Has anyone seen the two page article about the newest Duggar in this week's People?
"Following in the footsteps of his parents - "We accept the children we have as blessings from God," says Jim Bob - Josh says he and Anna "will welcome as many children as God will give us." Anna agrees: "I can't wait to see what might happen with the next one!"
What is it with these people? One child is barely born before they are talking about the next one! Sounds like they are going to see how much they can contribute to the world's overpopulation problem as well.
But Michelle was just as bad. Within hours of giving birth, she was heard saying she would take some more if God gave them to her. CLUE to Michelle. It ain't "God" giving them babies. It's her inability to say NO to Jim Bob that keeps her pregnant & clueless.
If Josh and Anna goes by the JB's thinking they will not be able to have marital relations until December 27, 2009. They are suppose to wait 80 days since they had a girl. I honestly don't see Josh waiting that long.
Originally posted by mitsy12: But Michelle was just as bad. Within hours of giving birth, she was heard saying she would take some more if God gave them to her. CLUE to Michelle. It ain't "God" giving them babies. It's her inability to say NO to Jim Bob that keeps her pregnant & clueless.
If more wives learned to say yes to their spouse their spouses would be alot happier and they in turn would be as well. And yes God the Creator of life is the one giving them these blessing of children.
My favorite scripture verse: From Psalm 139
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
Originally posted by mom9900: If more wives learned to say yes to their spouse their spouses would be alot happier and they in turn would be as well. And yes God the Creator of life is the one giving them these blessing of children.
My favorite scripture verse: From Psalm 139
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
Life is not all about men!! I guess in your world I would not be a good & dutiful wife if I don't want or feel like having relations with my husband. Oh well, in my world it is all about if I feel like it or not.
[quote by mom9900]If more wives learned to say yes to their spouse their spouses would be alot happier and they in turn would be as well. And yes God the Creator of life is the one giving them these blessing of children.[/quote]
Men and Women are equal. I thought everyone knew that. We are all equal.
Originally posted by lissy5678: I know these people have barely been married a year! They should put the brakes on it.
Why. Because you or someone else dictate?
I have a few ideas. Getting married is a huge thing in itself so it's nice to take some time to get to know each other. Once you have kids it gets busy and they get to be a bigger focus than the marriage sometimes. (Possibly more so with Josh and Anna being so young and not having experienced other relationships) If I were to give some advice I would say enjoy your new baby! Get to know her. There's lot's of time if you want to have more.
Originally posted by mitsy12: But Michelle was just as bad. Within hours of giving birth, she was heard saying she would take some more if God gave them to her. CLUE to Michelle. It ain't "God" giving them babies. It's her inability to say NO to Jim Bob that keeps her pregnant & clueless.
What??? How about men saying yes to their wives. Respect and love works both ways. If more wives learned to say yes to their spouse their spouses would be alot happier and they in turn would be as well. And yes God the Creator of life is the one giving them these blessing of children.
My favorite scripture verse: From Psalm 139
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
I have been married for 23 years. My husband and I have always together. It has never been his money r my money. We just work together. I work in a very stressful job, but everyday, pack my husband's lunch for him. I do it because I love him. But he would not loose his mind if I did not do it. He would make it himself of buy something. My kids have always had one of us with them. In a marriage it cannot be one sided. that is where the over zealouse religiouse followers get talked about. It is not about good or bad christians but being so over the top they cannot see any other view and for some reason think women are a lower being. If one takes the bible as so literal, than one really needs to reavaluate quite a few of the writings. Anyway, I think Anna will do what ever Joshua says to do. I also think to even consider having another baby is stupid e specially when he commented how things were not good at the dealership. I would say that about anyone, do not try to get pregnant, how foolish, god does not provide, we provide, the god I believe in has given me free will to make the choices I need to go on. The godI believe in does not control or think one sex is over the other. But that is my belief
It's all about the "army of God", their religion/beliefs which they have a right to believe in (and I have every right to disagree with); when a woman's destiny is tied up in her ability to procreate for God because he has opened up her womb, and the husband is blessed because he "conquered" his wife through pregnancy then they are blessed by God (according to them). To control ones procreation, in their (quiverfull) mind set, is a sin and goes against God's will for married couples. It really is that simple for those who believe this.
Originally posted by mitsy12: But Michelle was just as bad. Within hours of giving birth, she was heard saying she would take some more if God gave them to her. CLUE to Michelle. It ain't "God" giving them babies. It's her inability to say NO to Jim Bob that keeps her pregnant & clueless.
If more wives learned to say yes to their spouse their spouses would be alot happier and they in turn would be as well. And yes God the Creator of life is the one giving them these blessing of children.
My favorite scripture verse: From Psalm 139
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
That psalm doesn't say anything about giving your will up and letting your man have his way with you whenever he wants. Show me a psalm where is says "You can't say no to your man" and then we'll talk. Heck, that psalm doesn't even talk about kids being a gift, just about the creation of a person.
Oh well, in my world it is all about if I feel like it or not.[/QUOTE]
So sad that it is considered okay to be so selfish. How about in your world, instead of worrying about yourself and your feelings, you focus on your husband and making him happy? And then he in turn does that for you and you are both giving of yourselves selflessly. That makes a good marriage.
Originally posted by mitsy12: But Michelle was just as bad. Within hours of giving birth, she was heard saying she would take some more if God gave them to her. CLUE to Michelle. It ain't "God" giving them babies. It's her inability to say NO to Jim Bob that keeps her pregnant & clueless.
If more wives learned to say yes to their spouse their spouses would be alot happier and they in turn would be as well. And yes God the Creator of life is the one giving them these blessing of children.
My favorite scripture verse: From Psalm 139
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
Are you serious? Wives should say yes to their husbands just to make them happy? What about women's feeling? I guess in your world whatever the man wants the man gets no matter how you feel. I guess Michelle feels the way you do and never says no to Jim Bob. But I guess since she really doesn't do much, she has time to always please her man. It's not like she has 18 kids to take care of, or cook, clean or do laundry.
I think as much as Josh and Anna say marriage is about love and they don't want to have a million kids, its most likely going to happen. It might be difficult to admit but when Michelle Duggar is your mother in law, birthing babies becomes a competition. Josh expects nothing less than unwavering devotion and I think now that he's had a taste of what its like to have your own kid, he's got Jim Bob fever. And I hope this baby addiction isn't catching on with Anna, I was really hoping she would have waited or been a little less eager than to start talking about the next one.
But with Josh Duggar as her husband, what choice does she have? Sad.
Are you serious? Wives should say yes to their husbands just to make them happy? What about women's feeling? I guess in your world whatever the man wants the man gets no matter how you feel. I guess Michelle feels the way you do and never says no to Jim Bob. But I guess since she really doesn't do much, she has time to always please her man. It's not like she has 18 kids to take care of, or cook, clean or do laundry.
Can you not chill? She wasen't saying be your husbands slave but you can't deny that some women mistake shrillness and nagging for assertivness IE Kate Gosseline and proceed to have a man that tunes them out;A little give, understanding,and placating-from whom ever, within reason-is just common sense to have a functional marriage and home life.IMO,Thats one reason why the divorce rate is out of control-both spouses want to be in charge all the time and get the last word.
Originally posted by marymarycontrarysp: I think as much as Josh and Anna say marriage is about love and they don't want to have a million kids, its most likely going to happen. It might be difficult to admit but when Michelle Duggar is your mother in law, birthing babies becomes a competition. Josh expects nothing less than unwavering devotion and I think now that he's had a taste of what its like to have your own kid, he's got Jim Bob fever. And I hope this baby addiction isn't catching on with Anna, I was really hoping she would have waited or been a little less eager than to start talking about the next one.
But with Josh Duggar as her husband, what choice does she have? Sad.
Sadly probably no choice. I think within the next 10 years she will have at least 5 more kids. Josh is so much like Jim Bob, it's scary. Although I think Josh comes across as such a know it all.
Amen Mitsy You also got a brain to use.Noone mentions the ones who follows this belief system on Ramen noodles, living in cramped quarters, no health insurance, and barely making ends meet. It is such a shame for the kids in these situations. No Bible verse makes this ok IMO I say enjoy the ones you have for now
Are you serious? Wives should say yes to their husbands just to make them happy? What about women's feeling? I guess in your world whatever the man wants the man gets no matter how you feel. I guess Michelle feels the way you do and never says no to Jim Bob. But I guess since she really doesn't do much, she has time to always please her man. It's not like she has 18 kids to take care of, or cook, clean or do laundry.
Can you not chill? She wasen't saying be your husbands slave but you can't deny that some women mistake shrillness and nagging for assertivness IE Kate Gosseline and proceed to have a man that tunes them out;A little give, understanding,and placating-from whom ever, within reason-is just common sense to have a functional marriage and home life.IMO,Thats one reason why the divorce rate is out of control-both spouses want to be in charge all the time and get the last word.
So your solution is to have the man in charge? I really can't understand what you were trying to say.
What part of 'whom ever' is confusing to you, dear? But if you are a Christian and go by the bible,it's pretty clear what we are supposed to believe.I realize that's not cool or modern but I don't want to hear your angry,frustrated feminist rant about.
First, Anna's comment shortly after having her baby. I don't think its uncommon for new mothers to be so in love with their baby's that they think it would be great to have another one. That doesn't mean trying to get pregnant within weeks after childbirth, it just means they are enjoying their new baby and the newness of being a mother. The reality of the lifetime of work seems simple at this point. She may also have enjoyed being pregnant and so it makes sense she would make comments about having more. I remember after my first thinking "this is easy. I could have another one - no big deal). A couple years later I did have my second. Pregnancy wasn't so novelle then and labor was twice as long. If you asked me at shortly after that baby if I thought I'd have more I said I thought 2 was enough. (I went on years later to have more but the way I was feeling then I couldn't imagine wanted to go thru it again)
Anna's response was probaly a combination of her upbringing and what she believes and the fact that this is a first baby. She/they may change their minds or at lest reevaluate once they have had some more time. (I am not comdemming them if they choose to trust God with their family planning, but I am just saying trusting God doesn't mean they will be watching the calander and TRYING to concieve as soon as possible. They may recognize a little space in between Kynzie and the next one might be a good idea)
My other comment was about the marriage comments. When my husband and I were going to premarital counseling prior to our wedding we were asked about percentages when it came to marriage. My husband (thinking he was so smart) said marriage was to be 50/50. I told him he was wrong. It was to be 100/100. My thought was that I was to love him unconditionally regardless of what he did and my commitment should reflect that. While I agree it sounds kind of blind and makes a person vulnerable, if your husband is of the same mindset (and he did agree with me) then both of you would love and respect one another. Katrina28 was in no way saying the woman should be a doormat - and neither am I. But if both people have that attitude then it makes it so much easier when trouble/disagreements come up. Both persons would be interested in hearing the other persons side and trying to find a fair resolution to the situation. Divorces would be less common (I believe) if more people stopped thinking about/expecting an "equal" relationship and just did thier part. (again, I know this sound like I am supporting one person being a doormat but I really intend for BOTH partners to respect each other and both be committed 100%. When that is the case then neither one will be taken advantage of- and in case you're wondering - we have been married for 20 year so far... and our relationship continues to be strong....and he's much better at apologizing than I am!)
Originally posted by Vera10: Has anyone seen the two page article about the newest Duggar in this week's People?
"Following in the footsteps of his parents - "We accept the children we have as blessings from God," says Jim Bob - Josh says he and Anna "will welcome as many children as God will give us." Anna agrees: "I can't wait to see what might happen with the next one!"
What is it with these people? One child is barely born before they are talking about the next one! Sounds like they are going to see how much they can contribute to the world's overpopulation problem as well.
Is there a link please? Any further thoughts regarding the the article/OP please...
This message has been edited. Last edited by: mod_kelly,
Being a Christian does not equal mindlessly doing whatever your husband says. Common sense would dictate that it's selfish and irresponsible to produce a truck load of children for others to have to take care of because there is no way the parents can do the raising on their own. Perhaps Jim Bob & Michelle missed those Bible verses about making wise decisions...but I'll spare you the quotes. Some fundies think you must take the Bible literally in order to prove that you're a worthy Christian. Thankfully, I'm a bit more enlightened than that.
Originally posted by katrina28: What part of 'whom ever' is confusing to you, dear? But if you are a Christian and go by the bible,it's pretty clear what we are supposed to believe.I realize that's not cool or modern but I don't want to hear your angry,frustrated feminist rant about.
Who are you responding to? If that answer was a response to me, it was not an an angry, frustrated feminist rant.
Originally posted by 1989kb: Here are my thoughts on a couple of matters.
First, Anna's comment shortly after having her baby. I don't think its uncommon for new mothers to be so in love with their baby's that they think it would be great to have another one. That doesn't mean trying to get pregnant within weeks after childbirth, it just means they are enjoying their new baby and the newness of being a mother. The reality of the lifetime of work seems simple at this point. She may also have enjoyed being pregnant and so it makes sense she would make comments about having more. I remember after my first thinking "this is easy. I could have another one - no big deal). A couple years later I did have my second. Pregnancy wasn't so novelle then and labor was twice as long. If you asked me at shortly after that baby if I thought I'd have more I said I thought 2 was enough. (I went on years later to have more but the way I was feeling then I couldn't imagine wanted to go thru it again)
Anna's response was probaly a combination of her upbringing and what she believes and the fact that this is a first baby. She/they may change their minds or at lest reevaluate once they have had some more time. (I am not comdemming them if they choose to trust God with their family planning, but I am just saying trusting God doesn't mean they will be watching the calander and TRYING to concieve as soon as possible. They may recognize a little space in between Kynzie and the next one might be a good idea)
My other comment was about the marriage comments. When my husband and I were going to premarital counseling prior to our wedding we were asked about percentages when it came to marriage. My husband (thinking he was so smart) said marriage was to be 50/50. I told him he was wrong. It was to be 100/100. My thought was that I was to love him unconditionally regardless of what he did and my commitment should reflect that. While I agree it sounds kind of blind and makes a person vulnerable, if your husband is of the same mindset (and he did agree with me) then both of you would love and respect one another. Katrina28 was in no way saying the woman should be a doormat - and neither am I. But if both people have that attitude then it makes it so much easier when trouble/disagreements come up. Both persons would be interested in hearing the other persons side and trying to find a fair resolution to the situation. Divorces would be less common (I believe) if more people stopped thinking about/expecting an "equal" relationship and just did thier part. (again, I know this sound like I am supporting one person being a doormat but I really intend for BOTH partners to respect each other and both be committed 100%. When that is the case then neither one will be taken advantage of- and in case you're wondering - we have been married for 20 year so far... and our relationship continues to be strong....and he's much better at apologizing than I am!)
Very insightful post and you show a very good understanding of what it takes to keep a marriage going strong.
Are you serious? Wives should say yes to their husbands just to make them happy? What about women's feeling? I guess in your world whatever the man wants the man gets no matter how you feel. I guess Michelle feels the way you do and never says no to Jim Bob. But I guess since she really doesn't do much, she has time to always please her man. It's not like she has 18 kids to take care of, or cook, clean or do laundry.
Can you not chill? She wasen't saying be your husbands slave but you can't deny that some women mistake shrillness and nagging for assertivness IE Kate Gosseline and proceed to have a man that tunes them out;A little give, understanding,and placating-from whom ever, within reason-is just common sense to have a functional marriage and home life.IMO,Thats one reason why the divorce rate is out of control-both spouses want to be in charge all the time and get the last word.
The link to this article was requested and you can view an article on Josh and Anna at people.com but it isn't the same article as in the newstand copy.
The problem in my opinion with the Belief system that the Duggars follow, it is a inferior part for women, they are the hardest workers yet the smallest person. I feel bad for Anna as one I am not so sure she truly knew what she was getting into and neither did her parents, but she should want more than to just have babies and serve her husband. I am sorry but i think it is so terribly sad for anyone to feel they should put up with abuse and being subserviant to anyone. A marriage is a partner ship and i am not so sure that Josh and Anna really understand that. Josh has been raised to think women are beneath him. Kissing all the time does not show your love and respect. We see how the Duggars are because they are on TV and it is obviouse the roles and that is sad to me
This message has been edited. Last edited by: mod_ivy,
Both Josh's family and Anna's family seem to believe the husband is the head of the household and the wife is beneath him. When they got married, her father handed her over to her "authority figure". I believe this is wrong. Both spouses should be equal as one is no better than the other. But in the Duggar's case this is sadly not how it is.
the bible talks a lot about marriage. women are to submit to husbands. husbands submit to God. It can work in a Christian household.. One has to know that the husband has committed to Christ and love her like Christ loves the church (Christ died for the Church and it is a very selfless love, - in the same way husbands are to love their wives). it doesn't always work that way because humans are sinful and not always submitting to God.
Men need more respect than love, women need the love. Men and women are different and think differently. we are not equal physically or mentally. (maybe if we were there wouldn't be Olympics with mens teams and women's teams. it would all be one team). we are to enjoy the differences.
Originally posted by DeeKay1: the bible talks a lot about marriage. women are to submit to husbands. husbands submit to God. It can work in a Christian household.. One has to know that the husband has committed to Christ and love her like Christ loves the church (Christ died for the Church and it is a very selfless love, - in the same way husbands are to love their wives). it doesn't always work that way because humans are sinful and not always submitting to God.
Men need more respect than love, women need the love. Men and women are different and think differently. we are not equal physically or mentally. (maybe if we were there wouldn't be Olympics with mens teams and women's teams. it would all be one team). we are to enjoy the differences.
If I were shown love but not respect, that wouldn't work either.
I'm sorry, but personally I don't believe in being unequal. My hubby and I are partners, and he views me as an equal, just as I view him. Yes, we're different physically, and we have different strengths and weaknesses. But his testicles and my ovaries aren't enough to make him "higher" than me.
The Bible does use these words but I think many people miss the point. The Bible does not say women are unequal or less than men. God created both and they are equal in His sight. He does hold the men responsible in some ways not because they are better but just because He's given them a role of caregiver/protector. (this was especially important in those times - our roles/function in society is differnt now but the idea of responsibility is still there - naturally ingrained in most men) The wife is to be the "help meet" to the husband. Not beneath him but a partner. Both have important/equal roles but the are different.
The submission is not an admission of weakness as Chist was submissive and He certianly wasn't weak. Submission is to be a voluntary attitude of the heart - not a position or mentality of inequality.
I can follow the leadership of my husband because he treats me with love and respect. We discuss matters that pertain to our lives and made decisions TOGETHER. If I say I am submisive to him (not that I go around talking like this) I would mean that I respect him and choose to follow him whereever he leads and whatever decisions he makes (because we've made them together) God sees him as the "leader" in our family so He will hold my husband accountable for how our family functions just as parents are held accountable for how their children behave. Or an employer is held accountable to the behavior of an employee. That doesn't give me a free pass and if I choose to go out on my own and do something without discussing it with him I can look at him and say "you're responsible and I'm innocent" just because his position is the "leader." (I can't think of any example to put in here because we really do make any important decisions together and when we make normal every day type decisions we respect/trust each other that we make our own decisions and don't feel the need to discuss every little thing = I don't need his permission to do things and he doesn't need mine)
All that to say (because we're supposed to be discussing the Duggars!) that if Josh treats his wife properly and not as a doormat but as an equal partner (even if she has a different role) and she "submits" to him out of respect and not obligation or sense of inferiority (or is made to feel that way) then their marriage will be fine. If the attitude or balance of these basic things is off then one person will have to compromise more in order to make the marriage work. Compromise is important but it's much better if both people are compromising and not one forcing their will upon the other. (not saying either is doing this but I have witnessed many relationships where one partner is always pushing thier will on the other and the other one will give in just to keep the peace - and in many of those I've seen it's the women barking commands to the husband and not the other way around)
kb, my issue is the whole idea of gender-based submission. I see no reason why a man is any more qualified to be a leader than a woman is. It's a biased attitude that has no grounding in reality.
I see your point of the submissive relationship, but ultimately, you're handing one person in the relationship control. You can talk the guy's ear off, but in the end, the decision is his, and if you're a good submissive wife, you go with it. No thank you. Personally, I see nothing wrong with a husband and wife deciding *together*, viewing each other as equals. Is there anything wrong with that?
arnaras, I do agree with you that husbands and wives should decide things together and seeing each other as equals. There's nothing wrong with that.
I think where we differ is that I accept that one person is held accountable (yes, it is gender based, but I'm not sure how else it would be based. by age? education,?) The whole "authority" issue is more about accepting responsibility/accountability for the family.. It is not intended to demean anyone. The problem comes when the approach is unbalanced or misunderstood. Then, of course, treatment of individuals can be less than equal and unfair.
I guess I think of it as when a person is in a position of leadership he is responsible for the welfare of those he is leading or for the project he is in charge of (like a work situation). When a situation comes up that requires action or a decision, regardless of how it comes about or what action is taken - even if he's not directly involved in the decision, the leader is held accountable for the outcome regardless of it was good or bad. For instance, in a work environment if someone is working "in the field" and makes a mistake, it's the field supervisor that gets chewed out even if he wasn't on site. On the other hand, if the job goes really well, it would be the job supervisor that gets commended. Now, the job supervisor could also chew out the employee or give him credit when it's due, but the owner doesn't necessarily care what all the details involved. He just looks at the end product. Good, bad, or indifferent the supervisor is accountable.
Of course, no example is perfect and I'm sure this one is lacking as well, but that's the best I can do at the moment. From a Biblical point of view the husband is to (as the "head of the household") place his family first and himself second- (loving her as Christ loved the church - it is a sacrificial type of love that places the needs of others above our own) If that were the attitude then the wife is never in danger of being treated poorly/unfairly. But again, none of us are perfect and many people interpret things differently.
This is just my poor attempt to explain something that I agree with/understand. And of couse even agreeing with it doesn't mean I always do it or make the right decisions. I try and live out my life in accordance with what I believe but don't always succeed. I would like to be able to express myself properly each time I post but I'm sure I fail at that too.
Anyway, I hope I've clarified my point of view somewhat and on the points we don't agree on, I'm happy to "agree to disagree." It makes life much more pleasant that way!
Originally posted by 1989kb: arnaras, I do agree with you that husbands and wives should decide things together and seeing each other as equals. There's nothing wrong with that.
I think where we differ is that I accept that one person is held accountable (yes, it is gender based, but I'm not sure how else it would be based. by age? education,?) The whole "authority" issue is more about accepting responsibility/accountability for the family.. It is not intended to demean anyone. The problem comes when the approach is unbalanced or misunderstood. Then, of course, treatment of individuals can be less than equal and unfair.
My question has always been, why in the relationship there has to be *one* person who is solely responsible for everything?
If my husband decides to do something without discussing it, then he is responsible for that action. Just the same as if I do something by myself. But, if we make a decision together, and it turns out to be a bad one, then we're both responsible. That makes sense to me. To have one party blamed when both people agreed together seems unfair to that one person. To me, the one person system is illogical and unfair.
I understand your explanation of a hierarchical system, one like a business or the military. But the relationship between husband and wife isn't a business or military one; there is no rank between husband and wife. Why artificially create one?
I am happy to agree to disagree, as we will obviously never convert each other to our way of thinking. I will be honest and tell you that I hope the gender-based ranking between husband and wife dies off as a practice, and that I will instill in my daughters a desire to be equal to their spouse. But then, I'm sure that you hope that in the future all wives are submissive. Scary to me, wonderful for you.
I've noticed that amongst my friends and family, the tradition of the words "submit" and "obey" are making a big comeback at weddings. I don't remember hearing that at weddings when I was younger (I'm a child of the 70's and 80's). But now almost all of my female friends and family include some phrasing of the sort in their vows.
So to all those who say "christian values" are under attack, that's something to keep in mind.
I personally don't think there is anything christian about "submitting to" or "obeying" someone. Seems demeaning to me. When I hear submitting to someone, sounds like slavery to me. When I hear obey, sounds like something you expect a dog to do.
I agree. I almost choked when I heard my cousin, an accomplished woman - speech pathologist, home owner at 28, holder of multiple degrees, and all around smart lady - vow to "submit to" her future husband's "headship." Now, he's a great guy, but not nearly as accomplished. Never went to school, recovering drug addict, and unemployed at the time.
I guess I have just been unable to articulate what I mean. I continue to advocate equality between husbands and wives. I think perhaps it's related to different understandings of the use of certain words. In any event, I do appreciate being able to "discuss" our differences in this manner - guess we'll have to find something else to discuss now!
See, but why would she be the submissive one, when she holds college degrees and makes more money? If a marriage has to be a follow - lead kind of deal, wouldn't it make more sense for the person with more life experience and breadwinning capabilities to be the leader? In that case it was the wife. Just how I see it I guess.
I would like to know who is considered the head of household in the case of same sex marriages? I know a lot of people do not acknowledge same sex marriage because their belief in the bible says that is a "sin". But same sex marriages are legal in some states and I thought it would be interesting to get people's opinions on this.
