In TWI submitting yourselves to one another pretty much went like this: The wife would submit to her hubby, then to another--the HFC, and another--The Branch coord, still another--limb coord, and don't forget another--region coord and a random group of others--any loose corps you happened to deal with.
Plenty of people to keep you on the straight and narrow. Plus they could communicate amongst each other about you, and even have your ministry 'friends" knowingly or unknowingly spy on you--that kept you 'honest,' and kept the household pure.
I have no interest in anyone having authority in my personal or family life In my relationships with hubby, siblings and friends, I do not have to submit. I can say yes or no, agree or disagree, compromise, take advice or ignore it. My well being does not hinge on my 'obedience.'
I think the kind of husband/wife relationship that Wierwille promoted was a product of the times and culture he grew up in, not a representation of the scriptures. (Rural America, during The Great Depression) I believe, like many other things he taught, he simply looked for scriptures that would substantiate his viewpoint with a bit of tweaking and twisting.
I would suggest being subject to one another in love is directed to the church, which includes everyone, married and single.
As far as marriage, someone has to be the CEO, and at least in my situation Mr. Garden is better equipped to fill that position. This does not mean that he doesn't ask my thoughts, seek me out for discussion, suggestions and feedback. Being the head of the household is leadership, not dictatorship.
In many Christian churches, Bible studies, classes, etc. the woman gets hammered with submission, obedience, keep your mouth shut and the house cleaned and the meals cooked kind of subjection. I've had Prov. 31:10-31 crammed down my face at least once a year since I was 28 years old, and the house still isn't perfectly immaculate. I actually took one class where this lady said that "The husband is the master, and the wife is his servant." :o
Marriage isn't a job description with carefully delineated responsibilities that are completely separate from the other; it's a life. We are to be heirs TOGETHER of the grace of life.
Men, that's God's daughter you are wedded to. How would YOU feel if some man treated your little girl like dirt, worked her like a slave, spoke rudely and disparagingly to her? Do you think God is going to applaud you if you treat HIS little girl like that? I think love and respect go together; Paul accentuates men loving their wives, and wives respecting their husbands, but nowhere does he state that one cancels out the other. I see nowhere that I am to respect my husband, but not to love him; I see nowhere that he is to love me but be very disrespectful. At the least that is NOT how we treat our brothers and sisters in Christ. So, yes, men should respect their wives as well as love them.
Think about what Christ went through for the church; the unbelievably horrific torture and humiliation and death He went through for us; that's the kind of sacrificial love men are to have for their wives.
And as Christ invites us to come to the place He has so lovingly prepared for us, and we gratefully, gracefully and graciously accept, so is the wife to submit herself to her own husband. Not "yes dear of course dear" with gritted teeth, but with a joyful step and light heart. Submitting ourselves one to another in love and in the light of Christ's sacrificial love for us.
I would suggest that this is possibly judean culture of 2000 plus years ago rather than God`s law.. Women now cut their hair, own property, are allowed in worship services...all one time big no nos in biblical cultures.
Does anybody know of a culture or people that are successful that practice this??
I know that as long as I was the good little submissive wife, our lives were pure hell. As far as I am concerned we all need one another to keep each other in balance and check...when one has the total authority, it puts another at a disadvantage, it also puts a huge amount of responsibility on the shoulders of the one who feels responsible for the other.
I can say this as well, that if you are unfortunate enough to be married to an alcoholic, submission is the LAST thing that they need, and it is dangerous for yourself and the kiddos.
It is for this reason alone that though a christian myself, I don`t necessarily want my girls marrying one....a guy that claims authority over them because of his gender. He is going to have to be a lot more spiritually mature than that no matter what label he wears. I hope that my boys are mature enough not to need to feel powerful and dominate another.
. . . I think love and respect go together; Paul accentuates men loving their wives, and wives respecting their husbands, but nowhere does he state that one cancels out the other. . . .
As far as I know Paul was assigning a new behavior for husbands, at least for that culture. Perhaps he was saying that the women ought to respect there husbands, becuase this new behavior could be seen as a sign of weakness in that culture, and therefore the women would be ashamed of their husbands?
I would suggest that this is possibly judean culture of 2000 plus years ago rather than God`s law.. Women now cut their hair, own property, are allowed in worship services...all one time big no nos in biblical cultures.
Does anybody know of a culture or people that are successful that practice this??
Rascal I'll answer the above snippet in a minute. First, I have to say that this is a pretty funny thread. It reminds me of the 1960's when women stood up and militantly burned their bras and said to men, "up yours muthaphuka." Granted it was a worthy effort at the time BUT this is the USA and it is 2009 AD (Christian calendar). Times have changed and your (as in women's) lifestyles are under YOUR control as they SHOULD be like never before. If you wish to refute this I have a few countries I've visited that I'd like to recommend to you just for your observation of how cruel women are actually treated in other places. I BY NO MEANS think things are perfect in the US, however. by comparison - enjoy your margarita tonight.
Now to your quote above. Limiting this to some judean biblical cultural event is incredibly myopic and smacks of the Christian martyr syndrome. ALL RELIGIONS - ON EVERY CONTINENT I HAVE BEEN ON (six out of seven to be precise) keep women down and I mean down HARD through the use of religion - crushingly hard - slavery hard - where they are routinely mutilated physically for the slightest disobedience often resulting in permanent disfigurement - nothing like the milky pseudo-suppression of TWITS by force of words and a brainwashed belief system - nothing like the phenomenal advances made in Europe and the USA/Canada groups. It is NOT limited to, NOR did it originate in, judeo-christian culture and practice - it is also in Hindu, Buddhism, Shintoism, most African religions and others. In fact in some religions women are not allowed to even practice - religion (god) is between their man and the priest. The one exception I can think of is pure Taoism - and even that has some variants on the original themes.
Anyway - y'all have fun with this thread - I just had to expand this crushing of women to something more global and FAR more viscious than the goofball religious kooks from so called seat of man in the middle east - and the myopic incredibly self-centered view of judeo-christianity as somehow some special place for god - helluva a loser THAT god is if he couldn't figure out how to codify the absolute value of women.
Women have equal value to men - if you have a doctrine that suggests otherwise then I suggest you toss the entire thing out the window - if you trash or crush 52% of your population you probably got a boatload of other STUPID doctrinal IDIOCIES that need to be DUMPED (along with that IDIOT god of yours) unceremoniously into an already used but not yet flushed toilet.
That being said - all of you women on here send me your money and I will save you from eternal damnation and everlasting fires of hell - just repeat after me........... <=== please note humor - well heck y'all can just send me your money anyway - I'll send ya a personalized pink card or something
I have seen what happens when scripture (religion if you will :) ) is used to dominate and subjugate, it isn`t pretty. I don`t believe that God created women inferior to guys, so that it is necessary for someone to oversee us. I think there are some real bullies out there that would LIKE us to think that....would like us to believe that in order to be spiritual, we have to submit because God requires it no matter how bone headed a spouses decisions are....
Too many years as a wife of having my input ignored, my warnings left unheeded, my insight discounted because of my gender and enduring the resulting consequences to believe that this is a Godly idea or practice.
I am married... we talk things over.... we don't always agree but we usually try to go with who ever is the most affected by the decision... If we really disagree sometimes we wait a month or two and revisit the issue.... usually the person who feels the most strongly about it wins. so to speak.... but we always try to be equals with each other.
Sometimes one of us is better at something than the other so that is generally that persons job... but we both try to pitch in when the need is there.
I guess what I am trying to say is perhaps submitting should not mean enslavement.
As to Marriage going away... I say no.. maybe the institution, the piece of paper, but people are meant to join together in some fashion... the paper doesn't really make it a marriage... even the ceremony doesn't
What makes it a marriage is the way the two people work together with each other and enjoy being together. How committed in their hearts they are to each other.
I just found a book called "Me? Obey Him?" by Elizabeth Rice Handford
My wife was tossing it out and I was like "Hey, don't you want to read that?"
(She didn't think it was funny either )
I'll have to skim through this later.
I believe this very book was originally tossed by W@nd@ or Mrs. W--. The first page is ripped out. Maybe it had note from a husband a long time ago . . . i dunno.
I know that this is sometimes an explosive topic that brings out the worst in some folks....but do present your ideas.
I know what TRADITION has taught...but is this really what Ephesians 5 states?
Tradition has taught that it is only the woman's job to submit to her husband, but the verse right before 5:22
Ephesians 5
21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
But right before 5:22 is 5:21 where all the believers are exhort to
SUBMIT YOURSELVES ONE TO ANOTHER....
Could it be???
What do you all think?
Be Polite!
Ummmm....
Don't you think that maybe - just maybe - the emphasis is on "YOUR OWN" instead of every husband (or man) out there? That takes the wind out of the sails of the "women are inferior" doctrine. hmmmmmm.....
And I don't think the emphasis is on "submit to your husband" so much as it is -"Hey! Wake up! It doesn't take a village to be in a committed relationship. Keep your relationship between you and your significant other."
Be Polite!
OH NO! That would mean that I'd be (sssssshiver....) submitting to YOU! No-ooooooooooo!
*runs screaming down the street in mock terror - stops at the corner and falls down laughing*
Actually, marriage IS a dying institution in this country. People meet, have babies, break up, find someone else, have another baby. And the beat goes on.
A lot of women today who want a child do not want a two parent family. Just give me 23 chromosomes honey and be on your way. No commitment to each other, and in the long run no commitment to the child.
The children are the losers. God didn't intend it this way. He set up a two parent family, the first one. Must have had His reasons.
I know that this is sometimes an explosive topic that brings out the worst in some folks....but do present your ideas.
I know what TRADITION has taught...but is this really what Ephesians 5 states?
Tradition has taught that it is only the woman's job to submit to her husband, but the verse right before 5:22
Ephesians 5
21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
But right before 5:22 is 5:21 where all the believers are exhort to
SUBMIT YOURSELVES ONE TO ANOTHER....
Could it be???
What do you all think?
Be Polite!
Dear Bride,
I believe the operative phrase in this exortation is "one to another in the fear of the Lord."
I have recalled different commandments in the Old Testament that warn people that oppressed folks in different categories can cry unto God for injustices and it is promised that God will hear the oppressed.
And for those who keep their homes through cruelty the answer seems plain to, but I don't remember the reference.
I can believe in submission to a minister, but if they are twisted, abusive, and wrongheaded as became common in TWI then the TWI minister should have then been submissive to the "Whiners" in the fear of the Lord IMO. I can remember things Wierwille blew off that I am fairly certain only prove to me that he did not fear the Lord as he should have. As it seems so plain it is only a matter of the Lord making good on His Words now, like He spoke of the ones who beat their bretheren recieving many stripes, etc.
Of course for those who don't choose to fear the Lord I am fairly certain that their ethical frameworks have some provision for authority in situations without abuse and/or the ones in authority not letting it go to their heads.
(edited for spelling)
The same gos for husbands and fathers IMO if they are abusive and/or cruel. Dwelling with them according to knowledge seems to indicate the fear of the Lord to me, it is the same bible after all.
Well in all honesty, I was basing that on personal experience and observation of the younger individuals with whom I reluctantly associate, namely my son, DIL, FDIL, FDIL's live-in boyfriend and future babydaddy, FDIL's sister and her boyfriend, Bristol P. etc etc. So I cannot give you, with mathematical exactness and scientific precision, a head count. It was a somewhat emotional statement, but then I'm not a Vulcan so I get emotional, and tired, and wish sometimes that the children would grow up, do their own laundry, pay their damn bills and leave me be for a while.
Just tired that's all. And very discouraged. Sorry for the inaccuracy of my emotional statement not backed by facts, figures and so on. Maybe the 2010 census will handle this issue.
Not to worry WG, I wasn't trying to go all WD on you ok? But I keep hearing all the yammeryammer that the institution of marriage is dying out, that society is turning into a bunch of hedonistic, post-apocolyptic, Obama socialistic, Hell's Angels, ... yadayadayada. Besides, _real life_ never was an imitation of Andy Griffith's Mayberry in that respect anyway.
And frankly, all of that Jack Chick-wannabe propaganda does get boring and tiring after a while. And (from my own perspective) it would seem to me that the institution, despite the many who do not participate therein, is quite thriving and is in no real danger of becoming extinct.
Oh and please don't let WD's twisted misusage/abuse of 'providing proof' spoil the real principle of 'prove it', ... okay?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
11
36
24
26
Popular Days
Apr 11
16
Apr 7
14
May 5
10
Apr 6
9
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 11 posts
Watered Garden 36 posts
Bolshevik 24 posts
brideofjc 26 posts
Popular Days
Apr 11 2009
16 posts
Apr 7 2009
14 posts
May 5 2009
10 posts
Apr 6 2009
9 posts
Bolshevik
I hear the next verse(s) were actually revolutionary considering the times back then.
Like two sticks holding each other up. A teepee I guess.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
In TWI submitting yourselves to one another pretty much went like this: The wife would submit to her hubby, then to another--the HFC, and another--The Branch coord, still another--limb coord, and don't forget another--region coord and a random group of others--any loose corps you happened to deal with.
Plenty of people to keep you on the straight and narrow. Plus they could communicate amongst each other about you, and even have your ministry 'friends" knowingly or unknowingly spy on you--that kept you 'honest,' and kept the household pure.
I have no interest in anyone having authority in my personal or family life In my relationships with hubby, siblings and friends, I do not have to submit. I can say yes or no, agree or disagree, compromise, take advice or ignore it. My well being does not hinge on my 'obedience.'
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I think the kind of husband/wife relationship that Wierwille promoted was a product of the times and culture he grew up in, not a representation of the scriptures. (Rural America, during The Great Depression) I believe, like many other things he taught, he simply looked for scriptures that would substantiate his viewpoint with a bit of tweaking and twisting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
I would suggest being subject to one another in love is directed to the church, which includes everyone, married and single.
As far as marriage, someone has to be the CEO, and at least in my situation Mr. Garden is better equipped to fill that position. This does not mean that he doesn't ask my thoughts, seek me out for discussion, suggestions and feedback. Being the head of the household is leadership, not dictatorship.
In many Christian churches, Bible studies, classes, etc. the woman gets hammered with submission, obedience, keep your mouth shut and the house cleaned and the meals cooked kind of subjection. I've had Prov. 31:10-31 crammed down my face at least once a year since I was 28 years old, and the house still isn't perfectly immaculate. I actually took one class where this lady said that "The husband is the master, and the wife is his servant." :o
Marriage isn't a job description with carefully delineated responsibilities that are completely separate from the other; it's a life. We are to be heirs TOGETHER of the grace of life.
Men, that's God's daughter you are wedded to. How would YOU feel if some man treated your little girl like dirt, worked her like a slave, spoke rudely and disparagingly to her? Do you think God is going to applaud you if you treat HIS little girl like that? I think love and respect go together; Paul accentuates men loving their wives, and wives respecting their husbands, but nowhere does he state that one cancels out the other. I see nowhere that I am to respect my husband, but not to love him; I see nowhere that he is to love me but be very disrespectful. At the least that is NOT how we treat our brothers and sisters in Christ. So, yes, men should respect their wives as well as love them.
Think about what Christ went through for the church; the unbelievably horrific torture and humiliation and death He went through for us; that's the kind of sacrificial love men are to have for their wives.
And as Christ invites us to come to the place He has so lovingly prepared for us, and we gratefully, gracefully and graciously accept, so is the wife to submit herself to her own husband. Not "yes dear of course dear" with gritted teeth, but with a joyful step and light heart. Submitting ourselves one to another in love and in the light of Christ's sacrificial love for us.
WG
Edited by Watered GardenLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I would suggest that this is possibly judean culture of 2000 plus years ago rather than God`s law.. Women now cut their hair, own property, are allowed in worship services...all one time big no nos in biblical cultures.
Does anybody know of a culture or people that are successful that practice this??
I know that as long as I was the good little submissive wife, our lives were pure hell. As far as I am concerned we all need one another to keep each other in balance and check...when one has the total authority, it puts another at a disadvantage, it also puts a huge amount of responsibility on the shoulders of the one who feels responsible for the other.
I can say this as well, that if you are unfortunate enough to be married to an alcoholic, submission is the LAST thing that they need, and it is dangerous for yourself and the kiddos.
It is for this reason alone that though a christian myself, I don`t necessarily want my girls marrying one....a guy that claims authority over them because of his gender. He is going to have to be a lot more spiritually mature than that no matter what label he wears. I hope that my boys are mature enough not to need to feel powerful and dominate another.
It is an archaic custom from a bygone era.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
As far as I know Paul was assigning a new behavior for husbands, at least for that culture. Perhaps he was saying that the women ought to respect there husbands, becuase this new behavior could be seen as a sign of weakness in that culture, and therefore the women would be ashamed of their husbands?
just a thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Love God Love your neighbor on these two commandments rest all of the law. Sounds like submit to hubby is law to me....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Rascal I'll answer the above snippet in a minute. First, I have to say that this is a pretty funny thread. It reminds me of the 1960's when women stood up and militantly burned their bras and said to men, "up yours muthaphuka." Granted it was a worthy effort at the time BUT this is the USA and it is 2009 AD (Christian calendar). Times have changed and your (as in women's) lifestyles are under YOUR control as they SHOULD be like never before. If you wish to refute this I have a few countries I've visited that I'd like to recommend to you just for your observation of how cruel women are actually treated in other places. I BY NO MEANS think things are perfect in the US, however. by comparison - enjoy your margarita tonight.
Now to your quote above. Limiting this to some judean biblical cultural event is incredibly myopic and smacks of the Christian martyr syndrome. ALL RELIGIONS - ON EVERY CONTINENT I HAVE BEEN ON (six out of seven to be precise) keep women down and I mean down HARD through the use of religion - crushingly hard - slavery hard - where they are routinely mutilated physically for the slightest disobedience often resulting in permanent disfigurement - nothing like the milky pseudo-suppression of TWITS by force of words and a brainwashed belief system - nothing like the phenomenal advances made in Europe and the USA/Canada groups. It is NOT limited to, NOR did it originate in, judeo-christian culture and practice - it is also in Hindu, Buddhism, Shintoism, most African religions and others. In fact in some religions women are not allowed to even practice - religion (god) is between their man and the priest. The one exception I can think of is pure Taoism - and even that has some variants on the original themes.
Anyway - y'all have fun with this thread - I just had to expand this crushing of women to something more global and FAR more viscious than the goofball religious kooks from so called seat of man in the middle east - and the myopic incredibly self-centered view of judeo-christianity as somehow some special place for god - helluva a loser THAT god is if he couldn't figure out how to codify the absolute value of women.
Women have equal value to men - if you have a doctrine that suggests otherwise then I suggest you toss the entire thing out the window - if you trash or crush 52% of your population you probably got a boatload of other STUPID doctrinal IDIOCIES that need to be DUMPED (along with that IDIOT god of yours) unceremoniously into an already used but not yet flushed toilet.
That being said - all of you women on here send me your money and I will save you from eternal damnation and everlasting fires of hell - just repeat after me........... <=== please note humor - well heck y'all can just send me your money anyway - I'll send ya a personalized pink card or something
Edited by RumRunnerLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I have seen what happens when scripture (religion if you will :) ) is used to dominate and subjugate, it isn`t pretty. I don`t believe that God created women inferior to guys, so that it is necessary for someone to oversee us. I think there are some real bullies out there that would LIKE us to think that....would like us to believe that in order to be spiritual, we have to submit because God requires it no matter how bone headed a spouses decisions are....
Too many years as a wife of having my input ignored, my warnings left unheeded, my insight discounted because of my gender and enduring the resulting consequences to believe that this is a Godly idea or practice.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Ephesians was written to Ephesus, in Asia Minor, a Greco-Roman culture?
Perhaps marriage is an archaic practice. I wonder if it will fade someday.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leafytwiglet
I have no Clue... I like what WG said.
I am married... we talk things over.... we don't always agree but we usually try to go with who ever is the most affected by the decision... If we really disagree sometimes we wait a month or two and revisit the issue.... usually the person who feels the most strongly about it wins. so to speak.... but we always try to be equals with each other.
Sometimes one of us is better at something than the other so that is generally that persons job... but we both try to pitch in when the need is there.
I guess what I am trying to say is perhaps submitting should not mean enslavement.
As to Marriage going away... I say no.. maybe the institution, the piece of paper, but people are meant to join together in some fashion... the paper doesn't really make it a marriage... even the ceremony doesn't
What makes it a marriage is the way the two people work together with each other and enjoy being together. How committed in their hearts they are to each other.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Words like submit or submission seem to be hard words to handle.
The word submit does not say obey.
And obey is taken badly as well, most of the time.
Submitting to one another, certainly doesn't mean obey each other.
If we think logically and with common sense.
It can be seen and done with GREAT FREEDOM realized.
Doors of communication open and places to go are not limited.
twi's submit and obey is not love or godly at all.
never even close to knowing being part of each other
not like-minded as we were taught
but able to see with another persons eye
don't even have to agree
how about adding to what is seen
when you quit fighting everyone and everything
things are experienced differently
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
OMG!!!!
I just found a book called "Me? Obey Him?" by Elizabeth Rice Handford
My wife was tossing it out and I was like "Hey, don't you want to read that?"
(She didn't think it was funny either
)
I'll have to skim through this later.
I believe this very book was originally tossed by W@nd@ or Mrs. W--.
The first page is ripped out. Maybe it had note from a husband a long time ago . . . i dunno.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Actually, in the christian view as I understand it, it came prior to the laws of moses, in the garden, with eve, after the fall.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
what fall? no mention of any fall...........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
maybe there wasn't any fall.
in that case, marriage is based on economy, for a time that no longer exists.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Ummmm....
Don't you think that maybe - just maybe - the emphasis is on "YOUR OWN" instead of every husband (or man) out there? That takes the wind out of the sails of the "women are inferior" doctrine. hmmmmmm.....
And I don't think the emphasis is on "submit to your husband" so much as it is -"Hey! Wake up! It doesn't take a village to be in a committed relationship. Keep your relationship between you and your significant other."
OH NO! That would mean that I'd be (sssssshiver....) submitting to YOU! No-ooooooooooo!
*runs screaming down the street in mock terror - stops at the corner and falls down laughing*
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Actually, marriage IS a dying institution in this country. People meet, have babies, break up, find someone else, have another baby. And the beat goes on.
A lot of women today who want a child do not want a two parent family. Just give me 23 chromosomes honey and be on your way. No commitment to each other, and in the long run no commitment to the child.
The children are the losers. God didn't intend it this way. He set up a two parent family, the first one. Must have had His reasons.
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Well, you'd think that with all the gays wanting to get married, that the institution is getting its needed infusion of support. ...
But seriously, upon what real numbers are you basing that conclusion that marriage is the dying institution you insist it is?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JeffSjo
Dear Bride,
I believe the operative phrase in this exortation is "one to another in the fear of the Lord."
I have recalled different commandments in the Old Testament that warn people that oppressed folks in different categories can cry unto God for injustices and it is promised that God will hear the oppressed.
And for those who keep their homes through cruelty the answer seems plain to, but I don't remember the reference.
I can believe in submission to a minister, but if they are twisted, abusive, and wrongheaded as became common in TWI then the TWI minister should have then been submissive to the "Whiners" in the fear of the Lord IMO. I can remember things Wierwille blew off that I am fairly certain only prove to me that he did not fear the Lord as he should have. As it seems so plain it is only a matter of the Lord making good on His Words now, like He spoke of the ones who beat their bretheren recieving many stripes, etc.
Of course for those who don't choose to fear the Lord I am fairly certain that their ethical frameworks have some provision for authority in situations without abuse and/or the ones in authority not letting it go to their heads.
(edited for spelling)
The same gos for husbands and fathers IMO if they are abusive and/or cruel. Dwelling with them according to knowledge seems to indicate the fear of the Lord to me, it is the same bible after all.
Edited by JeffSjoLink to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Oh, God not you too!
Well in all honesty, I was basing that on personal experience and observation of the younger individuals with whom I reluctantly associate, namely my son, DIL, FDIL, FDIL's live-in boyfriend and future babydaddy, FDIL's sister and her boyfriend, Bristol P. etc etc. So I cannot give you, with mathematical exactness and scientific precision, a head count. It was a somewhat emotional statement, but then I'm not a Vulcan so I get emotional, and tired, and wish sometimes that the children would grow up, do their own laundry, pay their damn bills and leave me be for a while.
Just tired that's all. And very discouraged. Sorry for the inaccuracy of my emotional statement not backed by facts, figures and so on. Maybe the 2010 census will handle this issue.
Sorry if I offended.
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JeffSjo
A good friend once asked me what I thought of gay marriage.
I answered that between al the divorces and the selfishness in marriage these days that the gays may well make us heterosexuals look bad. :B)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Not to worry WG, I wasn't trying to go all WD on you ok? But I keep hearing all the yammeryammer that the institution of marriage is dying out, that society is turning into a bunch of hedonistic, post-apocolyptic, Obama socialistic, Hell's Angels, ... yadayadayada. Besides, _real life_ never was an imitation of Andy Griffith's Mayberry in that respect anyway.
And frankly, all of that Jack Chick-wannabe propaganda does get boring and tiring after a while. And (from my own perspective) it would seem to me that the institution, despite the many who do not participate therein, is quite thriving and is in no real danger of becoming extinct.
Oh and please don't let WD's twisted misusage/abuse of 'providing proof' spoil the real principle of 'prove it', ... okay?
Edited by GarthP2000Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
You scared me there for a minute, Garth! :unsure:
And I hope you are correct. I'm not ranting about Obama or gay marriage or anything else, okay?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.