William Malven post on the Mens News Daily website, in an article titled, “God’s Rights, Not Men’s Rights,” “Self-righteous anger is a dubious pleasure at best; at worst it is self-destructive and self-deceiving.” The article—just skim it to the catch the drift—is filled with self-righteous anger. It is obviously meant to be provocative and upset those that frequent Men’s News Daily. In and of itself, this is not necessarily a terrible thing to do, I certainly have spoken in forums where my view was the minority, but to engage in the very tactic that you are decrying is a fool’s enterprise. Psalms 26:4 “I do not sit with deceitful men, nor do I consort with HYPOCRITES.”
What’s humorous is how he starts off with true sounding statements. “All over America men are being “screwed” by a court system that favors women over men.” “All a woman has to do is yell ‘Battery!’ and the judge automatically takes her side.”
As an attorney, I can tell you that men do seem to be treated in an unfair manner by the court system. The is just one of many studies that documents this problem. And yes, very frequently women are given restraining orders with little to no proof that she was a true victim other than by her own self-serving declarations.
But then Malven starts piling on strawman arguments:
“The totally blameless male is the victim.” “He didn’t do a thing, honest!” “Women are the cause of all of society’s ills and any man who defends a woman is a traitor to his fellows”
I don’t know why he didn’t add:
“All men are Godly and all women are works of the devil.”
Mr. Malven is a pyromaniac in this field of straw men, burning one down after another. As soon as you start engaging in straw man statements that there is a serious effort to have people believe men never engage in domestic violence, well, you can’t be taken seriously.
Most people in the fathers’ rights movement (the “men’s rights movement” is very rarely used) simply want equality in family court. There are some that want to restore a “patriarchy,” but this is a minority, and I am not one of them. And endless experiences in court and statistical data demonstrate that men get a pretty bad shake.
Funnier still is the statement, one size fits all for everyone to wear, “It’s a lie, people and deep down inside you know it. Whether you like it or not, whether you are honest enough to see it (and worse, admit it) or not, we all have had a hand in what has happened to us in this life.”
This is an interesting morally ontological view, but it is far too simplistic. Sure, we all have made mistakes that contributed to our fate, but there is evil in the word that contributes to that fate also. Fighting that evil is the work of God.
Mr. Malven writes, “The path to ‘happiness’ is not through the courts or by getting our own way; it is in doing God’s will (I haven’t quite figured out what that is or how to do it, but I know what it ain’t).” Let me give you a hint what God’s will is:
The Lord “defends the cause of the fatherless.” Deuteronomy 10:18
The Lord defends the cause of the fatherless. William Malven attacks that cause, but then adds we should follow God’s will. As Jesus said, “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.” Matthew 7:15.
In Malachi 4:5-6 it is written, “See, I will send you the prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the LORD comes. He will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers; or else I will come and strike the land with a curse.”
Those who attack a movement of people that want to bring the child to the father as a “bunch of whiners” are not animated by Christian principles or Judaic ones. It is a view not supported by any major religion.
Equally disturbing are Malven’s views of divorce. He writes:
“I know, I know…you didn’t do anything to deserve it, your wife just up and divorced you because she wanted to make your life miserable and take the kids away from you. You didn’t do a thing. You were the ‘perfect husband,’ and she just ‘screwed you.’ You were faultless. You were blameless. You tried, but she didn’t. Yeah, yeah, tell me another one.”
Malven’s overstatements where men claim to be “faultless” or “blameless” are easily dismissed for the silliness that they represent. In all my years of representing fathers, I have never heard a statement coming close to that. But what I have heard—repeatedly—is that husbands are routinely dumped without marital fault, i.e., the type of extreme misbehavior that is needed to be shown in order for a divorce to be granted before the advent of uni-lateral no-fault divorce. Yet Malven response is to ask the father to take a deep look in the mirror, rather than blame his wife for dumping him. Rather than taking a look in the mirror, let’s take a look in the Bible:
“[A]t the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.” Mathew 19: 4-6.
Jesus added, “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Mathew 19:9.
When the court system allows wives to just dump their husbands (and vice-versa) over minor faults, they violate basic biblical principles. That, as Mr. Malven put it, is telling “the difference between the real (that which of the spirit-the self-and thus eternal), and the unreal.”
I certainly do not claim to be a Biblical scholar, but when someone comes along claiming to want to do “God’s Will,” and those statements do not reconcile with some of the basic tenents of the Bible, that man is either mistaken or a liar. But whether he is honestly mistaken or a liar, he is wrong. “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.” Mathew 7:15. Those who attack the father’s rights movement:
(1) promote fatherlessness, and
(2) promote divorce.
There’s simply no Biblical support for this, no matter who much you think you should be supporting “God’s rights.” There is simply too many Biblical passage about the importance of fathers (and both parents), and the sin of divorce to take Mr. Malven’s arguments seriously.
Susan B. Anthony once said, “Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God.” If he lived at her time, William Malven would have stood up and objected, “Hey, God’s rights, not women’s rights!”
THE FATHER’S CAUSE IS GOD’S CAUSE
By Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, Esq.
Rate this post:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Stumble It!
Lloyd selberg said,
“And now behold, I say unto you, that the foundation of the destruction of this people is beginning to be laid by the unrighteousness of your lawyers and your judges.” - Alma 10:27
“Now the object of these lawyers was to get gain; and they got gain according to their employ.” - Alma 10:34
May 17, 2007 at 10:59 am
Lloyd selberg said,
May 17, 2007 at 11:03 am
Robert Stevens said,
This should be a strong message to the feminist and the other hatemongers, YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE. It may take awhile, but you are going to lose! Hope, pray to the God you deny, that he has mercy.
I for one will not take pleasure in seing those that done wrong punished and being made to suffer. They do deserve it , but that is not God’s way and therefore it is not the right way.
May 17, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Menck said,
Thanks again. Great work.
May 17, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Mike LaSalle said,
To my way of thinking, Rush Limbaugh has more in common with Will Malven than he does with Glenn Sacks, Marc Rudov or Dave Usher. And that’s the key. Conservative men have an independence of mind that must be engaged and responded to… as you have done.
May 17, 2007 at 12:20 pm
Rinaldo Del Gallo, III said,
What happens is that Conservatives, after cutting welfare and other social services to make government smaller, need to find SOMETHING to show that “they are the women’s candidates.”
As a moderate not trying to cut every social safety net, I do not have problems. But the “night watchman” kind of conservative does. (“Night watchman” conservatism is a derogatory term for someone who believes the only proper role of government is the police power—all other enterprise should be left to the non-public sector.)
So what conservatives do to appear “soft” is starting talking about how men are bad, how they deserve their fate, and throw the “feminist” (I hate that term because most self-described “feminist” are not feminist) a bone.
But when you start attacking fathers and start justifying divorce, you attack the very social values that you claim you espouse.
And thanks Menck, Rob, and Lloyd.
Rinaldo
May 17, 2007 at 1:06 pm
mruffolo said,
When my son offended or made a mess, I looked into eyes to see he did not mean it but it was an accredited - I began to forgive, putting people before stuff.
When my son looks at me, I feel it. When I look to God I feel he is pleased. I feel his strength through my comfort and confidence that problems will work out.
No book or conversation for me could explain the experience.
Even as I write this to explain, this falls flat.
God rocks. Being a father ought to rock.
May 17, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Menck said,
Unfortunately, in this case it ultimately seemed to be a fruitless and unproductive effort.
May 17, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Will Malven said,
You will find little in the way of “self-righteous anger” in it. What you will find is sarcasm mixed with serious belief in God and faith in Him rather than in the material world as a solution to all of our earthly problems.
If you have spent any time reading the multitude of articles written on these pages by MRA’s and the comments below them you will find much in the way of whining.
Oh and I am sure that your clients have all been thoroughly honest with you about their relationships. If you are claiming that the men for whom you have worked who are facing divorce don’t lie. That’s as laughable as saying women filing divorce don’t lie.
By your last sentence alone you have just alienated about half of the people to whom you are speaking on these pages.
Try investigating what is being said on these pages before you join battle, sir.
You are very dismissive of what is a fundamental truth.
IN a God-centered life, faith provides one the perspective and honesty to see ones own faults without fear.
God’s will extends far beyond a simple quote form Deuteronomy.
You then have the effrontry to quote Mathew 19:9 “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
How must that make you feel as a divorce lawyer? Are you not by the very nature of your work ennabling this sin?
Christ spoke much more thoroughly on the subject of forgiveness and tolerance of others. he had sage words regarding how we should react to the manner in which these “feminist” are treating men. Say for example:
Christ was also very specific in to whom we should turn for anwers and solutions:
May 17, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Will Malven said,
You are quite correct, I am much closer to Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, and Conservatives of the ilk.
I thank-you for your words of wisdom and as always, you seem to have the objectivity that some of us hotter heads lack (I certainly include myself in that group).
May 17, 2007 at 2:13 pm
bombbombbombbomb said,
May 17, 2007 at 2:43 pm
chas said,
William Malven’s problem misunderstanding justice, can be illustrated by a school has a rule against fighting. A gang of troublemakers is walking through the halls roughing up every little punk in their path. They start really beating up on one kid and just then a teacher walks up and says all of you are suspended for fighting. The kid they were beating up says no I wasn’t fighting. The teacher says yes you were I saw you. The teacher is right, but we all know she is wrong.
I also have a lot of trouble with irrational optimism, being totally out of line with the realities of history. If you look at the Christians who were torches decorating the roads of Rome under Nero where it took 400 years for Christians to become the dominant power of Rome. If you look at the Armenian Christians who suffered genocide by the Turks, never overcame. If you look at the Russian Orthodox Christians who suffered genocide and total suppression by the Soviets, they will probably never recover. Look at the Coptic Christians suffering now in Sudan. God can’t win these battles for us; it’s up to us to defend our way of life, or lose it. The cross was Jesus’ victory over evil and when he returns he will conquer all the nations. Now, we fight evil when we can and honor martyrs when we can’t.
RDG III - Father’s cause… great writing… my thoughts…
“Jesus went to Nazareth with his parents and was obedient to them.” Luke 2:51 Come on, does it really say that? He was God, He was perfect. He was holy. What could it possibly mean he was obedient? Maybe it says his parents obeyed him, well no I guess it doesn’t. In marriage and in parenting God’s plan A is love and plan B is obey. God has no plan C like therapists or lawyers, or like government welfare programs or court ordered child support or visitation, or church sponsored domestic violence centers, or the need for freedom. In the US we have a despair subculture that is intentionally vandalizing everyone’s confidence in our traditional way of life and making the man out to be a slave-owner when he asserts the God given authority to use power to maintain the social order that preserves the most important expression of the relationships of the trinity of God, in the image of God on earth. God in his questionable wisdom said the man has the authority. They vandalize it to their own confusion and societal chaos creating a country in which even they won’t want to live.
May 17, 2007 at 3:12 pm
David R. Usher said,
Correct. Malvin is a classic in-camera example of why the Republican revolution failed.
Republicans and the Christian Coalition, Limbaugh, Ollie North, Wade Horn, and all the rest have an extremely shallow view — which I characterize as “neo-conservative feminism”.
The root of this problem: most conservative men think that family and social issues are solely a woman’s prerogative. Feminists took advantage of this wormhole by establishing themselves as being the only people qualified to speak for women, and the only ones qualified to protect them. Instead of conservative men looking at social policy as it is, and looking to see if it makes sense, they just do whatever feminists want.
The source of the problem: everyone must fully understand the feminism is the latter-day WKKK. Suffragettes were not feminists, and would have nothing to do with feminists. Feminists supported Margaret Sanger, suffragettes oppose Sanger. Phyllis Schlafly agrees strongly with me about this. I spoke with her yesterday about it.
To win, we must reverse feminist historical revisionism. Feminists cannot lay claim to the 19th amendment. The only thing they can claim is that they are the modern-day WKKK. Read “Women of the Klan” by Kathllen L. Blee for more information.
PS: It was very wise to remove Malven from the front page. MND is the face of the men’s movement in public. We cannot possibly mainstream the movement with maniacs like Malven making us look like the nuts that feminists tell everyone we are.
I will continue working to educate everyone, liberal and conservative alike, about what feminism really is. In fact, we should all research this and work on it. When America wakes up to that reality, feminism will go out of style faster than Michael Jackson ever did. This will not happen overnight. But it will happen a lot faster if we all write about it.
May 17, 2007 at 3:19 pm
conservativation said,
And what is very strange is you use Jesus Words about divorce to indict the writer, then go on to somehow conversely indict those who would be inclined to frown upon those who violate the vary words of Jesus that you quoted. It is very inconsistent, and very representative of how the church handles divorce…it is the non-sin sin. Women are told in pastoral counciling all the time, “sure mam, it is a sin to divorce without Biblical grounds, but our God is a loving and forgiving God”.
I sound like a broken record on this…I begging you to reconcile it for me Will. Reconcile the way the church looks the other way at unilateral divorce….even if you disagree women are doing it 80% of the time…which is fact…the church is looking the other way regardless who is doing it. By personal example, in my near miss divorce, when my wife filed, of course I had to move out, etc. (no accusations of anything, no restraining orders, very low drama). Within a week I went by the house and there were cars everywhere. I called my daughter to ask who it was. Turned out it was at least 30 people there from our church doing the yard work for my wife. Some friends had a similar situation, the woman filed and even gave up her kids to run away with her lover. All she wanted was the home. Husband and kids moved, and the church jumps in (different church) shuttling the kids to school etc. for the women when they visited her as she worked, and doing her yard work…never even called the Dad to ask about him. Its more then anecdotal. It came full cirlce for me last week as a virus whiped out all six in my family for a few days, just as movers were there and we had to leave our home. The same exact people who were pulling weeds to enable the divorce were full aware the situation….one came and helped a few hours…after all it wasnt a sista need, it didnt involve da bad man. If you see this as me playing victim you miss my point entirely…I am offering real world examples. It enables! Its like my asking my pastor to arrange anonymous rides to a hotel where I can meet women and him agreeing….enabling sin.
Relativism (”Men do it too”) will not fly, in this matter or any other, and sadly relativism is a flawed and intellectually dishonest tactic favored by your list of conservative heros with the exception of Mr. Limbaugh. Hannity and Coulter rely heavily on simply answering occasional well grouded criticism of Republicans with “well what about Bill Clinton and Monica, nanny nanny boo boo”. If you call that discourse and you get goosebumps for being called a “great American” you are the demographic they need.
Finally, you ask how many clients the lawyer has discouraged from divorce. I ask…much more importantly, how many people has the church approached and discouraged divorce. How many times has a church followed a Biblical discipline model as a family is unilaterally destroyed, yet will flat excommunicate a businessman who is discovered cooking his books, or a man who looks at porn.
May 17, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Lloyd selberg said,
Teaching men to be fathers is best done by FATHERS. Responsible fatherhood and imparting religious values is taught by example. The greatest motivation for men to act in a civilized, righteous manner is for the sake of their children. Take away a man’s children and you remove his very motivation to act in a manner necessary for civilization. For those interested, I recommend the late Dan Amenus books, The Garbage Generation and The Case for Father Custody. Rich Doyle’s, Save the Males http://www.mensdefense.org extensively quotes Dan’s writings.
I propose that civilization is directly related to patriarchy and when androgynous societies develop, history shows they will soon fall.
May 17, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Rinaldo Del Gallo, III said,
REPLY: That’s just bologna. There are some who believe this—Seventh Day Adventist and stuff—but it is wrong. Mr. Malven, if you want to go up on some mountain, meditate, and “be one with God,” that’s fine—and I don’t mean that sarcastically. But when you want to stay on that mountain top and denigrate those that “fight in the secular world,” well, that’s just wrong. Christ had a tirade in a temple for heavens sake. Mark 11:15-17. He was very much into the secular world and correcting its wrongs.
Will Malvin said, “Christ promised us that God would provide us with what we need. He only asked of us to do the footwork necessary to follow God’s will.If you believe in God, and that he is the source of all, that he only asks of us that we follow his will, and he will provide. AS far as I can tell, obedience to Him and service to our fellow man (and woman) is all He has ever asked of us.”
REPLY: Again, your point is that protecting the fatherless and condemning divorce is not God’s will? If Christ provides for us we still not fight for social justice? This line of reasoning makes no sense.
William Malven wrote:”Oh yeah and I can’t help but notice that as lawyers seem want to do, you have no problem lying about others, to wit ‘William Malven attacks that cause.’ I do not attack the cause, only the focus of the cause.”
REPLY: You clearly attacked the father’s rights movement.
William Malven said: “I have never said that feminism is not a severe problem. Never in my entire life have I made such a statement, I see it as a severe threat. I have never said that men are not treated unjustly in the court system, not once. I have only stated that divorce is a two way street and that too many on these pages want to assert, usually as a result of their own experiences, that women are the real enemy.”
REPLY: You said of the movement (albeit of the “men’s rights movement”) “It’s a lie, people and deep down inside you know it.” That’s a funny way of saying, “men are . . . treated unjustly in the court system.” And then there’s the cheapshot that we hate women . . . Was there really such an article Mr. Malven. Did somebody really write, “Women are the enemy.” C’mon! I also did not bring up feminism.
Mr. Malven said: “It is simply that I see the true nature, origin and source of that feminist threat, and it’s name is Liberalism, and it’s true nature is Marxism. It has from it’s origin had a single goal in mind, the destruction of the family. It has chosen a number of tools to do so, welfare, feminism, and abortion being chief among those.”
REPLY: I will be honest with you, I avoid the feminism to Marxism connection. I almost never write about “feminism.”
Mr. Marven ask: How many marriages have you by your actions in court “split assunder?”
REPLY: To be honest, I think I am the only lawyer I know that advises against divorce. I am one of the few that has saved marriages. I tell guys that you are going to lose everything, you won’t see your kids, you’ll pay an insane amount of child support, and its terrible for the children, so put up with her. And that’s the truth.
William Malvin said: “How many of your clients have you discouraged from getting a divorce? How many of your clients have you sent to get counseling before continuing with the proceedings?”
REPLY: I have sent many to get counseling—maybe the only attorney to do so. Also tried to function as counselor a few times, a foray I do not wish to repeat. I already answered the question about how many clients have I discourages from divorce. I think I know of three or four actual marriages that I saved.
William Malvin said: “If you can honestly answer those last two questions with the words most or all, then I salute you, you are better than most of your ilk, if not then you are part of the problem not the solution.”
REPLY: Well, the answers have been provided.
May 17, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Rinaldo Del Gallo, III said,
Lloyd,
Your right. The Book of Alma is a Mormon book and not accepted by most Christian sects. I don’t have any knowledge of it, good, bad, or indifferent.
The passages you quoted Llod had truth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Alma
May 17, 2007 at 5:13 pm
Will Malven said,
I then applaud you for your integrity and your consistency. You are doing the work of God if you are working hard to prevent those divorces. I admire your work. The actual number of successes is irrelevant it is the action which is the good.
As a lawyer, you know that a message can be conveyed without ever actually uttering the specific words. Yes, there have been a number of articles (and an even greater number of comments referring to those articles) in which the attitude and message being conveyed has been very much “women are the enemy.” It is that attitude toward which my entire message was addressed. It is the exact reverse message which feminist have been using for the past 5 decades. Any movement which pursues such a course is doomed to failure and is a lie. It promises something it can never deliver.
It is also based on the pretext that man can solve earthly problem without the aid of God. It is a largely secular movement which is another reason prompting my confrontational and intentionally provacative tone.
The purpose of any article I write is to force men and women to think outside their set paradigms. I am not playing mind games because I truly believe that which I write, but I am not averse to stimulating a debate.
The fact is that Christ did what he did on the steps of the Temple because the money-changers were violating God’s Temple.
Remember he also instructed his disciples to sheath their swords when they came to his defense in Gethsemane.
That being said, I am anything but a pacifist. God’s instruction is pray, then get up off your duff and act.
The problem arises as it did in my original article when people mistake a call for reliance upon God for the ultimate resolution of their problems, and someone calling for, as you stated, going up onto a mountain and meditating.
I beleve that I was fairly clear on that. Once the dust has settled, it is a reliance upon the ultimate goodness of God and His wisdom to which we must, if we are believers, turn over our difficulties.
I will use my own recent example. It has been noted on the other track, that I seemed to have a great deal of time to write. This is because I am currently unemployed. I have been for sometime now, some by choice, some by lack of job opportunity. For months I fretted and worried while I was searching for employment. I realized that I was in my prayers and my thoughts attempting to force something to occur that was outside of God’s time table.
Having realized that (finally) I made a concious effort to stop my worry, my fear, and my demanding-ever so politely sometimes- more “Job-like” at others-that God provide me with a job. I never stopped looking, but within a week, an opportunity popped up from an unexpected and amazing source. The job was temporary, but it paid well. I made the money I needed to continue living as I have been until a better opportunity comes along.
As that job was winding down, two more opportunities have appeared seemingly by coincidence. AS a God fearing Christian, I know better than that. I know that once I surrendered my fears and stopped fighting, I made room in my life for God to work his miracles.
That is the message which I have been attempting to convey. It is not a matter of ceasing all activity and staring at your navel for hours on end, it is by working for that which you seek while allowing God to tend to the how and why of it.
Therefore I say that any movement which is primarily based in an effort to force the world to fit your paradigm is doomed to fail and is therefore a lie.
By all means do the work, but leave the worry and result to God.
The whining and moaning that I have seen here, the objectifying of women which I have seen on these pages, is doing neither, hence it is doomed to failure.
May 17, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Roger Knight said,
He is very good at what he does, and our nation has benefited immensly from his destruction of the MSM monopoly. The liberals have good reason to hate him.
However, his approach to the evil of no-fault divorce is not the angry you fathers deserve it approach we see from Will Malvin and other such so-called conservatives.
Rush’s approach is to praise every part of the welfare reform except the child support part, of which he is then SILENT.
When it comes to no-fault divorce, first signed into law by Ronaldus Maximus (his affectionate term for Ronald Reagan) in California, and to the Child Support Crusade, and the destruction of American freedoms and rights that result, Rush’s approach is to tiptoe around and ignore this elephant in the room.
Unfortunately, Average Joe Citizen just does not want to deal with it.
We are just going to have to make him deal with it.
May 17, 2007 at 7:03 pm
Will Malven said,
I at no time in anyway stated that the father’s deserve it. You are being dishonest to so aver. What I have said and what I stand by is that they were not, in most cases, blameless for the failure of the marriage and it is certain that very few can possibly be so oblivious to the state of their marriage that they never saw it coming. If they were, then they are to blame for being so detached.
And yes I have a friend who was just so blindsided by his wife’s actions, and yes he was one of those who lives his life in oblivion…a workaholic. I very much feel sorry for him but I cannot say he was blameless for what happened.
Yes some women do simply go “nutso,” but I do not buy the argument that all divorces, or even a substantial number of them occur in that manner.
May 17, 2007 at 7:39 pm
Will Malven said,
Yes we all know that you are wise and all the rest of the Conservative world (“Republicans and the Christian Coalition, Limbaugh, Ollie North, Wade Horn, and all the rest have an extremely shallow view — which I characterize as “neo-conservative feminism”.”) is ignorant and blind (at least in your own mind).
You sound more and more as though you are a Liberal at heart. The arrogance you have demonstrated in your posts implies this. The intolerance to opposition screams “Liberal.”
Oh and add this as well oh wise one, you are either blind, or naive if you believe this to be an isolated case:
You Liberals (by now we can agree that you are a Liberal can’t we?) always declare this paradigm. Only blacks can speak for black issues, or even provide “black justice” (that is why there must be a “black seat” on the bench of the Supreme Court, just as there must be a “female seat” on the Supreme Court). Only those who have served in the military are qualified to comment on the war in Iraq, only the disabled are qualified to speak for the disabled, Only Teachers are qualified to speak out on education, etc. etc.
AS for the Conservative men saying this, you are grossly misstating the case. Most Conservative men reject all of those claims. As they are based on a fraudulent claim. And your assertion is another strike against you as a crypto-Liberal.
You declare me to be a maniac, I declare you to be an egotistical, arrogant, presumptuous Narcissist, more concerned with blowing up his ego and his image than in accomplishing anything for the rights and freedom of All Americans.
You and your ilk seek to Balkanize America. In your case you seek to widen the divide between men and women rather than seeking to heal the wounds.
BTW, you never did tell me how proud you must have been to get those congregational pastors fired for preaching something with which you disagreed. Did it make you feel “empowered?, In control?” Did you look in the mirror and see a hero in the making?
You certainly made it a major claim to your legitimacy when you told me not to “backtalk you;” when you instructed me not to “mess with” you.
You are without a doubt, the most ego-centric and arrogant person I have had the pleasure to debate in a long time. I fear you think far too highly of yourself and you seem very facile at name-dropping…as though to impress those of us who are “less than.” Your condescention is unwarranted as is your arrogance.
Tell “Phyllis” that next time you “talk to her.”
May 17, 2007 at 8:14 pm
amfortas said,
Often people will take a very tough line. Maybe it is overcooked. Maybe it is plain wrong, but only rarely is it so wrong that all the ‘right’ attitude displayed elsewhere should be thrown out too. Some people just write poorly.
There are several fine people contributing to MND that I admire. I admire their work, their attitudes (generally) and the fact that they try hard. But even some of these don’t like me that much. So what? I don’t ask that people see eye to eye with me on everything and so I have to give the same consideration to them.
The MRM is a broad coalition of attitudes. We all have to put up with the strange ideas of others in this enterprise. I, personally, find all the God botherers to be a bit suss. I might say it is very ‘American’ except I find some here in Oz just as focused. Not that I dismiss God or Jesus. But I suspect that even they would be rolling their eyes at some of the claims and demands made in His name(s). Nevertheless, everyone who fights against the injustice of our current system that so badly abuses men, children - yes and some women - is worthy of consideration and some lattitude.
Willy has a view of his relationship with God. Its his view and he expresses it. Like many God botherers, he wants us all to be as convinced as he is. To me, that is bye the bye. All this text-quoting, all this hurling of what this person or that said someone else said way back when leaves me astonished. Bibles at ten paces!
Forgiveness is bandied around. It is a tough act, frankly and all praise to those who pull it off. But for many the pain is deep and long and it takes a while for forgiveness of an evil act to appear let alone take root. I tend toward the view that the sinner just might be worthy of forgiveness (given that they confess, make recompense, sincerely apologise etc) but the evil that they do is not. God himself found the forgiveness task a mite tough. God has the rights on Unilateral forgiveness, but even the Chrurch He set up insists on the sinner actually seeking and earning it.
Should we, individually, forgive our wife when she takes us to the cleaners and prevents us from seeing our children whwn we have done no wrong? When she plants toxic seeds in their minds and induces PAS to seek revenge for her fantasies of being ‘unfulfilled’? When she lies like a Dicky Mint trim-sheet in Court to turn bully-boys against us? The Uber-Christian will say yes, because Jesus says we must. But unless we can do that from our own sense of goodness, we are simply being ‘obedient’, remaining resentful. And there is a hell of a lot to resent.
The woman, wife, betrayer, may well be unilaterally forgivable for her human frailty, as we are for ours, but the evil acts remain and continue to damage.
It is that damage that the MRM needs to focus on, rather than usurping God’s job.
May 17, 2007 at 8:17 pm
hmh1497 said,
I find it interesting that all you tough guys can’t accept the fact that some people just don’t get along. Relationships exist between two and only two people. When one party is done, it’s over, it’s so obvious. So, whine about it why dontcha.
When religions teach that man and women become one. They are simply restating the obvious. The children that you produce are equal parts mom and dad. Those children and their children live your lives for eternity. You don’t have to be some verbose phylosopher to accept this self-evident truth.
In fact, we don’t pick our parents, our brothers and sisters, or our children for that matter. We’re stuck with them, for eternity. We do, however pick our mates. We promise to them to be faithful, for all our life. I believe the actual problem society faces is that people no longer embrace faith. There’s too much else to worry about. The problem is that our world today is kill or be killed.
I think we all should grow up and act like men and stop blaming others for our own shortcomings and promote freedom and liberty in the world. Adams wote in his “Thoughts on Government” that the worst form of leadership is rule by fear. That’s exactly the method employed by nearly every religion. Especially the radical Islamic ones.
You all go right ahead complaining about no-fault divorce because every time I read it I hear the same cry for tyranny again. Go ahead and deny it. All you want is to force people to stay married. Your so great at pinning the scarlet letter of divorce on folks who end their relationships. Next there will be legislation restricting divorcees from living within 1000 feet of married folks.
Your wife is nothing more to you than the person you pledged your faith to. She is not related to you, only your parents, their parents, your children and their children are actually related to you. Ask yourself if your love for your step-child is the same as your love for your child.
May 17, 2007 at 8:19 pm
chas said,
May 17, 2007 at 8:45 pm
Will Malven said,
You and I don’t always see eye-to-eye, but you’re a right good bloke in my estimation. There’s some wisdom in your words.
Have Fosters for the sake of all.
Cheers, mate!
May 17, 2007 at 9:10 pm
Rinaldo Del Gallo, III said,
Lloyd, #15, I understand you and at once don’t get it. Shared parenting poled very well in liberal Massachusetts. Not embracing, by liberals and conservatives, is a political mistake.
Will Malven, #18, I find this piece much more palatable than your original article. Appreciate you saying some nice things despite my sending a salvo in your direction. You said, “The fact is that Christ did what he did on the steps of the Temple because the money-changers were violating God’s Temple. Remember he also instructed his disciples to sheath their swords when they came to his defense in Gethsemane.” I think the way to reconcile the two incidents is that its ok to be angry about sin and get a little hot—violence to revenge is another thing.
Will Malven, #21. In defense of Ush, the father’s rights movement has been largely abandoned or ignored by the conservative movement. I get involved in issue of preserving traditional marriage and I see little cross-over. To be honest, I think we have a lot more friends with moderates than anybody that is very conservative or very liberal. Average folks think we are right.
Amfortas, #22. Forgiving the people that really hurt people and are totally unrepetent and keep doing it. Tough issues for Christians.
HMH1497: You said, “I find it interesting that all you tough guys can’t accept the fact that some people just don’t get along. Relationships exist between two and only two people. When one party is done, it’s over, it’s so obvious. So, whine about it why dontcha.” Please clarify. Are you saying you don’t have a problem with uni-lateral no fault divorce? What should the standard then be for divorce?
HMF1497 further said: “Your wife is nothing more to you than the person you pledged your faith to. She is not related to you, only your parents, their parents, your children and their children are actually related to you. Ask yourself if your love for your step-child is the same as your love for your child.” I really have to disagree with this—a relationship by marriage TO YOUR WIFE is supposed to be as strong as blood. You’re not dating or cohabitating.
Chas, #24 made some great points and the current no-fault system is a mess.
May 17, 2007 at 10:38 pm
mruffolo said,
Cultural attitude drives legislation. Legislation forces behavior.
Who has the authority to create laws that dictate behavior?
For at least the last 4,000 the bible has shaped leaders of men. It has wisdom. It is pro-father, pro-family - God is a father and we are his kids. Its wisdom is designed to keep us out of trouble both individually and as a nation. If you look more carefully it can help grow your gifts, among other things.
Government’s laws change like the wind, forced by public opinion, then politician’s legislation. During this nonsense (read: anti-family, pro-homo, anti-God laws), when we get off track, a leader always presents himself (Yes. It’s always a man) to cast a vision better for the common good, not special interest groups.
http://www.biblegateway.com
Read the Standard English Version as it is a literal (read: feminist free) translation.
The struggle is between good and evil. Good is defined in the bible, not by taking a poll or government legislation.
May 18, 2007 at 9:12 am
thurston861 said,
Do not disturb his psychotic delusion or you will get lambasted in a long posting.
May 18, 2007 at 9:23 am
thurston861 said,
David - I second the Motion. Will has proved himself psychotic.
Furthermore David, if the Suffragettists disbanded after the 19th Amendment, then it is clear they let known enemies of family, patriarchy, and women into the house to murder them all, and then ran from the scene.
All evidence appears to direct us to a standard M.O. of leaders of a movement not being the public leaders, using others and the people within the group to do work for the actual cause which none know about nor understand until it is too late and the group disbands because it failed for the group, but the true organizers got what they wanted.
So Mr. USher, can you name one issue WOMEN have pressed for legislation to address, that has been cosntitutionally legislated, properly enforced per that legislation, and has not caused greater harm adn suffering in society than the initial issue?
In case you did not read the other post under WIll’s rant, thanks for the history lesson. As you can see, I did read it, and it is causing more questions, but you keep avoiding my first challenging question.
This is not goodm as you have and continue to address me.
May 18, 2007 at 9:34 am
mruffolo said,
Ellen Frankel stands just 4-foot-8 inches tall, a size that allowed larger co-workers to playfully scoop her up at the office and make remarks about her height. Some even patted her on the head.
Lawmakers are considering complaints such as hers as they review a bill that would make Massachusetts just the second state to bar discrimination based on height or weight.
”People in authority will very easily make comments about height that they wouldn’t make about race or gender,” said Frankel, a Marblehead author.
Jeanne Toombs understands the frustration. She says overweight people routinely are discriminated against because of their size.
”It’s not fair. No matter what you think of fat people, they deserve to be treated like human beings,” said Toombs, 59, a piano teacher who weighs 300 pounds.
http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/fashion/391792,CST-NWS-size18.article
Another feminist complaint that motivates lawmakers to pass new legislation.
May 18, 2007 at 9:54 am
mruffolo said,
http://www.bible-researcher.com/inclusive.html
Of the approximate sixty-six books were written by about forty men.
The bible was written by men, for men to read. For example, Proverbs was written by King Solomon for sons (Proverb 1:1-8).
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%201:1-8;&version=47;
The books of the bible describe people and events of at least 3,000 years old. The oldest written part bible evinces 2,100 years old with carbon dating (Cf. Dead Sea Scrolls).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_the_Bible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
History has not recorded a successful led country by women. Feminism is a social experiment engineered. The drive for women in leadership roles is unprecedented.
I opine that the consequence is what we share with each other on this website: family injustice; abortion; anger from broken commitments; materialism; homosexuality; mislead politics; broken families; woman good, man bad legislation and attitudes; among other things.
May 18, 2007 at 10:25 am
mruffolo said,
Adultery is not illegal; homosexuality is not illegal; giving false testimony against another is not illegal; dishonoring fathers is common place; divorces is easy and widespread; murdering children by abortion is legal; and, publically worshiping a Christian God may cause litigation.
May 18, 2007 at 10:39 am
thurston861 said,
1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10…..the things is gutted!
In my discussion with an Orthodox Rabbit we talked of the 7 Laws od Noach being in existence at the Time fo Sodom and Gomorrah, that on the day of destruction there were Seven Citizes destroyed that day.
The thesis was were there Seven Jurisdictions where each City had only 6 of the laws in place, each interchanging the law not being followed?
The fact that they all rose together, and fell together, seems to point out that they were a concerted effort to be an affront to G-D, much like the Tower of Babel. To prove that mankind can exist when one of the laws is broken, thus indicting the legitimacy of 7 laws by devaluing a single law.
The Orthodox Rabbi said there has been such discussions, but no conclusion on the Thesis other than that the expereiment of teh Seven Cities ended badly.
Such is the precept that if a society or individual can justify violating one law continually, or throwing it out, it does violate all of the law then, as it can eventually rationalize the remaining laws away.
It is a struggle that has been going on since the Garden and Eve bought the lie of Materialism, and Adam just went along with it.
In Kindergarten I remember every morning reciting the Ten Commandments.
It was what I learned to read before I read about Dick, Jane, and Spot. (1971)
It has never left me.
May 18, 2007 at 10:59 am
thurston861 said,
I must learn to proof read some day!!!
May 18, 2007 at 11:00 am
Lloyd selberg said,
When it comes to politics any association with men or fathers can be a detriment. A very conservative KS attorney general, Phil Kline, was replaced with a moderate DA, Paul Morrison, from the KS 10th district last election. Phil Kline was attempting to prosecute statutory rape and the majority didn’t like his tactics of looking into abortion clinic records. For a conservative state, Kansas has some very liberal ideas promoted in the wealthiest county in the state.
Look at Kansas Representative Dennis Moore, a former Ks 10th District DA. He made it a career of attacking “deadbeat dads” and defending the poor women. I had personal dealings with him years ago. He is the idiot that saw fit to introduce legislation to withhold visas from “deadbeat” dads in recent federal legislation. Obviously deadbeat dads are leaving the country to escape paying for destitute kids by the thousands.
Dennis Moore was also the one that refused to prosecute the 19 year old high school drop out, on probation, which was sleeping with my then 13 year old daughter in ’87 that led to my first divorce ending a 17 year marriage. I was a controlling ogre and had to be prevented from interfering with a woman’s right to sleep with whomever she chooses. It’s a woman’s right you know. I now have a fatherless daughter, grand-daughter and great grand-daughter all supporting the contention that women should not subordinate to any man. It was my first wife’s rebellion against her father that started the mess. He was guilty of sending her to Bob Jones University for an education.
Bottom line is the full realization of the political detrimental effects of promoting fathers. Perhaps Ush will offer his assessment of the resent resignation of Wade Horn if he has not formerly posted it.
May 18, 2007 at 1:33 pm
David R. Usher said,
I think Wade wanted to get out while the getting is good — the Bush Administration isn’t looking good and that does not help him. Wade is a classic feminist neo-conservative who says one thing while doing another.
I’m sure he has something lined up with one of the private agencies that collects child support — or a similar privatized venue — that pays much more and wants an ex-undersecretary who knows how to get more business out ot Washington.
May 18, 2007 at 3:15 pm
David R. Usher said,
http://www.policy-studies.com/
May 18, 2007 at 3:23 pm
chas said,
May 18, 2007 at 10:22 pm
thurston861 said,
9 years later she has her second internet affair (the first one I found out about, the first one she had taken the kids wiht her to go meet the guy twice) and I try to send her packing to mom.
LSS - therapist discovered (the hell I was living in) her inadequacy problems surrounding her depression because I might have a point of dissatisfaction with her, so she found a way around that to stop going and said a house would make her happy which put me on a financial treadmill to stay in the kids lifves.
Internet Affair 3, which i knew was inevitable becasue I knew she had no character no matter how much I tried to edify her, came and I told her not to touch me ever again, I would not be tortured and played with anymore.
She did the 911 hang up and I realized that 14 years of my life was shit, me running to make the Princess happy and it was never to be, because she demanded EVERYTHING, ALL THE TIME, 100% CONTROL and Manipulation.
I did the work to make the money, I washed the clothes, the dishes, did the shopping, and the yard work she did not want to do, she handled the money and played an RPG all day like what my son does with his life now.
I left and got destroyed.
Here I am.
So much for G-D’s voice instructions and will, She dashed it all to peices.
HE can do amazing things, but he does not fix Female progeny of First Cousins when they say the Sinner’s prayer, especially if they do not want to be repaired.
Se la Vie!
So where is HE? Where is HE regarding my kids?
I know HE is up to something, but this seems completely unecessary except to drive me to this palce and see that I was still a Materialist.
May 18, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Lloyd selberg said,
The essence of God’s will is common to all the world’s major religions. Every religion be it Christian or otherwise teaches a set of moral values. Study of history will confirm God’s truths. God’s moral laws are just as firmly fixed as his natural laws of science. It appears to me that our Creator repeatedly tries to get his message across and as soon as men with his inherent ego get involved, things fall apart. When one considers that more men have died in the name of religion than for any other cause we must be very careful in promoting any specific faith. Clearly it was not God’s plan to have men killing men in his name.
Natural societies are patriarchal and have reached a very civilized state primarily due to religious influence. Only in such civilized societies, could matriarchy be considered or take root. Civilization is the result of good righteous men seeking to protect their wives and children. Remove that motivation and men have no reason to go to war or work for a better life contributing to the economic wealth of their society. God made men and women equally important, but compliments and not competitors. When our over civilized, democratic (majority rules), society gave women the right to vote, we began a defiance of God’s natural laws that will surely lead to self destruction.
Prophetic words: “The women’s suffrage movement is only the small edge of the wedge, if we allow women to vote it will mean the loss of social structure and the rise of every liberal cause under the sun. Women are well represented by their fathers, brothers, and husbands.” - Winston Churchill
Matriarchy simply doesn’t work and societies that have become androgynous have always ended in ruin. Has the time come for Atlas to Shrug?
“In the name of the best within you, do not sacrifice this world to those who are its worst. In the name of the values that keep you alive, do not let your vision of man be distorted by the ugly, the cowardly, the mindless in those who have never achieved his title. Do not lose your knowledge that Man’s proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind, and a step that travels unlimited roads.”
“Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of your battle. The world you desired can be won. It exists, it is real, it is possible, it is yours.” - Ayn Rand “Atlas Shrugged”
May 19, 2007 at 5:32 am
DadWith2Girls said,
I believe God has been sacked. He is out of work. Outsourced actually.
He’s rumored to be a greeter at a Wal-Mart in San Diego now, still trying to put a good face on the whole stupid tragedy….
May 19, 2007 at 11:39 am
DadWith2Girls said,
I guess my concept of polite conversation needs to be adjusted!
What I meant to say was —
I have serious trust issues with any preacher who uses politics as his primary pulpit.
I’m no Christian, but I recall that my favorite story in catechism class was about Jesus throwing the money-lenders out of the Temple.
I concluded that the Christ was an angry revolutionary.
I was excommunicated by my local priest shortly after I expressed this opinion, at age 12.
That man, who’s brother was a pedophile, did me a tremendous service.
(His brother used the Church to prey upon boys…)
Not me.
I left in a hurry and never looked back.
Religion is a tool for oppression. And predation.
Plain and simple.
Are you psychologically oppressed by post- 911 dementia?
Do you wish the global religious terrorist war could just go away?
Have you read about the Crusades? The slightly earlier war between Muslims and Christians?
How about the consequence of the Christian victory? The exploration of the New World and the genocide of 2 million Caribs and Ameridians? 4 million Native Americans?
Any familiarity with Manifest Destiny as a Christian concept?
What do you folks R-E-A-D?
Anything?
(oh, there’s always youtube.com for the post-literate!)
May 22, 2007 at 7:09 pm
thurston861 said,
May 22, 2007 at 7:47 pm
thurston861 said,
May 22, 2007 at 7:47 pm