Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner

Huma Abadin is "blaming herself" for her politician husband's sext-infidelity and American women have jumped her almost as badly as they jumped Hillary for "staying with Bill" after the Monica scandal broke.  It's not what is said about such things that surprises me, it's the left out parts that really make the story.  Without a Paula Jones, there would have been no Monica Lewinsky.  Meaning Hillary had a massive problem long before America caught wind of the cigar.  'Scuze that.  Hillary didn't have a problem, she had an agreement.  Happens all the time, so leave her alone - and not in just high profile marriages.  Many times, we just don't want to throw in the towel on something that has become public any more than we did while it was private.  It just becomes everyone else's business, 'specially if you're famous.  It doesn't surprise me that this is fodder for conversation, but it does surprise me that it continues to be front page news.  Either we have a situation which is common to many political marriages, which is a mutual agreement to stay in a marriage for appearances, or you have a woman in Huma Abedin who may be accepting her own part of the responsibility in a failing marriage.  She didn't make him sext.  It's not her fault that he sexted.  But the way I see it, you have two major kinds of adulterers:  Your pervasive serial adulterer who is either a skirt or zipper chaser, usually by nature, but sometimes just by habit, which they learn to excuse with their spouse's bad behavior (perceived or otherwise), or they have a failing marriage and have chosen a wrong but expected avenue for relief.  Not front page news.  Her marriage, her man, her cell phone bill.  If she chooses not to end her marriage, she's a doormat.  If she leaves him - she's a hero for women everywhere because she left her husband and decides to break up a marriage that has produced a child because he sent nasty texts?  Yeah, he was wrong to have done that.  And he was to blame for his own choice.  But her willingness to say that she owns a part in a failing marriage gives me a little hope for women who may otherwise feel that they must be followers of feminism and let "like-minded" people dictate their marital strategies.  Anthony Weiner chose his behavior and so has Huma Abedin.  I'm willing to just accept THEIR decision for THEIR marriage, and move on to page 2.

WHY ONLY YOUNG PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE KIDS

WHY ONLY YOUNG PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE KIDS 

 

My granddaughter, Genevieve, is visiting tonight and I thought we'd have some bath bonding time. We stayed in until we were freezing prunes but we had a blast. I realize that I'm opening myself up to shock, horror, legal prosecution and stoning - but I did it. I took a bath with a baby. Moving on to why ONLY THE YOUNG should have children: Obviously I wasn't thinking clearly when I put a naked and dripping Genevieve out of the tub first and toweled her peach fuzz a little bit (only for her own self esteem and a feeling of fitting in, not because there's actually any hair there) and prepared to get out myself. Drippy McNaked, who has recently learned to walk, saw her opportunity for liberation and took it, sans towel. She split. The dogs, who had been in attendance for the bath, were delighted to watch Drippy tearing out of there like her hair was on fire and chased behind her in her puddle of water. I didn't want her to fall and get hurt or eat anything not meant for human consumption before I could get to a towel for myself, so I - her equally naked and dripping 45 year old grandmother without the benefit of towel-dried hair - took off after her and hilarity ensued. Me chasing the dogs chasing her. One of us busted. Genevieve watched me peel myself off the kitchen floor, and when our eyes met, she and I had a mutual understanding that I would pay in the morning for my inability to take a decent fall. I grabbed the baby (FYI they're slick when you're both wet) and got us both toweled off and her put to bed without her supper. Just kidding about that part. It was funny after the fact and I wish I could have been a fly on the wall. I will write tomorrow about my sore muscles and aching bones from my chase-and-bust. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why only the young should have children.

Christian women and voting

 I choose to vote, because my husband is in agreement with my vote. Would I be ok with it if tomorrow, women were not allowed to vote? Sadly, yes. I say sadly because feminism runs rampant, and feminist views which are far from God and family are as common as cockroaches. Why would women want "rights" that allow them to do things that are not in agreement with their Godly husbands? This is the kind of thing that has led to the rise of feminism, abortion and the demise of the family unit. I am not drug around by the brain by my husband. He doesn't "order me around", because he doesn't have to. He is led by the Lord, as am I, so I already know the path that we are on, and as such, I don't have to be told what to do. I already know. There have been times in which my husband and I have been in disagreement, and after discussion, he realized that I had shed light on things that he hadn't considered. The final decisions are his, but he asks for my wisdom and input, as I ask for his. This is because we are as one flesh in Christ, from the day God joined us together. I'm not a whipping boy at home, or treated as a child - I am his partner, friend, lover and helpmeet. I am his wife. Our political views are the same, therefore, I vote. Our home, actions and votes are decided by our beliefs as Christians. If my husband and I were in political disagreement, I would not vote, as this would dishonor my husband, and I won't do that; however, with my eyes on God, along with my husband's, we choose to live this way, knowing that if we trust in the Lord with all our hearts and lean not unto our own understanding, but in ALL our way, acknowledge Him - he will direct our paths. And with that path, so goes the vote.  Another thing - giving up your right to vote is not the same thing as choosing not to vote. And a person who chooses not to vote DOES INDEED still have the right to complain about politics, government or anything else if they wish. There is nothing in the Constitution that says that you lose your first amendment right to free speech if you choose not to vote. That is commonly parroted drivvel from people who disagree, but can only use other people's quotes and snappy comebacks, rather than putting meat to their arguments.

1Timothy 5:14 - I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.

Femism and the destruction of the family

I want to go on the record as having written that I am NOT a feminist.  The two reasons are simple.  First, I'm not a feminist because I don't need to be.  I don't need a political "leg up" in order to find some sort of validation for my life, stepping on men just because they are men, or using the fact that I am a woman to suggest that I am somehow more deserving of proper and fair treatment.  For many years I worked in radio, which was and to some degree still is more heavily a male profession; however, I have never been discriminated against in my profession due to my gender.  Discrimination certainly exists, and I know it when I see it, but many things that women point to and call discrimination amount to nothing more than the women not getting their way.  What's their answer?  Very often, it's suggesting that their failures or simply not getting what they want are the result of unfair treatment due to their gender.  The second and most important reason that I am not a feminist is because feminism, which started out as a vehicle through which women were able to achieve equal treatment in business and education, has turned into a horned monster that is more responsible for the decline in a moral society and the breakdown of the family unit that anything else.  Feminists don't want equal treatment, they want special treatment.  They don't want equal rights, they want more.  They don't want equal pay for equal work, they want special consideration and a set of rules by which men are forced to play, while feminists can justify just about anything they do by saying that they were driven to it by men.  That's just nuts, and a pathetic attempt to manipulate situations and people rather than deal with them on equal footing.  When advocating abortion, women don't want control of their own bodies and reproduction as much as they want control over men.  Feminism has, through media, music, commercials and movies, sought to belittle men and present them as unfortunately overeducated idiots who are always "one-upped" by women while their faults, real or imagined, are pointed out and magnified while a woman is always portrayed as the one who comes through and saves the day.  These types of women speak as if, by virtue of estrogen alone, they are somehow more entitled and more able than their male counterparts, and more deserving of a work or education environment that caters to them and morphs into whatever the women say it should be.  I'm sorry ladies, but we aren't created the same.  We are different.  We have our own set of strengths and weaknesses, the latter of which should not be exploited by men, but the former of which should instead be praised and appreciated for what they are.  Feminists have created a bad situation for themselves though, by alternately saying, "I am woman, hear me roar!" then,  "He looked at me wrong!  He needs to be humiliated, fired, and I need a check!" or, "I am strong, fearless and in control!"  then, "He said the wrong thing and it made me feel uncomfortable.  I want him to go to sensitivity training, and when his humiliation is complete, I want it to go on his employment record and follow him around forever!"  How must men feel when they have to live in fear of being at the mercy of women who want to run the show wherever they go, and who know that their interpretation of any situation will be accepted, while men are expected to just accept the consequences?  Ladies, I am not talking about all women.  I am talking about the radical feminst women who have somehow managed to turn even regular women into those who feel gender entitlement.  Most feminists aren't happy unless their male coworkers are afraid to even speak in their presence for fear that they won't follow the politically correct nomenclature du jour to a tee and cause themselves grief and financial problems for not following "The Rules".  Sad.  I love my place as a woman.  My husband does not have to "dominate" me in order for me to be scripturally submissive.  My husband loves me as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her, therefore, it is a pleasure to submit to his authority as the Godly head of our household.  He is not my Lord and Master, he is my partner, my lover, my protector and my friend.  He does not order me around, because I know what my role is within our household.  He works and financially supports our family, while I manage our home.   The cause for much destruction within the family is that a man's position of head of the household is something that feminsts can't stand, and they pass down their disdain for such by ridiculing women who stay home with their children and take care of their homes and their husbands.  No higher calling does a woman have, and no harder job will she ever have, but the rewards are great when they are in the will of God.  Not only do feminists not respect their husbands (if they even marry, as many feminists don't believe in marriage) but also do they seek to change a man from his very core - to remove him from his natural place of authority and protection, and make him a spineless wimp who is at the mercy of his wife and her decisions for herself and for him.  How can we expect marriages to thrive when women and men are constantly having to fight their very natures and become the liberal's dream family with women running the show, disrespecting their husbands, men having to fight to regain the position that God gave them to start with, women fighting tooth and nail to be in control, both jockeying for position instead of praying for unity and seeking God's face and abiding by His will?  More and more marriages are plagued by affairs, physical abuse, substance abuse and divorce as the natural operation of the family goes by the wayside and the "new normal" takes hold and undermines the family from the inside out.  Now, by no means do I suggest that women are doormats or whipping posts, or that they should be treated like children by their husbands.  This is NOT the word of God, and this sort of behavior is as destructive as the behaviors I just mentioned.  If a man loves his wife as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her, it will be a pleasure for her to submit to his authority and live very well in his love and find comfort in his manliness and protection.  By the same token, men will do beautifully and will usually be happy when their wives take care of them, keeping their homes clean, their meals prepared and herself appealing for him.  In the days when women were home and family driven instead of being career driven, families stayed together more and were generally happier.  Children had security and were properly taught the roles to which they were born.  I am not feminist, and I thank God for my Godly husband.  I love being a woman, and everything that comes with it.

Christian Women and Long Hair

1 Corinthians 11:13-15 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

These verses and others make it clear to me in God's word that women should be covered when they pray, should wear their hair long and that their long hair is their covering. I believe, therefore, that women need not wear a covering over their heads if their hair is long. Women should look like women and men should look like men, and this is where the real debates begin.

Am I being legalistic? No. I do not believe that cutting your hair will send you to hell. I believe that whether or not a person enters the kingdom of Heaven is not based on their works, but on their salvation through faith. Works will always follow salvation, not the other way around.

So, where does short hair end and long hair begin? I don't know. God has not come to me to tell me that hair needs to be a certain number of inches long to be within His will. I can only tell you what the Bible says about it. I have long hair, and I know it. I know short hair when I see it. My hair is my glory and my covering and I thank God for it. I do not believe that choosing to walk a narrow path is the same as being legalistic or judgmental. I know what I read in the Bible and what I understand it to mean. I trust that God would show me if I am in error, and give me peace when I am within His will.

Why do men seem to prefer long hair on women? Because they are supposed to. Long hair is beautiful and my husband loves it. He appreciates my long hair, as it is a symbol of my submission to my husband, and is pleased that I live within the will of God in this area. And he just plain digs long hair.

Paul gave women good reasons for keeping their hair long, but prohibited them from using it as an object of vanity. If your hair is naturally very long, thick and heavy to the point that it causes headaches or neck pain, for goodness' sake, cut some of it off. Your health should not be endangered by legalism.

As far as ornamentation in the hair goes, I am not opposed to having healthy, beautiful and shiny hair that can be fixed in many ways. "Broided" hair means ornamentation in the hair and is not the same thing as "braided" hair. Paul was not saying that women cannot braid or adorn their hair, he was saying that a woman's beauty should come from the inside - from her spirit - and that her beauty should not just be an outward display. I do not believe that this was an indictment of women who make themselves more attractive.

Enjoy your long hair ladies, and there is not an age limit on it.  It is your glory!

Now, where to begin...

I found one of the most brave, interesting and thought-provoking blogs today, and it truly inspired me to begin blogging as a way to rid my brain of some of the excess while sharing what I've learned in a very turbulent life.  God has been gracious.  He has been merciful and He has been abundantly kind to me, although there have been times I haven't seen it that way.  My pain has been great, but my joys have been multiplied as a result.  I named this blog TRUTH...In Word and Deed because of something my grandfather used to say.   My grandfather was a Baptist preacher who truly loved the Lord and respected the Word.  He was a man of tremendous faith, who cut to the chase in Christianity and didn't dance around it like many Christians do today.  He often said, "A lie is any word or deed that deceives, or is intended to deceive".  What a powerful truth!  As Christians, we are required to speak the truth and to live it IN WORD AND DEED.  Our words are not enough.  We must behave as Christians and live the truths of the Bible with our best effort.  As you know, the things we give our best effort to, when it comes to sin, come to fruition for us.  If a person decides to give their best effort to drunkenness, fornication, adultery, idolatry (and the list goes on) they will succeed in these actions.  Why then, as Christians, should we not give our BEST EFFORT to living the Word of God and accepting the free gift of salvation, showing our appreciation by obeying the Bible and sharing the good news with others, in church, at home and in practical daily applications every day.