What I’d Wish I’d Known Before Moving In Together – via New York Times

What I’d Wish I’d Known Before Moving In Together

“Moving in together? Who will stay in the event of a breakup? Who will pay any pesky fees or taxes? Time to plan”

I’m not a paid subscriber to NY Times, and my monthly allotment of free articles is up, so I am unable to provide excerpts to this.

But maybe you can read it on their site:

(Link): What I’d Wish I’d Known Before Moving In Together – New York Times

Advertisements

Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith

Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith

The impetus for Smith’s essay is the book “All the Single Ladies,” by Traister, which I have posted about in several posts already such as (Link): this one or (Link): this one.

Much of what this author, Smith, says about single women in regards to the Republican Party -that Republicans need to start paying attention to and validating single women and their concerns- can also be said of conservative Christians.

Conservative Christians continue to either ignore single women or to attack them for being single, in spite of the fact that Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7 that it is better for a person to remain single.

There is nothing wrong with a person wanting to get married, BUT, conservative Christians need to stop acting as though marriage is a cure for society, or is the norm or the default. By doing so, they marginalize singleness and single adults.

(Link): Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith

Excerpts:

  • …Writer Rebecca Traister—author of the new book All the Single Ladies—explains that the rise of single women is “a radical upheaval, a national reckoning with massive social and political implications” as single women outnumber married women for the first time in American history. Marriage has shifted from an expectation in a woman’s early 20s to a life goal saved for someday (if ever).

Continue reading “Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith”

The Case Against ‘Saving’ Marriage – Married Nuclear Families Are the Gold Standard Against Which We Are All Judged. by N. Rodgers

The Case Against ‘Saving’ Marriage – Married Nuclear Families Are the Gold Standard Against Which We Are All Judged. by N. Rodgers

  • Disclaimer:
    I am not always in complete agreement with every last view in every editorial or article I link to.
  • I am right wing with traditional values but agree with liberals that right wingers, Republicans, and Christians need to stop idealizing the Nuclear Family, in so far as it marginalizes, punishes, or discriminates against those who do not fit that demographic or lifestyke.

The following editorial is from a progressive (left wing) site. I agree with much of what this editorial says, though not all of it.

(Link): The Case Against ‘Saving’ Marriage by N. Rodgers

  • Married Nuclear Families Are the Gold Standard Against Which We Are All Judged.
  • Marriage rates have been declining for more than half a century and single women now outnumber married ones. There are few guides better at navigating this new landscape than Rebecca Traister.
  • In a recent New York Magazine (Link): article, adapted from her soon-to-be-released book All the Single Ladies, she offers an insightful, nuanced analysis of the plight and power of unmarried women “taking up space in a world that was not designed for them.”
  • Traister argues that the current democratic policy platform may be more liberal than it has been in a generation in response to the growth of unmarried women. It’s about time. Public policy has lagged almost criminally behind in meeting the needs of single women, and especially single mothers, for decades.
  • But while a policy platform that stands to benefit unmarried women and mothers is necessary, it is not sufficient. There is no substitute for identity politics. Part of why the U.S. still has such inadequate public policies is the fear of publicly supporting families that conservatives have already convinced us are unequivocally bad, subpar alternatives to the married nuclear variety, especially “single mother” homes.

Continue reading “The Case Against ‘Saving’ Marriage – Married Nuclear Families Are the Gold Standard Against Which We Are All Judged. by N. Rodgers”

Husband-Hunting is the Worst Part of a Christian Upbringing – Christianity Made Me Obsessed with Finding a Husband – by B. Ramos

Husband-Hunting is the Worst Part of a Christian Upbringing – Christianity Made Me Obsessed with Finding a Husband – by B. Ramos

(Link):  Husband-hunting is the worst part of a Christian upbringing by B. Ramos 

Excerpts:

  • Christianity made me obsessed with finding a husband 
  • June 30, 2015
  • …Now that I am “old” and married with two kids at the age of 31 (and wasn’t married as I intended at 21), I’m so glad I didn’t go down that road. There’s nothing technically wrong with young marriage, though I personally believe and will tell my children that it’s so, so important to take time to get to know yourself and other people before you make a lifelong commitment.
  • There is something wrong with being coerced and even brainwashed into thinking you need to get married at a young age to be complete — in the eyes of God and in the eyes of other people.
  • No, I did not grow up in a Duggar-like cult. I grew up in a fundamental Christian home, which was quite common for my area of South Texas.
  • I’ve spoken to a number of friends, including my husband who was the son of a Baptist pastor, and our stories match up.
  • Young people are still being led to believe that young marriage (implying abstinence from sex) is the only way to please God, and these young people who follow this path are not being told the whole story.

Continue reading “Husband-Hunting is the Worst Part of a Christian Upbringing – Christianity Made Me Obsessed with Finding a Husband – by B. Ramos”

Boyfriend is Insecure About Girlfriend’s [Sexual] Past (Ask Amy Letter)

Boyfriend is insecure about girlfriend’s past (Ask Amy Letter)

Yes, sex sometimes means something to some people. Some people don’t believe in having numerous sexual partners, having casual sex, or what have you.

Some people can be troubled to know that their partner has a sexual history – or maybe can sort of compartmentalize it and suppress it, if they don’t get subjected to details about it.

Here we have a letter from a woman who says her current boyfriend is troubled by her sexual past.

Not everyone holds casual attitudes about sex.

Boyfriend is insecure about girlfriend’s past

Dear Amy:

I am seeking advice on a very touchy subject between me and my boyfriend of two years.

I am 24 years old. When I was 21, I was living in a different town and had a sexual relationship with another female.

This relationship did not last long, because I became conflicted and eventually determined I was just not interested in that lifestyle.

My boyfriend is everything to me! From our values to spirituality, he is my perfect match.

We have always been open and honest with each other. He has a daughter from a previous relationship, so he likes to make the point that he can’t hide his past.

I opened up about my past sexual history with the female. Now he seems to be struggling with a lot of insecurity.

I’m not sure what else I can do to comfort him, in that I am not gay. I was a young lady in a weird spot in life and experimented (like a lot of us do at that age).

But he is taking this very hard.

Continue reading “Boyfriend is Insecure About Girlfriend’s [Sexual] Past (Ask Amy Letter)”

Civil, Secular Authorities and Marriage and The Dippy Christian “Marriage Pledge” Preachers are Being Asked To Sign

Civil, Secular Authorities and Marriage

This is a critique of the following post, and related ideas:

(Link): The Euphemism Of Marriage by J. Morgan

The guy that wrote that post has a tendency to make his blog temporarily private once he sees I’ve linked to one of his posts, then he makes it public again after so many weeks. You can read more about that wacko situation (Link): here, here, and here.

Lately, on other sites, there has been discussion on whether or not Christian preachers should stop holding weddings altogether, or if Christian preachers should only perform weddings for Christians…

In other words, some Christians are so upset over the possibility of Christians being forced to perform same-sex marriage, some are thinking that maybe Christians should not have anything to do with the government or secular groups in regards to marriage.

Here are a few links about the situation:

(Link):  Separating Civil and Christian Marriage: Should We Sign the Pledge?

(Link):  Should Pastors Disengage Civil and Christian Marriage?

(Link):  Pastors Sign Pledge to Separate Christian, Civil Marriage – via CBN site

Excerpt, from CBN article::

  • A new LifeWay Research survey on marriage and an online pledge drive shows support for a movement to further separate church and state roles in marriage.
  • Six in 10 responding to the survey said the government should not define or regulate marriage. More than a third also said that clergy should get out of the civil marriage business. 

I am not necessarily in agreement with all views by this blogger or this particular page, but it’s a critique of the Marriage Pledge position by Protestant Christians:

(Link):  The Marriage Pledge: Why You Should Not Sign It

Excerpt:

  • Their heirs, especially the Puritans and later the neo-Reformers, knew that all of life must be Christian, and to be Christian, it must be biblical.
  • The Bible provides the guidelines on what all of life, including the state, should look like. If the state is anti-biblical, you need to work to make it biblical, just as you would do in the family and church. You don’t get to opt out of them.
  • …But this option of cultural withdrawal isn’t available to the neo-Reformers. Douglas Wilson has offered several excellent practical, pastoral objections to The Marriage Pledge.
  • I would add that The Marriage Pledge is flawed at its root.The state, no matter how perverse, has a vested interest in marriage (will the church enforce disposition of children and property in the case of divorce? Hardly. And if she did, who would enforce the enforcement?). Should the church “disentangle” itself from the family since the family, too, is being redefined?
  • To be sure: the state can and does act unjustly (“no-fault divorce,” etc.). But the alternative isn’t anarchy, which despite its best intentions, is what The MArriage Pledge is suggesting. The state, even an apostate one, has a legitimate vested interest in marriage and the welfare of children springing from it.

Some Christians have a weirdo, odd ball view point that Christians marrying HETERO couples in today’s climate somehow is associated with the marriage of HOMOsexual couples.

I have written of this topic before, like here:

Yes, there are some Christian kooks who are teaching other Christians that if you, a hetero Christian, gets married in a state that has legalized homosexual marriage, this somehow invalidates YOUR (hetero) marriage.

These Christian kooks are teaching if you are a HETERO, Christian VIRGIN, yet marry your spouse in a state where homosexual marriage is also legal, this means you are NOT EQUALLY YOKED to your spouse because your entire marriage is invalidated, and they seem to imply you are sexually impure by extension.

And doesn’t the God of the Bible say he does not hold the sins of the father against the sons, that each person is responsible only for his or her own sins?

So what gives with Christians who are teaching this heresy that a hetero, Christian marriage magically becomes improper or sinfully tainted if it was held in a state where homosexuals are permitted to marry? God does not hold the sins of homosexuals against hetero Christians.

Anyway, this John Morgan guy seems to argue along a similar line in his post,

(Link): The Euphemism Of Marriage by J. Morgan

My intent here is not to copy tons and tons of this guy’s post, but it’s so hard to find just one or two paragraphs that summarize his thoughts here, I’m not sure what parts to excerpt.

Excerpts.

  • …We hear euphemisms everyday: Correctional facility instead of prison, collateral damage instead of accidental deaths, enhanced interrogation techniques instead of torture, pregnancy termination instead of abortion, etc.
  • We can add one more – marriage. Turning to the Oxford Dictionary again, we see that marriage is: “The legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship.” In short, it’s a legal sexual relationship recognized by the state you live in.

Continue reading “Civil, Secular Authorities and Marriage and The Dippy Christian “Marriage Pledge” Preachers are Being Asked To Sign”