Why Are Women Expected to be the Gatekeepers of Virginity?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#1
Hey Everyone,

This thread was inspired by a conversation with a friend about church culture, as well as reading through some posts here in a thread about The Purity Culture (though I haven't had a chance to watch the video that was shared.)

I grew up in WELS Lutheran schools, and while I can't remember the pastors or teachers ever explicitly saying this (because sex was never talked about except not to have anything to do with it unless you were married,) but my home church had a very strongly implied culture that although abstinence was preached, women in particular were shouldered with the responsibility of making sure nothing improper happened.

I can't remember anyone specifically saying this, but you could definitely feel the air of "GOOD girls put up walls and surround them with barbed wire, electric fences; BAD girls are loose and do all those horrible things that a GOOD girl would NEVER do."

How was this so strongly imprinted without every being specifically stated?

I have often talked about how if a girl became pregnant at my Lutheran high school, the mothers were kept from coming back. In the one case that happened while I was there, the mother could not come back, but the father finished out his time at the school. The mother was heavily condemned amongst the gossiping circles, but I never heard anything about the father.


In a similar fashion, other kids talked about other girls who were supposedly "doing things" with their boyfriends (you always heard about how "bad" the girls were -- never the boys,) and by listening to how the adults talked about single and divorced mothers (which was something very strongly condemned in the underground currents of my home church.) Any girl or woman who was suspected of "immoral behavior" was openly whispered about (I realize this phrase is an oxymoron but it's extremely fitting,) and there was absolutely no mention or judgment of the men involved.

Now, let me be clear in that I am NOT in any way, shape, or form trying to knock the men here.

But as I've said in many other threads, the popular boys at my Lutheran high school were known for bragging about going to the local strip club every weekend, and one openly showed off the condoms he kept in his wallet. But no one seemed to pay any mind to that or ever say anything derogatory about them -- other kids saw them as the cool rebels whom others aspired to be like and be with.

I've always found it to be an intriguing, albeit disturbing phenomenon within even the church culture that women are always seen as the ones to say no, stop anything from going to far, and being responsible for holding the key to the gates of sexual morality. Now I realize that this attitude has a very long social history and culture outside the church as well.

But why is it still like this within the church?

* Why isn't there more emphasis on the equal role of both men and women to remain morally sound and keep things that way? Why does even the church hold on to old-fashioned beliefs that it's mostly the woman's fault if something happens?

Or maybe that's just the church culture I'VE been raised in. If yours has been different, please tell us about it! I would actually be very relieved to hear that I'm in the minority and that everyone else's churches hold both men and women equally responsible.

* In your experience, how much emphasis is put on boys saying "No," "Stop," and "I Won't Do That"?

* Why are women more seriously punished for sexual sins?

Again, I would love to hear examples that counter my own experiences. I grew up listening to church people wagging their tongues about, for example, a divorced mother whose daughter I went to school with, and the women I heard talking about her claimed that the mother had "a revolving door for men." (I was so young at the time that I thought this mean an actual revolving door that was installed into the side of their house.)

I have no idea if this was true or not about the woman's personal life or not, and I'm not sure that the people who talked about her really knew, either.

But I can't recall that I have ever heard anyone in my church environments talk about a single father having a revolving door for women, whether or not it was true.

* Why is this, and what have your experiences been?

* Did God really intend for sexual morality to rest more heavily upon women's shoulders?

* This is NOT meant to be a He Vs. She thread at all -- to me, it's not so much about gender, but rather, what we're taught about the different genders, is it Biblically sound, and how can this be changed if needed?
 
Aug 4, 2021
586
185
43
#2
Obviously because women are givers of life, and supposed to cherish that gift. And it applies to men too, but mothers are the caregivers so they must be purer. A father guides, he does not nurture. Theese are both evolutionary roles and genderroles from natural law. Why would you need churchpeople to tell you this?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,149
30,296
113
#3
It does at times seem to come down to: "Boys will be boys."

As if boys/young men/men in general are allowed to misbehave, and nothing wrong is seen in this.
It is also characterized and dismissed by the saying that they are simply "Sowing their wild oats."
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#4
Obviously because women are givers of life, and supposed to cherish that gift. And it applies to men too, but mothers are the caregivers so they must be purer. A father guides, he does not nurture. Theese are both evolutionary roles and genderroles from natural law. Why would you need churchpeople to tell you this?
I could be mistaken, but from everything I have read in the Bible, God, who neither follows "natural law" (according to humans) nor evolutionary gender roles (again, according to humans,) does not expect or require women to somehow be purer.

He has equal levels of expectations of men and women, and some might argue that He expects more of men in marriage, as they are the heads of the household. (I'm not saying this is an absolute, just a point I have seen brought up from time to time.)
 
Aug 4, 2021
586
185
43
#5
I could be mistaken, but from everything I have read in the Bible, God, who neither follows "natural law" (according to humans) nor evolutionary gender roles (again, according to humans,) does not expect or require women to somehow be purer.

He has equal levels of expectations of men and women, and some might argue that He expects more of men in marriage, as they are the heads of the household. (I'm not saying this is an absolute, just a point I have seen brought up from time to time.)
Natural laws are Gods laws.
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#6
Natural laws are Gods laws.
It depends on what you define as natural laws.

Many people define evolution (in the sense of creatures and life developing on their own) as a natural law, which, according to the Bible, is obviously not true.

I have also heard it said that because God created everything to reproduce "after its own kind," human races should not be mixed and should be kept "pure," because this is "God's natural law."

I don't agree with that either.

Not to say that I'm right about everything, but I don't automatically see "natural laws" as being God's laws.
 
Aug 4, 2021
586
185
43
#7
It depends on what you define as natural laws.

Many people define evolution (in the sense of creatures and life developing on their own) as a natural law, which, according to the Bible, is obviously not true.

I have also heard it said that because God created everything to reproduce "after its own kind," human races should not be mixed and should be kept "pure," because this is "God's natural law."

I don't agree with that either.

Not to say that I'm right about everything, but I don't automatically see "natural laws" as being God's laws.
I define Gods laws as natural laws, we are afforded unailable rights from God, which you americans keep bickering about regarding constitutional issues, everlasting argument forevermore. And the natural laws come from the same place.

If you cannot merge evolution and God, I cannot help you, no problem for me. If it is goading, I am not biting. Same with the racismbait, I have not read anything about God being a racist. Stating such a thing is blasphemy in my book. You conflate religious groups with race, intentionally deceit as far as I can see. Call God a racist here and see how long people think that is OK. Demanding that christians should only marry other christians, is kind of required in the ceremony of marriage which is a pact between man, woman and GOD, so faithfulness to God is a requirement. I have not made up my mind on this yet.

We disagree and that is fine, as long as I burn down your false strawman, trying to make me and God racists. So you can ask real questions about what is clarified, if you want to discuss the constructed generalized strawmen you typed, I am not a defender of those, so wrong person to ask.
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#8
I define Gods laws as natural laws, we are afforded unailable rights from God, which you americans keep bickering about regarding constitutional issues, everlasting argument forevermore. And the natural laws come from the same place.

If you cannot merge evolution and God, I cannot help you, no problem for me. If it is goading, I am not biting. Same with the racismbait, I have not read anything about God being a racist. Stating such a thing is blasphemy in my book. You conflate religious groups with race, intentionally deceit as far as I can see. Call God a racist here and see how long people think that is OK. Demanding that christians should only marry other christians, is kind of required in the ceremony of marriage which is a pact between man, woman and GOD, so faithfulness to God is a requirement. I have not made up my mind on this yet.

We disagree and that is fine, as long as I burn down your false strawman, trying to make me and God racists. So you can ask real ng questions about what is clarified, if you want to discuss the constructed generalized strawmen you typed, I am not a defender of those, so wrong person to ask.
You seem to see absolutely everything as trying to pull you into a fight. What has happened in your life that has made you see everything as a setup for some kind of showdown? I know you've mentioned drugs and an atheistic background.

I have seen you accuse multiple people here of always trying to "bait" you, and if that's what you choose to see, that is most certainly your own choice.

May I suggest getting to know people around here for several months first? All of the people I've seen you accuse of trying to start something are just regular posters who regularly write replies to most of the new threads that pop up. They're not targeting, following, stalking, or bullying you as you have accused them of doing, and the mods are already well aware of who they are and what their regular posting habits are. Rather, these members are simply doing what they've always done, long before you came to the forum.

And as you talk about certain inalienable rights, if one of them, is supposedly the right to state our own points of view, you took the liberty to do so, and likewise, I took the liberty to post mine -- even if they may differ, which is fine.
 
Aug 4, 2021
586
185
43
#9
You seem to see absolutely everything as trying to pull you into a fight. What has happened in your life that has made you see everything as a setup for some kind of showdown? I know you've mentioned drugs and an atheistic background.

I have seen you accuse multiple people here of always trying to "bait" you, and if that's what you choose to see, that is most certainly your own choice.

May I suggest getting to know people around here for several months first? All of the people I've seen you accuse of trying to start something are just regular posters who regularly write replies to most of the new threads that pop up. They're not targeting, following, stalking, or bullying you as you have accused them of doing, and the mods are already well aware of who they are and what their regular posting habits are. Rather, these members are simply doing what they've always done, long before you came to the forum.

And as you talk about certain inalienable rights, if one of them, is supposedly the right to state our own points of view, you took the liberty to do so, and likewise, I took the liberty to post mine -- even if they may differ, which is fine.
You called God for a racist, and lied about the scripture. The tribe of God is faith, not race. And you implied/accused me of meaning that when I simply typed natural law/Gods law. That is creating a fight. What other point is there in blasphemning and calling people for racists unfounded? And yes, multiple leftists here bait people. It is what the children of the lie do, the same as on secular social media.

Just post a qualifying verse or 5 for God being a racist, telling us to be racists. Your word "race", prove it. Good luck. I register that you dodge elaborating/defending that. So you answered in in that way, and by turning it around on me. Happens everytime. I hope for your souls sake that you stop dishonest conflating of terms, and certainly not do it and in turn blasheme and call God a racist. It stands, And I do not expect you to clarify it, but pivot again. Sorry, no engaging in another pivot. Clarify how God is a racist and how I am a racist for following God. That was your claim, did not have to read between no lines even. Read your own comment again.
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#10
It depends on what you define as natural laws.

Many people define evolution (in the sense of creatures and life developing on their own) as a natural law, which, according to the Bible, is obviously not true.

I have also heard it said that because God created everything to reproduce "after its own kind," human races should not be mixed and should be kept "pure," because this is "God's natural law."

I don't agree with that either.

Not to say that I'm right about everything, but I don't automatically see "natural laws" as being God's laws.
You called God for a racist, and lied about the scripture. The tribe of God is faith, not race. And you implied/accused me of meaning that when I simply typed natural law/Gods law. That is creating a fight. What other point is there in blasphemning and calling people for racists unfounded? And yes, multiple leftists here bait people. It is what the children of the lie do, the same as on secular social media.

Just post a qualifying verse or 5 for God being a racist, telling us to be racists. Your word "race", prove it. Good luck. I register that you dodge elaborating/defending that. So you answered in in that way, and by turning it around on me. Happens everytime. I hope for your souls sake that you stop dishonest conflating of terms, and certainly not do it and in turn blasheme and call God a racist. It stands, And I do not expect you to clarify it, but pivot again. Sorry, no engaging in another pivot. Clarify how God is a racist and how I am a racist for following God. That was your claim, did not have to read between no lines even. Read your own comment again.

My comment specifically says, "I have also heard it said," as in, this is a train of thought I have heard and read about other people having, but do not believe myself.

I'm not sure how you took that as calling you or God a racist.

You have the same confrontational approach in nearly every thread you answer.

You see what you want to see, and I will leave you to your own visions of your own reality.

It's interesting because the things you accuse others of doing -- following, stalking, and bullying you -- I could say that you are doing the same to my threads, as you're showing up as nearly the first poster in every single one.

But rather I've just seen you as someone who just wants to get in on the conversations.

There are people here who DO understand what I'm saying, and seeing as I have little spare time as it is, I will save my time and energy for interactions with them.
 

Lynx

Folksy yet erudite
Aug 13, 2014
27,725
9,656
113
#11
You called God for a racist, and lied about the scripture.
Dude you are more full of it than a Christmas goose, as the old saying goes.

Do you even read a post before you fire off a reply to it? Or do you just see a phrase that you think you might be able to argue with, yell "BANZAI!!!" and reach for the REPLY button?

She did NOT call God a racist or lie about scripture.
 

Lynx

Folksy yet erudite
Aug 13, 2014
27,725
9,656
113
#12
Ahem... anyway...

seoulsearch I can't say why it would be that way at your church because I've never seen that. It's not at all like that at our church.

I mean yeah, certain people talk about other people. I try to avoid them, and fortunately they aren't very many. But they don't seem to be partial to either gender.
 
Aug 4, 2021
586
185
43
#13
My comment specifically says, "I have also heard it said," as in, this is a train of thought I have heard and read about other people having, but do not believe myself.

I'm not sure how you took that as calling you or God a racist.

You have the same confrontational approach in nearly every thread you answer.

You see what you want to see, and I will leave you to your own visions of your own reality.

It's interesting because the things you accuse others of doing -- following, stalking, and bullying you -- I could say that you are doing the same to my threads, as you're showing up as nearly the first poster in every single one.

But rather I've just seen you as someone who just wants to get in on the conversations.

There are people here who DO understand what I'm saying, and seeing as I have little spare time as it is, I will save my time and energy for interactions with them.
Backtracking is not working. You claimed to have heard that people who believe in natural laws/Gods laws, generally are racists and God is the source for the racism. What innocent else could this mean, "human races should not be mixed and should be kept "pure," because this is "God's natural law." ". Seems pretty racist to me.

And again you try to flip it over to me, not working. You called me and God racists. I have clearly stated that I am a very conservative christian and answer truthful and bluntly to all questions. I see goading. I know the tricks of leftists, and the rule on most christian forums is that christians should not goad others by calling their faith false, and stuff like that. So, I am not going into that. I have to accept that others believe what they believe, and only give my point of view, and so should others to me. If people with different denominations want to go at eachother, and false report eachother, I am not entertaining it. So not entertaining leftists on much scripture anymore, after the initial reply to a specific question. Not here to convert you to mine, and not entertaining your mindfulzenhangup. I have never read your entire posthistory and made fun of you with that on later posts. As certain nicks have done to me, regarding family and cats, which is always off topic posts by a select group of nicks on my threads. Do threadsarchology and check.

Now you know how it is, you will get replies to new threads, you will not get me to follow pivots off topic, and I will not be goaded and go off on your denomination. I just state what I believe is the truth. You do you, I do me, and we can coexist here, and do not call God racist again, I do not think christians like that. People who report might not like it.
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#14
Ahem... anyway...

seoulsearch I can't say why it would be that way at your church because I've never seen that. It's not at all like that at our church.

I mean yeah, certain people talk about other people. I try to avoid them, and fortunately they aren't very many. But they don't seem to be partial to either gender.
This is actually one of the reasons I write these threads.

When I read other people's stories and they are completely different than mine (in positive way,) I feel a lot of hope and am very grateful for that.

I would love to know that I am simply one of a minority who has been taught these kinds of attitudes within church culture, whether explicitly or implied.
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#15
Backtracking is not working. You claimed to have heard that people who believe in natural laws/Gods laws, generally are racists and God is the source for the racism. What innocent else could this mean, "human races should not be mixed and should be kept "pure," because this is "God's natural law." ". Seems pretty racist to me.

And again you try to flip it over to me, not working. You called me and God racists. I have clearly stated that I am a very conservative christian and answer truthful and bluntly to all questions. I see goading. I know the tricks of leftists, and the rule on most christian forums is that christians should not goad others by calling their faith false, and stuff like that. So, I am not going into that. I have to accept that others believe what they believe, and only give my point of view, and so should others to me. If people with different denominations want to go at eachother, and false report eachother, I am not entertaining it. So not entertaining leftists on much scripture anymore, after the initial reply to a specific question. Not here to convert you to mine, and not entertaining your mindfulzenhangup. I have never read your entire posthistory and made fun of you with that on later posts. As certain nicks have done to me, regarding family and cats, which is always off topic posts by a select group of nicks on my threads. Do threadsarchology and check.

Now you know how it is, you will get replies to new threads, you will not get me to follow pivots off topic, and I will not be goaded and go off on your denomination. I just state what I believe is the truth. You do you, I do me, and we can coexist here, and do not call God racist again, I do not think christians like that. People who report might not like it.
Yes.

You sure told me.

As for people reporting me, I'm sure I've had a few reports in the time I've been here. But I'm not sure exactly who else is going to interpret my posts as calling you or God a racist, as you have done.

In either case, I trust the mods in their judgment calls, including any they might have to make with me.
 

Sculpt

Well-known member
Apr 18, 2021
1,147
368
83
#16
Hey Everyone,

This thread was inspired by a conversation with a friend about church culture, as well as reading through some posts here in a thread about The Purity Culture (though I haven't had a chance to watch the video that was shared.)

I grew up in WELS Lutheran schools, and while I can't remember the pastors or teachers ever explicitly saying this (because sex was never talked about except not to have anything to do with it unless you were married,) but my home church had a very strongly implied culture that although abstinence was preached, women in particular were shouldered with the responsibility of making sure nothing improper happened.

I can't remember anyone specifically saying this, but you could definitely feel the air of "GOOD girls put up walls and surround them with barbed wire, electric fences; BAD girls are loose and do all those horrible things that a GOOD girl would NEVER do."

How was this so strongly imprinted without every being specifically stated?

I have often talked about how if a girl became pregnant at my Lutheran high school, the mothers were kept from coming back. In the one case that happened while I was there, the mother could not come back, but the father finished out his time at the school. The mother was heavily condemned amongst the gossiping circles, but I never heard anything about the father.


In a similar fashion, other kids talked about other girls who were supposedly "doing things" with their boyfriends (you always heard about how "bad" the girls were -- never the boys,) and by listening to how the adults talked about single and divorced mothers (which was something very strongly condemned in the underground currents of my home church.) Any girl or woman who was suspected of "immoral behavior" was openly whispered about (I realize this phrase is an oxymoron but it's extremely fitting,) and there was absolutely no mention or judgment of the men involved.

Now, let me be clear in that I am NOT in any way, shape, or form trying to knock the men here.

But as I've said in many other threads, the popular boys at my Lutheran high school were known for bragging about going to the local strip club every weekend, and one openly showed off the condoms he kept in his wallet. But no one seemed to pay any mind to that or ever say anything derogatory about them -- other kids saw them as the cool rebels whom others aspired to be like and be with.

I've always found it to be an intriguing, albeit disturbing phenomenon within even the church culture that women are always seen as the ones to say no, stop anything from going to far, and being responsible for holding the key to the gates of sexual morality. Now I realize that this attitude has a very long social history and culture outside the church as well.

But why is it still like this within the church?

* Why isn't there more emphasis on the equal role of both men and women to remain morally sound and keep things that way? Why does even the church hold on to old-fashioned beliefs that it's mostly the woman's fault if something happens?

Or maybe that's just the church culture I'VE been raised in. If yours has been different, please tell us about it! I would actually be very relieved to hear that I'm in the minority and that everyone else's churches hold both men and women equally responsible.

* In your experience, how much emphasis is put on boys saying "No," "Stop," and "I Won't Do That"?

* Why are women more seriously punished for sexual sins?

Again, I would love to hear examples that counter my own experiences. I grew up listening to church people wagging their tongues about, for example, a divorced mother whose daughter I went to school with, and the women I heard talking about her claimed that the mother had "a revolving door for men." (I was so young at the time that I thought this mean an actual revolving door that was installed into the side of their house.)

I have no idea if this was true or not about the woman's personal life or not, and I'm not sure that the people who talked about her really knew, either.

But I can't recall that I have ever heard anyone in my church environments talk about a single father having a revolving door for women, whether or not it was true.

* Why is this, and what have your experiences been?

* Did God really intend for sexual morality to rest more heavily upon women's shoulders?

* This is NOT meant to be a He Vs. She thread at all -- to me, it's not so much about gender, but rather, what we're taught about the different genders, is it Biblically sound, and how can this be changed if needed?
Your experience on this wider issue is the same as mine. I have basically all the same stories you have here, more or less.

Why does society at large (America), or christian circles more specifically, put harsher expectations on females and than males? That's a big sociology subject... but I do have an educated speculation. Want to know what it is? :)

Let me start the answer with statistical measures sociologist collected through research. I'm not going to look them up and link them, I'm just going to tell you what I remember hearing/seeing. You can look it up or dismiss it, I'm not high energy today. One is how often men think about sex compared to women. The studies found men thought of sex many, many, many times a day, and the average women's numbers were not in the same galaxy. On top of that, multiple studies reveal men are primarily aroused by sight. The drive for men started off the charts, and then modern media developed, as did sexuality as a pervasive sales technique.

I don't need to mention this to you, Seoulsearch, but yes, we're talking about the average drive of men compared to women; obviously each individual is different. And to sum up: it's measurable, and it's not even close.

I heard a close female relative, married and a pastor's wife for decades, say they know the disparate drives as a significant obvious reality. What's this all mean practically? As I read it... it means most people accept the drive is apples and oranges, and in this area so are the expected responsibilities and behaviors.
 

phil36

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2009
8,345
2,159
113
#17
I'm not sure what all churches teach, but the ones I've been to teach about purity for both men and women.

It may seem like women have the added pressure mainly because, at the end of the day, they will have to carry the burden. That could be a possible reason 🤔 IDK?

Lynx has mentioned above... why do people gossip. Because they are busy bodies, maybe it gives them pride..'I'm not like that'? It also causes division, and destroys. So why do Christians still gossip.. as with everything we need to start with ourselves.. I need to ask myself this. Do I gossip? We also have to remember that not everyone in church will actually be a christian in the first place.

A gossip betrays a confidence; so avoid anyone who talks too much - Proverbs 20:19.

Not sure if that even answered your OP lol.
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#18
Now you know how it is, you will get replies to new threads, you will not get me to follow pivots off topic, and I will not be goaded and go off on your denomination. I just state what I believe is the truth. You do you, I do me, and we can coexist here, and do not call God racist again, I do not think christians like that. People who report might not like it.
To be honest, I would actually like to encourage anyone who felt I called Mindfulzen and/or God a racist in my posts to go ahead and report it, because I'd like to know if I really came across that way.

If enough reports were made, I would trust a mod to contact me and tell me that I really did sound like I was calling both him and God racists.

I would want to know if I was wording things so drastically wrong, that it really came across to the good majority of the readers as being what I said.

But I truly believe that most of the readers will understand what I was actually saying.

However, I am willing to be proved wrong.
 

seoulsearch

OutWrite Trouble
May 23, 2009
16,707
5,617
113
#19
Getting back to the topic at hand, I guess one of the things I look forward to in heaven is asking God to set me straight regarding everything I question about church culture.

"God, they punished the unwed mothers, but never said a word about the fathers -- what would you have done?"

"God, they talked about the single and divorced mothers... How would you have wanted to see them treated?"

"God, everyone talks about the difference between men's and women's sex drives and how men are so visual... But what did you create a man's sex drive to be, and in what ways did you expect both men and women to control it? Did you really intend for women to be the moral backup for both people within a couple?"

This is just my own personal view, but I don't believe I will know God's true answers to these questions within this lifetime.

I'm looking forward to the day that I do (along with the other 8 zillion + questions I have.) :)

Then again, some people say that once we get to heaven, the things we worried or wondered about here won't even matter.

Thank you for all the honest, heartfelt answers, and I hope people will continue to share.
 
Aug 4, 2021
586
185
43
#20
Yes.

You sure told me.

As for people reporting me, I'm sure I've had a few reports in the time I've been here. But I'm not sure exactly who else is going to interpret my posts as calling you or God a racist, as you have done.

In either case, I trust the mods in their judgment calls, including any they might have to make with me.
Just a headsup in a christian forum, claiming that Gods laws involve racial profiling and racial segregation, is not very nice. Another headsup, whites are a racial minority among christians. There are more latinos and black christians. And FYI, I am not member of a church, am white, but the ministries I listen to are black, and the denomination I identify with is of a different race than I am, so God is not racist. Quite the opposie of the scripture and how christianity works in practice. God and true christians do not differ between races, and we are told to only see the colour of the heart so to speak. No need to inject political manufactured racism into religion, for any reason other to divide. Deny that you posted that you "had heard" that conservative christians meant racism when talking about natural laws. Preserve your burned down strawman. Find a poll and prove how many conservative christians believe that God tells them to segregate on racial lines. Otherwise your hearsay has no relevance, and it is a false generalization. Not my game, but this is how the left tend to reply. Can you provide a source for conservative christians tend to think that God tells them to be racist? I will make it easy for you, if you find a large minority thinking that way globally, like say 30%, it is an issue in the christian community, and I will agree. Then we do the scientific thing, and break down which denomination and geographic areas that think like that. And we can talk about that in a thread you make, about people not including me. Please do not infer racism on me again. The word has become meaningless, by so many false accusation of it.