Tag Archives: feminism

No wonder men don’t want to get married

wedding-rings2.jpgI love being married and wouldn’t trade it for anything (Best. Wife. Ever.).  But I can see why young men today are so fearful of marriage. 

Go read Jennifer Roback Morse evaluates the economics of no-fault divorce by Wintery Knight.  It is a major reason for men to be scared of commitment.

It is especially important for unmarried women to understand how no-fault divorce laws and activist family courts dissuade men from marrying. My concern today is that the feminist ideology has become so entrenched that young women will drag themselves through the muck of the sexual revolution without even reflecting on how a string of drunken hook-ups destroys their innocence, vulnerability and capacity to trust and love.

This is not just bad for men, who will increasingly face financial ruin, and loss of access to their own children. No-fault divorce opens the door to totalitarian control of men, women and children by the state. Women who wish to marry and have children will find it increasingly difficult to find men willing to take the risk of marrying and raising children. Women need to consider the incentives created by a Marxist-feminist state.

And besides, when radical feminism convinced women that out-of-wedlock sex (and the inevitable abortions) were evidence of their equal worth to men, the men got the sex they wanted with little if any commitment or responsibility.  Something like Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free? comes to mind.

If  you combine a godless worldview with our current divorce laws, why would any guy take the risks?

There is still a better way, people: Follow God’s plan for sex and marriage — one man, one woman, for life.  Easy?  No.  Worth it?  Yes!

The Apostle Paul: Two major salvation lessons

There is a fabulous paradoxical combo-lesson about salvation from the life of Paul: (1) If someone as bad as Paul can be saved, then so can we and (2) If someone as good as Paul needed to trust in Jesus to be saved, then so do we.  In other words, he was so bad but not beyond salvation and so good but couldn’t earn salvation.

I was reading Philippians last night and thinking about how I like the Apostle Paul.  I appreciate his writing and especially his passion in conveying the word of God.  He gets a bad rap for allegedly being anti-female, but if you read him properly and in the context of his culture, he was quite the feminist (in the good sense).  A woman in a Bible study once said, “I don’t like Paul.  He’s a chauvinist.”  I thought to myself, “I’ve got bad news for you.  You’re wrong, and he wrote much of the New Testament.” 

Paul had perhaps the most dramatic conversion experience ever.  He went from a full-time job of persecuting Christians to being the greatest evangelist for Christianity of all time.  That would be like Osama Bin Laden quitting terrorism to head up the Anti-Defamation League.

Paul’s life has at least two great lesson about salvation, though it is powerfully important how different they are:

1. If someone as awful as Paul can be redeemed, there is hope for us.  Jesus’ sacrifice covers all our sins if we will only repent and believe.  In Acts 9:5, Jesus said that Paul was persecuting Christ himself.  Paul went about terrorizing, jailing and murdering Christians as his day job.  If his sins can be forgiven, so can yours.

2. If an outstanding Jew like Paul still needed Jesus to be saved, then so does every other human on the planet.  Consider Philippians 3:4-6:

. . . If anyone else thinks he has reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness, faultless.” 

Paul had the ultimate Jewish resume — part of the chosen people, well educated, zealous, very righteous on human terms and so much more.  He had all that going for him but He still needed Christ.  If such a stellar Jewish person like Paul had to have faith in Jesus to be saved then, then so do we.  (Side note: What makes any Christian think we shouldn’t witness to Jewish people?)

Don’t swallow the stereotypes.  Read Paul (and more!) and learn for yourself.  Rejoice in the truth that just like him, you need to be saved and you can be saved.

Roundup

Randy bravely addresses the thorny topic of just how many pillows one man needs and he also offers a chance at a $10 prize just for explaining your choice for smartest U.S. President ever.  I’m going with William Henry Harrison, because by dying 31 days into his term he made the fewest mistakes of any President.

The public option is not dead yet and is still the same Trojan Horse it always was.  And here are 20 errors Obama made in describing the plan.

Abstinence = true feminism — some excerpts:

“The availability of abortion removes the one remaining legitimized reason that women have had for refusing sex besides the headache.”

“Legalized abortion was supposed to grant enormous freedom to women, but it has had the perverse result of freeing men and trapping women.”

Stith writes that MacKinnon’s essay, which was given little credence when it was published, warrants further discussion. He argues that in a competitive sexual marketplace, the number of women willing to have an abortion “reduces an individual woman’s bargaining power.”

“As a result, in order not to lose her guy, she may be pressured into doing precisely what she doesn’t want to do: have unprotected sex, then an unwanted pregnancy, then the abortion she had all along been trying to avoid,” he said.

I think there’s some truth here. I for one have heard men admit they will never wear a condom during sex because there is no shortage of women who’ll oblige their demand for optimal pleasure. It’s sad, but it’s true.

It seems to me, following this logic — and contrary to what many feminists would argue — that the only way to be a true feminist is to make a man wait until marriage to have sex.

More about the differences between Wesleyan Arminianism and Calvinism.  This can get contentious, so play nice, everyone!  My comments there:

One thing I find interesting about the debate is that the critiques both sides use are often superfluous as they cut both ways.  For example, you could say that Calvinism leads to pride (“God chose me!”) or that Wesleyanism leads to pride (“I chose God!) or vice verse with humility (“There is no way I would have chosen God” / “I’m so grateful I had a chance to choose God”).  I try to sift those arguments out as they really don’t prove much.

“When you are at the point of inventing an infinite number of universes to explain the fine-tuning, you’ll know what I am talking about. For every 100 non-Christians who starts to make that speculative multiverse reply to the fine-tuning argument, maybe 1 of you closes his mouth and says “ENOUGH”.”

Well said!  The multiverse theory is an atheist concession speech.  It is a good litmus test to see if they are seriously seeking God or seriously seeking reasons to avoid God.

Pro-Obama = anti-black

And pro-Mccain / Palin = pro-black.  Really.  Here’s why.

I think McCain’s economic, defense, energy and other plans will ultimately be better for blacks, but even if they won’t the title is still true.

There are two indisputable facts to consider:

  1. Abortions will increase under an Obama administration.  Obama clearly stated that his top priority as President would be to sign the “Freedom of Choice Act,” which would effectively eliminate every guideline, regulation, restriction, and limit on the multi-billion dollar abortion industry in the U.S. (see the video below).  He is on the record for being pro-partial birth abortion (he knows his “health” exception makes any restrictions meaningless) and wouldn’t even vote for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (his attempts to spin that have been thoroughly debunked).  Judges he would appoint would be pro-choice, so the legacy could last for decades.  The evidence is overwhelming: He is radically pro-legalized abortion with no restrictions.
  2. Abortion rates in the black community are three times that of whites.

In short, Obama is wildly pro-abortion and abortions are disproportionately high in black communities.

Therefore, with Obama you will have many more black human beings crushed and dismembered in the womb and blacks will be a smaller and smaller percentage of society than they would have otherwise.  And that means less influence over politics and such.

It is indisputable that Obama’s policies will result in many more dead black people.  I cannot see why people think his slightly different shade of melanin will more than make up for that.

Pro-choicers may or may not be racist, but their policies are bad for black human beings.  The facts speak loudly and clearly. 

  • Pro-choice = anti-black
  • Pro-life = pro-black
  • Pro-McCain / Palin = pro-black
  • Pro-Obama = anti-black

Weekly roundup

The Misogyny of Sex and the CityWhy do so many women find that show/movie appealing?  Marge Simpson said it best:

That’s the show about four women acting like gay guys.

Read Brooks’ review of Bart Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus.  Ehrman used to claim to be Christian and now is a favorite of the theologically liberal Christian / atheist / Muslim sets.  He does sound scholarship . . . to a point.  Then he makes some missteps when playing out his agenda.

Evangelism is a hate crime in the UK? – Coming soon to a country near you?

Religous pluralism doesn’t promote tolerance, but criticizes those who believe – and act on the belief – that religions have objective truth value.  Not only are those believers wrong, they are guilty of hate crimes. 

That’s not only truly oppressive, but self-refuting.

The daughter of the radical feminist author of the Color Purple speaks out and highlights the awful consequences of that worldview.

The Bible vs. the Book of Mormon – archeology supports the Bible and embarrasses the Book of Mormon over and over.