Jayne Kulikauskas, spiritual daughter of Jezebel, wrote:
> Turin wrote:
> > A funny thing about watching housewife feminists speak in the name
of
> > Men's Rights (another other funny thing) is in trying to figure out
> > which one is the bigger hypocrite.  Heidi is unquestionably the
bigger
> > feminist and the bigger rationalizer, while Jayne is the bigger
> > patriarchist.
> >
> > Does Heidi qualify as an honest practitioner of equality?
> > No.
> >
> > Does Jayne qualify as an honest practitioner of patriarchy?
> > No.
> >
> >
> > If Heidi wants to improve her adherence to her beliefs, then she is
in
> > a fine position to do so, these days.  Instead, she chooses to hide
in
> > the house doing some unspecified form of work which, probability
> > suggests, doesn't pay the bulk of the bills.
> >
> > She uses the word "client", but I'd love to know what
"clients" are
in
> > conjunction to.  ...Selling orders of Nana Goat stories over the
phone?
> > Maybe a home daycare babysitting business for children women with
> > jobs?  Those are both bullshit.
> >
> >
> > If Jayne wants to do better, then she can talk about it all that
she
> > likes, but it's out of her hands and she knows it.  So, it's pretty
> > dishonest to pretend to live that life when the main element of it
is
> > missing.  ...Pretty CONVENIENT, I say.
> >
> >
> >
> > "What do I do, Turin?", quoth Jayne.
> > "Guide me to mend my ways."
> >
> > It couldn't possibly occur to Jayne that I've already answered her
> > question with something that she didn't want to hear.  Since she's
> > living a lie, anyway, she could get out of the house to get a job.
> >
> > The Bible does not command women to keep house.  They were created
to
> > be useful to Men.  After the downfall of Eve, wives were made the
> > slaves of their husbands.
>
> My husband does not want me to get a job out of the house.  He has a
high
> paying job, not to mention the fortune he made from his stock
options.  We
> don't need the money and he likes me having time and energy to devote
to
> caring for him and our children.


These are all secular arguments.  Secular society allows for blending
Christianity with their own system; however, Christianity does not.  My
main point with my arguments is to separate you from your illegitimate
religious stance, while my secondary purpose is to point out that the
secular adaptations of your positions don't jive with each other,
either - and are, likewise, unethical.

This is due to the fact that your main response to everything is "my
husband lets me/doesn't let me".  That is purely a religious argument,
so you're not as safely under the dual citizenship umbrella of
secularism as you seem to think you are.  That little game of "liberal
Christian", religious moderate, has no cohesion to it at all - except
for the number of people chanting it.


Your pretense to subservience is an idol of your own making.

Your persistent presence in a Men's forum is nothing other than
deliberate feminist defiance of the patriarchy that you profess to
believe in.  It does a lot to invalidate your cover story.


Behold:

Under God's authority, your husband has limited authority.

He cannot simply play one commandment against another in a way that
supercede God's laws.  For instance, he couldn't proclaim, "I'm the
boss, and _I_ say that my wife is equal to me."  Nor can he grant you
permission to fraternize with other Men as you constantly do in
soc.men.

This means that while - yes - he can decide whether he wants you
working in the house or at a real job, his MOTIVE for wanting this is
what God really looks at.


Nor, is his motive in this any great unfathomed mystery; especially,
thanks to your froward tongue.  Your husband is interested in this
life, and acquiring possessions and riches for it.  Like many, he makes
a mockery of Him who bore the nails and the crown of thorn with his
carnal expectations.


This is what JESUS said about pursuing money:

Matthew 6:

19: Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust
doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth
nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor
steal:

24: No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and
love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.
Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

26: Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they
reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are
ye not much better than they?


Matthew 8:

19: And a certain scribe came, and said unto him, Master, I will follow
thee whithersoever thou goest.
20: And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of
the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
21: And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first
to go and bury my father.
22: But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their
dead.


Matthew 13:

22: He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the
word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches,
choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.


Mark 10:

"21: Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing
thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the
poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the
cross, and follow me."

24: And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth
again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that
trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
25: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than
for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.


Luke 12:

19: And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for
many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry.
20: But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be
required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast
provided?

22: And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no
thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye
shall put on.
23: The life is more than meat, and the body is more than raiment.


John 6:

27: Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which
endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto
you: for him hath God the Father sealed.


The BIBLE also says:


Acts 2:

44: And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
45: And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men,
as every man had need.


Acts 5:

1: But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a
possession,
2: And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it,
and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
3: But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to
the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
4: Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was
it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine
heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
5: And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost:
and great fear came on all them that heard these things.
6: And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and
buried him.
7: And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not
knowing what was done, came in.
8: And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so
much? And she said, Yea, for so much.
9: Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to
tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have
buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.
10: Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the
ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her
forth, buried her by her husband.
11: And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard
these things.



Acts 8:

18: And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands
the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
19: Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he
may receive the Holy Ghost.
20: But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou
hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
21: Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not
right in the sight of God.
22: Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps
the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.


1 Timothy 6:

9: But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and
into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and
perdition.
10: For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some
coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves
through with many sorrows.



A couple other things JESUS said:

Matthew 5:

30: And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from
thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should
perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

48: Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is
perfect.



There are many other scriptures from The Bible which come easily to
mind, which I could dig up, that would bear on things like the family
movement, showing it to be complete and utter garbage, based as much in
the Old Testament as animal sacrifice for atonement of sins.  The point
is that Jayne's self serving lifestyle has little to no ordination from
Christianity.

It's amazingly hypocritical that the same political party which
masquerades as a religious moral movement resting primarily upon the
writings of Paul to water down rigid obedience to God (if not Jesus),
completely ignores Paul's words about other things like marital life.
(Again, if not Jesus's).

They are truly bound for their own hell after this life.


Liberal Christian phonies, like you - Jayne - might fool the ignorant
atheist into accepting certain ideas as being from God, so that you can
pretend to lord it over them with God's authority in this life (as the
apostate Catholic church did in the middle ages); but, you don't fool
those of us who have already been there - whether, we still are, or
not.


> > Jayne is no more a patriarchist than a Jew who doesn't sacrifice
> > animals is a Jew.  Or a Muslim who doesn't believe in killing
> > Christians and Jews is a Muslim.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "a patriarchist".


Of course you don't.

When God's angels visit the liberals in Sodom and Gomorrah, they are
stricken blind.  They can't see anything.  The mantra response to every
perfectly defined concept becomes "I don't know what you mean".

How can they?  You're sinners.


> If other men want their
> wives to work, that is fine with me.  I can even see some advantages
to it.
> But in our family, it is not the way the head of the family wants
things
> done.


In your family, the head of the family is obviously you, operating
through a puppet, having what you want done.


> > No, Jayne will moderate her religion to go with today's flow of
> > ecumenicism so that she can take it easy on herself and so that she
can
> > do what she wants, instead of what she's SUPPOSED to do.  She'll
follow
> > a liberalized religion that is bent according to her liking with
easy,
> > secular, pacifist elements which make the martyrdoms of the early
> > Christians pointless.
>
> In many areas I would be considered a liberal Christian.  I'm not a
biblical
> literalist, for example.  I have never claimed that I was not
liberal.


There's no more such a thing as a liberal Christian, than there is a
Catholic Christian.  You've rejected God, just as they have.  Just as
Israel did ...choosing a king over a theocracy.


> > However, when it comes to getting a JOB, she'll suddenly become the
> > religious DOGMATIST.
> >
> > (Never mind the fact that this so-called dogma qualifies as what
Jesus
> > called a tradition of man.  There isn't one bloody word in The
Bible
> > about division of labor.  Maybe she ought to read the book of Ruth
> > sometime to find out where Ruth got her husband.)
>
> I have never claimed that the Bible teaches wives may not work
outside the
> home.  I agree with you that it does not.


The only thing you agree with is having at least two ways out of every
situation, and using The Bible as your backup if it agrees with you.
If it doesn't ...oh, well.


> > "Oh, I can't get out of the house to get a job!  "I'm
submissive to
my
> > husband!"  "That means he works, while I stay home and
go with the
> > rhythms of my period."
>
> Being submissive to me husband means that if he wants me at home then
I stay
> at home.


Being submissive to your puppet means that he makes the decisions that
you approve of.


> > "Excuse me, now, while I go discuss some of my approved liberal
> > causes...."
> >
> > ...what rank, calculated, pre-meditated, completely conscientious
> > hypocrisy.
>
> You jump to conclusions about what I believe and then, when it turns
out you
> were wrong, you act like I deceived you in some way.  I am not the
one who
> makes you assume things about me.


Maybe if you weren't in a Men's forum - where your husband has no
spiritual authority to grant you access to annoy other Men - then you
wouldn't have to worry about it.

But, those are just bourgeois hypocrite lies, anyway.  You cannot
stereotype yourself so thoroughly, and then object that someone is
making assumptions about you.  They go with the stereotype.


Besides, I don't do that.  When I'm forced to read the soap operas
concerning people's private lives that are used to jam the topical
discussion forums where I expect to read about issues, I make use of
the annoyance by docketing the information for later use against them.


It's funny to wreak vengeance upon the obstructionists, using weapons
they themselves put into my hands, only to listen to them decry:

"How could you know that....?!?
"YOU made that up!!!"


.....funny, and satisfying.

--- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 100