Dalrock is continuing his one man Jihad against frivolous divorce, and his latest action is to warn Men seeking wives to pay careful attention and not assume that just because a potential wife is a Christian, she would be less likely to divorce you in the future.
He issues this warning in a post entitled Warn men: Beware Christian marriage doublespeak and hair trigger for wife initiated divorce.
This issue is so important I’m asking my readers and other bloggers to do whatever they can to help spread the word and protect men and their future children. Any blogger who wishes to is free to repost this entry in part or its entirety on their own blog with a link back to this page. Literally millions of men are at risk here, and we can help them understand the reality they face.
Happy to help, D.
I'll excerpt and comment on the most salient points here, but you really should click over and read the whole thing.
One of the more dangerous assumptions I see men making is that if they marry a Christian woman they will be somehow shielded from the epidemic of divorce. I’ve stated in the past that most churches talk like Christ but act like Oprah on the issue of divorce.
For men looking for a church to attend, this would be a good measuring stick on whether or not any particular church would be worth your time and investment in joining. If you get the vague sense that sermons resemble the emotive, feel-good environment of the Oprah show or any other female coffee klatch type of show like the View, get thee to a different church!
In my post Promiscuity is good, so long as it is done on the woman’s terms I pointed out that there is no backing for the popular belief that the female preferred form of promiscuity (serial monogamy/ serial polyandry) is more moral than the male preferred form of promiscuity. I used the example of Christians arguing that the wife in Fireproof was justified in her attempt to swing from marriage to marriage:
This is similar to the argument by the Christian women that the wife in Fireproof wasn’t being whorish because she planned on divorcing her husband and marrying the other man she was after before having sex with him.
Sheila Gregoire is one of the Christian women I had in mind when I made that statement, and she noticed the post and defended her position:
"But I just want to clarify: I do believe that she had grounds for divorce because of his pornography addiction....
...And so in the movie Fireproof, she was in a relationship where divorce was permitted, and she was planning on divorcing, and planning on remarrying. Thus, I wouldn’t say that’s whorish. He’s the one who cheated."
Viewing teh Pr0n is now the exact same thing as cheating? Dalrock got it exactly right when notes:
The fundamental problem is that Christian women are being given get out of marriage free cards while Christian men are being told man up and marry these Christian women. This selective moral softness from Christians combines with our legal system which rewards women who commit divorce theft and creates millions of fatherless children. Your husband looked at porn? Dump him and find another man! Keep in mind this isn’t some corner case example I’ve made up. This is from the movie Christians profess shows their views on marriage.
Moreover, Sheila isn’t just another commenter on the internet, she is a respected author and speaker on the topic of marriage for Christian women. All men need to understand this; if your wife decides to divorce you for another man, there will be well respected Christians lining up to justify her decision and place all of the blame on you. If that means conflating viewing pornography with actual adultery, so be it. This is true even in cases where the wife was withholding sex in an effort to control the husband.
She even excuses the wife lining up the other man while still married!
I've visited Sheila's blog before, To Love, Honor & Vacuum, and I've also seen her comment at various blogs like Terri's and Alte's. I never found anything she commented on to be so objectionable...
As Dalrock implores...spread the word.
On second thought, a thought just popped in my head. Sheila is a feminist....the worst kind. A wolf in sheep's clothing.
She appears to be "pro-marriage" but she's spreading marriage and family destroying memes amongst the very people who are supposed to be the last vanguard of the bedrock of Christian-based civilization.
Think I'm making an overblown charge?
Let's take the title of her blog - To Love, Honor & Vacuum.
On the surface it appears to be a call for Christian women to be better housewives. But exactly what is that title really imply? It's a distortion of the common Christian marriage vow a wife makes at the altar - Love, Honor and OBEY.
Whether it was deliberate or subconscious, I still think it's a subversive meme that aims at one of the Bible's direct, unambiguous tenets regarding the institution of marriage...wives, submit to your husbands.
Just as the newly married, "modern" Princess of England had the word's OBEY taken out of her Anglican Church vows -- just like her adulterous, scandalous, deceased mother-in-law did -- this "pro-marriage" Christian has replaced the vow of wifely obedience to her husband with a trivial domestic household chore using a modern appliance.
The problem is not Pro-marriage Christian women. It's pro-Divorce justifications couched in the veneer of pro-Marriage Christianity.