89 points

The televangelist told host Steve Gruber, “If there’s ever a time that a decision has to be made and we don’t agree on something, he’s the head.”

“It’s not hard to submit,” she added.

(Later in story…)

White, who has been divorced twice,

Maybe it’s been a bit harder for this cosplaying trad-wife loony-toon to submit than she’s willing to admit…???

🤷‍♂️ 🙄 🤡

permalink
report
reply
38 points

they’re all con artists. they actually believe about 0% of the bullshit they spew 24/7. it doesn’t matter because their cultist followers believe 100% and provide money and votes, in exchange for being told that jesus loves racism and sexism, and hates brown people and gays

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I figure the Righteous Gemstones is about as close as it gets to the truth about these “religious advisors”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

White, who has been divorced twice,

Family values am I right? Bet she has a vaginal resurrection before each wedding so she could wear white at the ceremony.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
4 points
*

This is nothing but a counterpoint anecdote to the article (not a counterpoint to your comment).

My wife and I also mutually prefer a more traditional family dynamic for ourselves but have no belief that it’s the best way or right for anyone else. We needed a tiebreaker system and for better or worse we also chose that I am the ultimate authority when we disagree.

It doesn’t come up often, but when it does, more often than not, I’ll choose her side over my own because if everything goes to shit she doesn’t tell me I told you so because I did what she wanted, and I don’t get to say it either because the final choice was mine and if I didn’t put my foot down for my beliefs that’s my own fucking fault.

I wish someone had laid that out for me in the beginning because I feel like I got a raw fucking deal. She gets to whine and pout and stomp her feet while I’m forced to be logical and judicious. Sometimes I want to just damn logic and demand a certain outcome just because I really want it.

Not really a point here other than, if you genuinely care for your partner, having the final say isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. And if someone thinks being in charge means they always get their way… I lose all respect for them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

You came to realize that marriage is a partnership. Your spouse is your partner, not your mother/father, not your caregiver (unless necessary via illness.)

Good for you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points
*

That’s not really how I would characterize it. This is a second marriage for us both so we knew that going in. But take out the condescension and of course you’re spot on. Point being that still can/ought to hold true even in traditional/patriarchal family dynamics. So these tradwife folks that advocate subservience aren’t even doing their own dynamic right if they make a point of removing the partnership.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Very true. I’m thinking it’s all about the grift.

Also, I first read it as this: “…and we don’t agree on something, he gets head.”

I guess that’s one way to come to an agreement.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Fuck off. That’s your religion, not mine.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

Exactly. These people adopt a chosen lifestyle and think anyone else has to listen to it? Fuck that noise. This is a secular nation and their little book club has no say.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Life in a Theocracy, bro. Shit sucks, but eventually you adopt the pastiche of Christian Nationalism and just try to wiggle through the cracks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Wait….so we’re just going to ignore the separation of church and state, never mind spouting off sexist bullshit?

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Whenever I used to meet women republicans I would always bring up how the other republicans don’t really care about their point of view and just want their votes. For example, if they are against abortion because they believe that it is actually murder, I respect their opinion even if I disagree with them. But I would always tell them that the people, specifically republican men, are not agreeing with them for the same reason. They don’t care about whether or not it’s murder, they just want to control women’s bodies and turn them into breeders. It’s never been about the unborn and it’s always been about the fact that these men don’t believe women have the right to deny them their future children.

People used to say that my opinion on the matter is extreme and that they couldn’t possibly think of women like that. But now here we are in the year of our Lord 2025 and the government’s religious advisor is saying that women need to submit to men. And I’m sure before we can even blink they’ll be trying to remove women from public office and get rid of their right to vote. They’re already firing them under the pretense of DEI.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

and get rid of their right to vote.

They’re already tiptoeing into it with the SAVE act.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Bonkers? These people read/watch something like Handmaid’s Tale and are rooting for the wrong side. This is entirely expected.

By the way? This woman should take advice from “the” bible and make sure she’s not in a position of power of any man and she should remain silent. What does she think she is doing when she is teaching about religion? Her own religion forbids it.

“But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”

https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/1tim/2.html#11

permalink
report
reply
1 point

I asked someone more knowledgeable than me about Timothy and he offered this:

https://youtu.be/4QTQZv7FvTw

I find his style somewhat arrogant, but I love history, so I find this appealing.

Wish the bible was more than just Cliff’s Notes.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 317K

    Comments