly wrong and unfair.
Here is an article explaining how and why the religious right elevated “the family” in their rhetoric:
Patriarchy vs. Single Women in the Bible by B. and T. Jennings
(Link): Patriarchy vs. Single Women in the Bible by B. and T. Jennings
This page I am linking to and excerpting below is critiquing one that was arguing that single women should stay at home.
The authors are addressing the author of the other page, a woman who explains she is still living at home and not going to college because she believed she was following biblical teachings for women.
Married Father and Baptist Preacher J D Hall – Another Example of How Marriage and Parenthood Does Not Make a Person More Godly or Mature
(There is an update at the bottom of this post).
This involves a lot of back story I don’t want to get into because this blog post would be ten pages long.
I am blogging this primarily for adult singles who have felt marginalized or hurt by Christian denominations or churches that treat adult singles as though they have cooties.
I have a somewhat different motivation for blogging about this than other blogs do. There were a few other blogs who addressed the child abuse aspect of the story, that we have an adult (Hall) badgering a teen kid (Braxton Caner) on the internet.
J D Hall is a Calvinist preacher with a blog called “Pulpit and Pen,” a Twitter account, and a group of fan boys who follow him around online who actually refer to themselves as “Pulpiteers.”
At one time, Hall’s groupies were using the #pulpiteer (or “pulpiteers”) hash to follow each other around Twitter. I’m not sure if they still use the “Pulpiteer” label or not. I will continue to refer to them as such.
This group, and a few other people, have a long standing hatred of another guy named Ergun Caner.
Being Childfree, Childless, Infertile, or Dealing With the Death of a Mother on Mother’s Day, An Abusive or Insensitive Mother, Mothers Who Lost Adult Children to Murder or Sickness (links)
Disclaimer: I am not anti-motherhood, nor necessarily against people taking their mothers out to brunch on Mother’s Day, or buying dear old Mom some flowers to mark the occasion.
I am, however, against the excessive focus on motherhood, the failure to acknowledge and celebrate childless and childfree women, the onslaught of syrupy Mother’s Day hoopla, on and before the day, and the church services that honor mothers because:
Some Christians have turned motherhood (as well as fatherhood and marriage) into idols, which they should repent of.
That is one reason why churches are losing visitors and members: despite the fact that 44% of American adults are single (edit: as of 2014 studies, (Link): that figure is now 51% or greater) and a big chunk are childless, most churches either…
– IGNORE adult singles/ childless adults,
-preachers and Christian talking heads insult adult singleness and adult virginity from their blogs, pod casts, books, organizations, and pulpits, by implying or forth rightly saying, that adult singleness (or being childless) makes a person stunted, or makes a person not as “godly” as being married with kids.
Now, why the hell does anyone suppose I, a never-married celibate woman, would want to attend a church where I am insulted before I ever step foot in it?
Most churches spend mountains of money on “family” ministries, family dinners, programs for youth and married couples.
Most churches and denominations do not budget time or money for adult singles anything – not classes, social functions, dinners. The big message from that is, “At our church, we don’t care about adult singles or those without children. You have to be married with a kid to count here.”
If you are a church that has a “Mother’s Day” celebration or ceremony of some sort, even if it’s very brief, you should also have one the following Sunday for all the childless, never-married women, the child free women, and infertile- but- married women too, or women who have not been able to carry a baby to term (ie, miscarry) – it’s only fair.
If you are unwilling to honor ALL women in ALL situations, ages, and life stages, at one time or another during the year in your church, nobody should get a holiday or party, none, nope, nuh-uh.
This post discusses being single and childless or childfree on Mother’s day, or other circumstances that make Mother’s Day painful for some women.
(Link): Mother’s Day After Abortion
Dear Person at the Front of the Room,
Written by a Child Free, lesbian Woman (you do not have to be a lesbian or agree with or endorse lesbianism to relate to what this woman says):
(Link): On Not Being a Parent by Julie R. Enszer
(Link): A Bittersweet Mother’s Day
Continue reading “Being Childfree, Childless, Infertile, or Dealing With the Death of a Mother on Mother’s Day, Or Dealing With An Abusive or Insensitive Mother, Mothers Who Lost Adult or Young Children to Murder, Abortion, Miscarriages, or Sickness (links)”
(I just got a notification from Word Press that today is my four year anniversary of registering with them for this blog. Yay, four year anniversary.)
Christian ‘historian’ David Barton: Allowing women to vote ‘hurts the entire culture and society’ and prohibiting the female vote kept the family together
(Links to pages with Barton’s quotes are farther below)
I am no secular feminist. I’m not left wing or a Democrat or a liberal (“progressive”), but I find some of my fellow right wingers to be odd balls on occasion, and this is one of those occasions.
It’s bad enough that some conservative Christians defend sexism under the guise of it being “biblical” (the terms they slap on church sanctioned sexism is sometimes referred to as ‘gender complementarianism’ or ‘biblical womanhood’) –
But to see a well-known Christian personality such as Barton defend the sexist notion that women should not vote, or it was good that at one time they were not permitted, because it makes for “stronger families” is another indication that some Christians have turned the nuclear family, marriage, and parenthood into idols.
Views such as this also do not take into account that some women never marry and never have children.
Some women who do marry are infertile, or their husband is, so they never have children.
Yet other women are widowed or divorced.
You will notice in Christian gender complementarian views, women who “fall between the cracks,” ones who are unmarried or childless, are not recognized.
This Barton guy has crack pot views about marriage and coffee and PTSD as well (see links at bottom of this post).
I think keeping women from voting on the basis of their gender alone, and supposedly that it’s due to keeping families together, is sexism.
Please, some Christian, try to defend the idea that being sexist is okay with God and oppressing women in this way is justified to “defend the family” or “defend culture.” (This is a rhetorical proposition.)
Although I am socially conservative and a right winger, I think other so cons and right wingers need to keep things in perspective.
Sacrificing equality of women in the name of “the family” – when it comes to this particular case (voting) – is unjust and shows just how much some Christian conservatives have turned “family” into an idol.
Christian ‘historian’: Allowing women to vote ‘hurts the entire culture and society’ by David Edwards
A so-called “historian” who Glenn Beck hired to teach at his online university insisted this week that women had originally been denied the right to vote “to keep the family together,” and for the good of “the entire culture and society.”
On the Thursday broadcast of Wallbuilders Live, David Barton explained that biblical principles — and not sexism — were behind not allowing women to vote prior to 1920.
“So family government precedes civil government and you watch that as colonists came to America, they voted by families,” he said. “And you have to remember back then, husband and wife, I mean the two were considered one. That is the biblical precept… That is a family, that is voting. And so the head of the family is traditionally considered to be the husband and even biblically still continues to be so.”
Barton argued that in the time since the women’s suffrage movement succeeded in the United States, “we’ve moved into more of a family anarchy kind of thing.”
Kook Christian Groups/Individuals and Their Nutty Beliefs on ProCreation and What Constitutes Being Unequally Yoked
Here is another post or two with more quotes by people who claim to be Christian but who teach the thoroughly un-biblical view that God’s kingdom is to be spread by married couples pro-creating (making babies).
The Bible in fact teaches that the kingdom is to be spread and enlarged by Christians- whether married, single, divorced, with children or childless – telling the un-saved about Jesus Christ, not by marrying and having children.
As to this first link. I tend to lump all these categories together myself – patriarchy, quiverfull, complementarianism – because to me, they are all just a bunch of men teaching that men should control females.
The author of this piece below might kind of disagree with me, because he (or she?) seems very keen on people following very specific definitions of each term.
I do not agree with some of the sharp criticisms of this piece. I for one don’t see the problem with someone proclaiming that “Christian patriarchy is two steps away from making women wear a burka.”
Because you know what? It is. Some of the rhetoric and reasoning is very similar in “Christian modesty ” teachings as it is in Islamic teaching on how they feel women should cover their bodies and faces.
I actually think that comment is pretty dang accurate, in that many of these groups do advocate “modesty” teaching, which frowns on Christian women showing so much as an ankle.
Both groups – Muslims and pro-modesty Christians – tell women that they should cover their bodies because men are incapable of controlling their sexual urges and that men get instantly turned on beyond their control at the site of an attractive female. So, responsibility is placed upon women in both schools of thought to “dress modestly.”
Regardless of those issues, note the quote below about how this person believes that Christian women should “out breed” their opponents:
From the page, (Link): WHAT “CHRISTIAN PATRIARCHY” IS NOT , by R.L. Stollar
Michael Pearl gave us a perfect embodiment of Quiverfull’s dominionist streak, when (Link): he recently stated,
“If you can’t out-vote them today, out-breed them for tomorrow.”
That is Quiverfull (albeit a distilled, intense version of it).
… Yes, there are many advocates of Christian Patriarchy who are Quiverfull.
And by all means, speak out against the dehumanizing and toxic idea that your children are your weapons, and a woman’s vagina is a weapons-building factory.
But remember these are distinct, especially considering there are many advocates of Christian Patriarchy who are not Quiverfull.
Take Doug Wilson, for example.
Doug Wilson is considered one of the pillars of Christian Patriarchy but believes birth control can be useful to ensure you’re actually taking care of your current children. That’s outright heresy to the Quiverfull crowd.
From this site:
(Link): Not On Your Side, Debi
Excerpts (emphasis added by me):
… Besides being given to racist and homophobic remarks, the Pearls are somewhat obsessed with sex. It gives Michael [Pearl] hope to envision homeschoolers “outbreeding” progressives.
He counsels the wife of an angry man to “make love” to improve her husband’s mood.
Debi often suggests that being sexually available is a wife’s primary responsibility.
Michael even wrote a book on erotic pleasure for fundamentalist Christian couples.
I can’t remember where I saw it – if on one of the pages above, but some page I read earlier today referenced quotes by Debi Pearl about being “equally yoked.”
Perhaps these comments can be found on her and her husband’s site, No Greater Joy, I am not sure.
Someone on another site quoted Pearl as having said that if you are a Christian, and you marry another Christian in a state that permits homosexual marriage, that your marriage – yes YOUR marriage to another Christian – is “unequally yoked.”
The argument seems to be that if you, a Christian, marry an opposite gender to yourself Christian in a state that also has legalized homosexual marriage, that a marriage performed in such a state taints yours, or makes yours invalid.
To put it yet another way (according to the Pearls): your marriage to another Christian is “unequally yoked” all because your next door neighbors, Fred and Stan the homosexual couple, are legally married by the same state too.
Please let that sink in and roll around in your brain for several moments: two Christians, one a man, one a woman, married to each other in a state where homosexual marriage is legal are said by the Pearls to be “unequally yoked”.
I’ve thought on it for awhile and still cannot make sense of it. What nuts these people are.
I ventured on over to the Pearl NGJ (No Greater Joy) site and see they have a page for singles ((Link): NGJ: Singles), and with pages on advice on how to find a mate, LOL, no thanks, won’t take advice from crackpots like them. The Pearls advise in their books on parenting that parents should beat their infant children with pipes.
There is much more nuttiness by them, but I don’t want to make this a huge post about the Pearls and every crazy thing they’ve ever taught.
On the main page for NGJ Singles is this:
This page at NGJ Singles actually recommends that parents allow a brother to pick out husbands for their sisters:
I’m in my 40s now and still not married.
My one brother is married to an atheist heroin addict. Yeah, I don’t think I’ll be going to my big brother for martial partner selection or input, thanks but no, Debi.
By the way, does it never occur to these Christian parents that their daughter may choose to stay single, a choice which God respects (see 1 Corinthians 7)?
Excerpt from Debi’s page:
She was gentle, cute, hard-working, and always cheerful, in addition to being the most compliant girl you have ever met.
But before they ever made it to our door to talk to Daddy Mike, most of them were already discounted as possibilities. Gabe or Nathan had seen to that with their reports.
Big brothers were watching out for their sisters, especially the sweet one.
How skin crawling is that, for so many reasons.
I have said it before, and I will say it again, but some Christian views on gender roles – whether we are talking patriarchy, gender complementarianims, or using the term “biblical womanhood” – is nothing but CODEPENDENCY under religious terminology, and is, therefore, un-biblical.
Codependent women are sweet, gentle, shy, compliant, soft spoken – they have poor- to- no- boundaries. Codependents are afraid or reluctant to be assertive, say no to people, and express anger.
Note too, that these are the same exact characteristics that are held up by Christians as being marks of biblical womanhood, or desirable for a Christian man to look for in a Christian wife: sweet, shy, gentle, compliant, soft spoken, little- to- no- boundaries.
Further note in books by experts on spousal abuse the sorts of traits abusive men intentionally look for in a mate:
sweet, shy, gentle, compliant, soft spoken, little- to- no- boundaries.
Seeing a pattern yet?
Yeah, Debi Pearl is (and I find this sad and chilling) totally thrilled that her daughter is prime pickings for an abusive man.
More excerpts from the page (advice to older brothers with younger single sisters):
Now, the oldest sister is kinda bossy, but she always gives in after a little persuasion. She’s the smartest. So if you think you would enjoy a little challenge but get a good mate for the extra effort…she’s your gal.
My next sister is not so cute, but she is the nicest of the bunch.
…So how about it…wanta check out the fam? I got four other guys coming Sunday for brunch, so you better hurry if you want the pick of the litter.”
That whole excerpt is so horrifying and sexist, I hardly know where to begin.
I would not want my brother approaching his male friends and blurting out, “So, you lookin’ for a bride?” My god, that would scare away every man on the planet.
Not that I object to friends and family setting me up with eligible guys my age, but what Pearl is suggesting sounds almost more like arranged marriage, where the woman is playing a very passive role.
Pearl also makes it sound like the brother is supposed to “market” the sister to men, as though she is not a human being, but a brand of shampoo, a car, or a tube of toothpaste.
She is kind of asking the brother to play the role of a pimp.
This remark: “My next sister is not so cute”
If your own mother is basically advising your brother to tell his pals you are ugly, that is pretty damn insensitive.
At any rate, here we see above yet more examples fringe, wacko groups, or persons, passing themselves off as Christian, but who are teaching some bizarre, un-biblical things about marriage, having children, and re-defining what “equally yoked” means (or has been traditionally understood by most Christians to mean).
It’s bad enough when Christians are telling Christian singles to only marry other Christian singles
but the Pearl family is basically telling Christian singles not to even marry another Christian single if they live in a state where homosexual marriage is permitted, as that would make their marriage “unequally yoked” (sorry I do not have a source for that, it is a quote someone pasted in at another blog without a link, I have no reason to believe he or she was lying about it).
I am really creeped out and appalled by these views of marrying, what constitutes being un-equally yoked, and pro-creation these groups are advocating. Their views are totally un-biblical. They have given themselves over to the worship of marriage, parenthood, and family.
Instead of worshipping the God of the Bible, they are worshipping their own peculiar ideas of culture, family, and marriage.
If Moses came down from the mountain today, he’d see most of the contemporary, American “Christian” people bowing down before a statue made of gold, of a figure of a man, woman, and child holding hands (a statue of “nuclear family”), with a “Focus on the Family” broadcast playing on a radio in the background, with a mountain of books with titles such as, “Ten Steps to a Great Marriage” and “How to Raise Godly Children.”
(Link): Pastor charged in wife’s murder was headed to Europe to marry boyfriend, prosecutor says – Single Xtian Ladies: Kick that Be Equally Yoked Teaching to the Curb! Also: Marriage and Parenthood do not make people more godly or mature or loving or ethical
(Link): Christian Single Women: Another Example of Why You Should Abandon the “Be Equally Yoked” Teaching: 21-Y-O Christianity Student, Children’s Minister Charged With Murdering Fiancée He Was to Wed in August; Made It Look Like Suicide
Sorry, but being a mother is not the most important job in the world, by Catherine Deveny
Christians are guilty of, as this writer below says, “The deification of mothers.”
Trust me on that one, as the voice of experience.
Try being over 40, still a virgin – never married, no children – and you feel very excluded in many conservative churches.
The exclusion against childless and older single women is not always deliberate in Christian culture, sometimes it is.
However, the un-intentional put downs and un-intended insults can be almost as hurtful. Most often, married Christian mothers, the instant they learn you are over 30, never married and have no children, lose all interest in getting to know you further.
Some of these married mothers act instantly uncomfortable and awkward around you once they find out you are still single and childless… you are treated like an alien from Mars, rather than a fellow human being. It’s hurtful, awkward, and is one reason of many I no longer attend church.
Churches constantly host Mother’s Day ceremonies or do things like monthly invite all new mothers foreward to pray for their newborns, but when is the last time you saw a preacher call all never-married women forward to pray for them, or to cheer on their accomplishments, such as buying a house alone, getting a work promotion, getting a college degree? Yeah, never. Only motherhood is viewed as a significant “accomplishment” for women in churches.
(By the way, I do not hate motherhood, and I am not opposed to women being mothers: I am only opposed to how adult single women, the infertile, childless, and child free are excluded, insulted or marginalized by so many Christian churches, denominations, and media.)
Here’s the article:
It’s time to drop the slogan. It encourages mothers to stay socially and financially hobbled, it alienates fathers and discourages other significant relationships between children and adults
Being a mother is not the most important job in the world. There, I said it. Nor is it the toughest job, despite what the 92% of people polled in Parents Magazine reckon.
For any woman who uses that line, consider this: if this is meant to exalt motherhood, then why is the line always used to sell toilet cleaner? And if being a mother is that important, why aren’t all the highly paid men with stellar careers not devoting their lives to raising children? After all, I never hear “being a father is the most important job in the world”.
The deification of mothers not only delegitimises the relationship fathers, neighbours, friends, grandparents, teachers and carers have with children, it also diminishes the immense worth and value of these relationships. How do gay dads feel about this line, I wonder? Or the single dads, stepdads or granddads? No matter how devoted and hard working you are, fellas, you’ll always be second best.
I’m also confused as to what makes you a mother. Is it the actual birth? Or is a “mother” simply a term to describe an expectation to care for children without payment? Is this empty slogan used to compensate women for gouging holes from potential careers by spending years out of the workplace without recognition?
Enabling this dogma devalues the unpaid labor of rearing children as much as it strategically devalues women’s worth at work. If being a mother were a job there’d be a selection process, pay, holidays, a superior to report to, performance assessments, Friday drinks, and you could resign from your job and get another one because you didn’t like the people you were working with. It’s not a vocation either – being a mother is a relationship.
Even if it were a job, there is no way being a professional mother could be the hardest when compared to working 16 hours a day in a clothing factory in Bangladesh, making bricks in an Indian kiln, or being a Chinese miner. Nor could it ever be considered the most important job in comparison with a surgeon who saves lives, anyone running a nation, or a judge deciding on people’s destiny.
Related posts this blog
No Man’s Land – Between Agnosticism and Christianity / Also: It’s Emotional Not Intellectual (PART 1)
This will be a series of posts where my thoughts wander in and out and all over, and it rambles, but there is a point or two behind it.
Since I’ve been in a faith crisis the last couple of years, somewhere between being an agnostic and a Christian, I have noticed I don’t fit in anywhere. I reside in No Man’s Land.
(Even before then, when I was a total, committed Christian, and politically, I was, and am, right wing, I still didn’t fit in at most blogs and forums, including political ones, and including ones for right wingers!
I tend to be one of those personalities who annoys or angers everyone, even those on “my side” of an issue, except a small number of people, who are either on my side of a topic or not, who “get me” or who appreciate where I’m coming from – again, this is true for even the ones who disagree with me on whatever topic we are discussing.)
I am in this really weird place now, where I am critical of some aspects of conservative Christianity, and see where conservative Christians get some doctrines and other things wrong, but, too, I am not fully on board with militant atheism (I find the New Atheists to be arrogant, vile, hateful and rude), and I don’t even care for lukewarm atheism.
Nor am I in the camp of anything and all things liberal Christianity, except where I think they get the occasional point correct (such as their rejection of gender complementarianism).
Since drifting away from the Christian faith more the last few years, I more often began frequenting forums or blogs for and by atheists, ones by liberal Christians, ones by ex Christians, or by Christians who were abused by a former church who remain Christian but who dropped out of Church, or who now are on a crusade to expose abuse by preachers or the absurdity and harm of current evangelical gimmicks.
THE MILITANT ATHEISTS
A clarification: when I say I have been visiting atheist forums and blogs more often, I am very picky about which ones I regularly visit.
I do not like the frothing- at- the- mouth, extremely bitter, biased- against- Christians- type atheistic communities.
The bitter atheist groups sound like a bunch of irrational, hate-filled loons who reject Christianity for emotional reasons, but who lie to others and themselves and say, “Oh no, it’s purely intellectual.”
But their unrelenting, insane amount of hatred at any and all things God and Christian, is just a total turn-off to me, so I try to avoid such sites.
These angry, always-ranting atheists are really nothing more than Fundamentalist Atheists or Taliban Atheists. They are just as dogmatic about their atheism as Muslims are in their Wasabi Islam or Baptists are in their Neo Fundamentalism.
Really, those types of atheists are just as bad as the religious groups they claim they hate, but they don’t seem to spot that they are. It’s ironic – and it’s hard to stomach the day in, day out anger and hatred, so I try to avoid their sites.
HYPOCRITICAL CHRISTIANS VS NON HYPOCRITICAL CHRISTIANS
Also, you have to be honest with yourself, which I do not find militant atheists to be, by and large: not every single Christian is a hypocrite, jerk, idiot, dullard, or complete jackhole.
I say this as someone who is very fed up with Christianity and Christian persons myself these days.
But your average militant atheist will never admit that some Christians are in fact okay and not being hypocrites.
I have known and met a few Christians who were sincerely trying to live the Christian faith out, such as my mother, who is now deceased, and her mother before her (my grandmother).
I’ve met a few honest, sincere Christians online who do help people and show compassion to the wounded.
So it’s not fair to completely dismiss the entirety of Christians and their faith or treat them all like jerks because some are liars, mean, or abusive.
Which is not easy for me personally, because at the same time, I do keep noticing that a lot of self-professing believers do NOT live out what the Bible says.
Many self professing Christians today, for example, do not protect victims, such as young church members who have been sexually molested by preachers.
Nor do many church goers today hold accountable preachers who bilk their church goers out of millions to buy big mansions and jets.
These idiots, these lemmings, actually defend their greedy pastors online, which I’ve written about here: (Link): Your Preacher Sucks – and People Have a Right To Say So And Explain Why.
Then you have a conservative or evangelical culture, which claims to care deeply that people preserve sex until marriage, but if you actually find yourself 40 years of age and still single – and therefore still a virgin, such as myself – these same churches and Christians do not offer you any support.
You either go ignored, or preachers and talking heads of such groups “run down” and insult celibacy as well as older, celibate adults. Churches treat single (and especially celibate) adults as though they are flawed, lepers, weirdos, or losers.
Churches wrongly counsel abused wives to return to their spouses – this is particularly true, again, of churches or Christian groups who buy into “biblical womanhood” (aka “gender complementariansm”) or “patriarchy.”
Churches and average Christians also remain ignorant or callous about matters pertaining to mental health issues, from P.T.S.D. to depression and anxiety attacks.
Some Christians wrongly and insensitively teach that “real Christians” can never get depression or other mental health maladies.
Or, some Christians believe and teach that prayer, faith, service to the poor, or Bible reading alone can cure one of mental illness.
Still other Christians (or the same type) will shame and guilt suffering Christians for using anti-depressant medications, or for seeing secular or Christian psychiatrists and therapists (see this link for more, “Over 50 Percent of Christians Believe Prayer, Bible Reading Alone Can Cure Mental Illness (article) – In Other Words Half of Christians are Ignorant Idiots Regarding Mental Illness”).
Yet other Christians are incompetent at, or unwilling, to provide more ordinary, “every day,” run- of- the- mill comfort to other Christians who are hurting, such as a Christian who is stressed out over a job loss, someone who is in mourning for a deceased loved one, etc.
Christians are dropping the ball in numerous ways.
And this failure, this huge failure, causes life long Christians like me to look long and hard at the faith and wonder if it’s true at all.
It causes even someone such as myself to ask if the faith is true, because
~ and it makes you wonder “what is the point, then.”
I find this discrepancy between confessed belief and actual practice shocking, because I myself sincerely tried living out the faith since childhood.
Also, my Christian mother was a role model for me, and she genuinely, consistently lived out and by biblical teachings, including getting up off her ass and actually HELPING people (giving them money if they were in a bind, cleaning their homes for them when they were sick, listening to them cry and rant about their problems for hours without judging them or interrupting them, etc).
I am not seeing most other Christians do any of this. They say they believe in those things but then they do not do them.
BLOGS AND FORUMS FOR SPIRITUALLY ABUSED OR THOSE HURT BY CHURCHES
Before I actually get into this topic (which I discuss more in Posts 2 and 3), here is some background leading up to it.
As far as the sites I have visited by liberal Christians, ex Christians, atheists, as well as sites by Christians for the spiritually abused:
By and large, these have been wonderful, supportive sites and groups to visit (the ones run by Christians for hurting Christians).
I have noticed, though, that there are problems even within these types of communities, and I don’t entirely fit in at them, either.
Married Preacher, Father of Eight Kids, Used Nanny as Sex Object – update on Phillips story
WARNING. Post ahead contains some sexy scenarios, some adult material, if you will.
I have written of this story before – twice. Here’s yet another update on the Phillips saga.
Most Christians don’t support folks like me, who have stayed virgins into our 40s or older – I’ve never been married, but had wanted to be – but instead, Christians preach repeatedly on the importance of marriage and having children. They claim to defend and revere “family values.”
Christians pay attention to marriage, married couples, and children and parenting all the time, but do little for or about older singles.
I’m treated like persona non grata, or like a leper, depending on which denomination we’re considering, for being a childless, never married, 40 something virginal woman.
But these guys who work as preachers who espouse the “nuclear family” ideal, who are married, some are fathers, get caught in affairs all the time. They are such flaming hypocrites it makes me want to form a fist and punch a hole in the wall.
Instead of Christians harboring the unfair stereotype that never married men past age 30 are child molestors, given the staggering amount of news items I keep seeing of MARRIED CHRISTIAN MEN (see this link for examples) who are using prostitutes, having affairs, molesting kids, and acting inappropriate towards young women, I think the stereotype needs to be dropped.
It’s much more accurate for Christians to suspect married men of sexual sin than un-married ones.
We have an update on another married preacher, a marriage- and- family idolater, Doug Phillips, who apparently cheated on his wife, which you can read at (Link): Spiritual Sounding Board
– under the “Lourdes Torres, Alleged Victim in the Doug Phillips (Vision Forum) Sex Abuse Scandals Files Lawsuit” post which was published April 15, 2013
(Link): Lawsuit claims S.A. religious leader preyed on his kids’ nanny
(Link): Sex Scandal Rocks The Duggars’ Christian Patriarchy Movement
(Link): Pastor accused of ‘using nanny [Lourdes Torres] as sex object’, from WND
This has nothing to do with anything, but in some of the photos, particularly the “red dress” photo, Torres looks like British R&B singer Amy Winehouse.
Compare (Link): Torres’ Photo with (Link): Amy Winehouse photos and tell me if they don’t look like they could be sisters. Anyway…..
Excerpts from WND article:
Lawsuit claims religious leader promised to marry young woman after wife dies
by CHELSEA SCHILLING
(Warning: This story contains explicit descriptions of alleged sexual conduct described in a lawsuit and may be offensive to some readers.)
The former leader of a popular Christian ministry – who resigned from his position after confessing to an “inappropriate” relationship – is now the subject of a lawsuit that claims he “methodically groomed” and made unwanted sexual contact with a young woman after serving as an authority figure in her life for more than a decade.
Doug Phillips, a husband and father of eight children, had been a popular and controversial figure in the homeschooling movement and a leading advocate of “biblical patriarchy” before his resignation from Vision Forum Ministries and Boerne Christian Assembly, a Baptist church outside San Antonio, Texas, at which he had served as an elder and preached hundreds of sermons.
… According to the teachings of the patriarchy movement, also known as the stay-at-home daughters or quiverfull movement, young women remain at home under the protection of their fathers.
They’re generally expected not to work outside their home or go to college, and they’re taught to abide by strict gender roles in which men have authority over women.
‘A personal sex object’
In the complaint filed in Kendall County District Court in Texas Tuesday morning, Phillips is accused of using a woman named Lourdes Torres, now 29, as “a personal sex object” over a period of five years.
… Torres said she met Phillips and his wife, Beall, at a homeschooling conference in November 1999 when Torres was 15 years old.
Torres spent many hours in the Phillips home, cared for their children and helped run the family farm. She was invited on trips with the family to Hawaii, Virginia, Mexico, Florida and other states.
By 2007, according to the complaint, Phillips began “to pay special attention” to Torres, complementing her beauty and devotion to his family, giving her money, touching her, asking her personal questions about her thoughts and life plans and telling her he would take care of her.
By October of that year, the lawsuit states, Phillips invited Torres’ family to live with him as they were moving into a new home: “Phillips entered [Torres’] bedroom and without her consent began touching her breasts, stomach, back, neck, and waist.” Torres alleges she began to cry and ask Phillips to stop as he rubbed his genitals on her and “masturbated and ejaculated on her.” She claims the behavior continued, and Phillips told her he loved her and intended to marry her and “blatantly disregarded her requests” that he stop.
“Douglas Phillips, on the evenings he visited Ms. Torres, persuaded her that he was not doing anything wrong, that he intended to marry Ms. Torres, and that his wife would die shortly and enable him to marry Ms. Torres,” the complaint states. “He further repeatedly told Ms. Torres that he loved her, that he would take care of her, and that what they were doing was not wrong. He also stated that if it was wrong, it was completely her fault.”