FamilyLife Forums

divorce in church:

Sanfords case is a great example. The women was married/separated too and knew very well who he was, that he was married, that he had 4 kids....all of it.

I understand she is a divorced singled mother.

So it boggles my mind that some seem to think they both didnt "commit" to the sin, that they both didnt weigh the wrongness, and choose to go ahead anyway. Its absurd.

I will say it again, the article posted does not address mistresses or the women the male leaders have affairs with at all. The article zooms in on that male leaders are more apt to have affairs, committ adultery than women leaders.

So, the eagerness you and spare have to constantly add the women did or this or that to every topic is what is absurd. Why not stay on the topic you posted instead of constantly trying to find a way to target women for being at fault in everything.

---

I Love My Husband!
Go Gators!!!

Keep your pants on, keep your marriage vows and keep your promises to those who placed you in a role of leadership. If, you can't handle leadership without cheating then stay out of leadership. Applicable to all.

---

I Love My Husband!
Go Gators!!!

pooh girl:

divorce in church:

Sanfords case is a great example. The women was married/separated too and knew very well who he was, that he was married, that he had 4 kids....all of it.

I understand she is a divorced singled mother.

So it boggles my mind that some seem to think they both didnt "commit" to the sin, that they both didnt weigh the wrongness, and choose to go ahead anyway. Its absurd.

I will say it again, the article posted does not address mistresses or the women the male leaders have affairs with at all. The article zooms in on that male leaders are more apt to have affairs, committ adultery than women leaders. So, the eagerness you and spare have to constantly add the women did or this or that to every topic is what is absurd. Why not stay on the topic you posted instead of constantly trying to find a way to target women for being at fault in everything.

 

Because the topic woud make men(in power) look bad and we cant let that happen unless we can blame eve.

Dont you get it Pooh? Men in power are MORE likely committ adultry because with there power they have a better chance of getting laid.

Love

Dallas

spare_parts:

BcauseHeLives:

Why do these men give in to temptation?

It's a character issue.

Bingo!

How does a man in power not give in to temptation?

---

Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground...

BcauseHeLives:

spare_parts:

BcauseHeLives:

Why do these men give in to temptation?

It's a character issue.

Bingo!

How does a man in power not give in to temptation?

Kill all the women?

 

Love

 

Dallas

I don't think that the day we stand before our King & account for our sins He will want to hear "why" we choose sin.  IMO stating "why" is blame shifting & excuses.  And according to what I have studied in God's word, He is not interested in why we fell to temptation...but that we take responsibility for it, repent & turn away from it!

At the moment when a senator or congressman or even president is tempted with a sexual affair he has a choice.  He can choose to give into temptation or he can choose to turn away from it.  Doesn't matter how many women are throwing themselves at him, he still has a choice.

I'm not saying that all of us don't give into temptation.  We do.  But we own 100% responsibility for having done so & taking that full responsibility, seeking God's forgiveness, repenting from it is the only way to grow from the experience so that next time we are stronger to turn away from it.

We cannot control the actions of others, we can only control our own actions.  We cannot choose others' actions, but we can choose our own.

When a senator stands before God when being held to account for sexual sin is anyone here suggesting that he tell God that if those women had not thrown themselves at him he wouldn't have been tempted & wouldn't have sinned?

Does anyone here claim to believe that is what He wants to hear from us when He is holding us to account for our sins?

We will be tempted.  We cannot get away from that. 

Which is why I ask.

How do these male politicians not give in to the temptation of sexual sin?  That's really the question that should be asked.  Because there will always be the temptation...so shouldn't the discussion be, how do we walk out from under it?

 

---

Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground...

pooh girl:

divorce in church:

Sanfords case is a great example. The women was married/separated too and knew very well who he was, that he was married, that he had 4 kids....all of it.

I understand she is a divorced singled mother.

So it boggles my mind that some seem to think they both didnt "commit" to the sin, that they both didnt weigh the wrongness, and choose to go ahead anyway. Its absurd.

I will say it again, the article posted does not address mistresses or the women the male leaders have affairs with at all. The article zooms in on that male leaders are more apt to have affairs, committ adultery than women leaders. So, the eagerness you and spare have to constantly add the women did or this or that to every topic is what is absurd. Why not stay on the topic you posted instead of constantly trying to find a way to target women for being at fault in everything.

Why limit the topic to only one of the two sinners in the affair?

Do you think God's going to say to him, you sinned, and to her, it's OK, you were not the governor, so we don't need to address your sin?

I guess I fail to see why her sin is not worthy of discussion, but his is?

Why minimize her sin, simply because she wasn't the governor?

Focusing on his sin is no different than when the pharasees drug the woman caught in adultery before Jesus.  It focused on the sin of only one party, the woman in that case. 

If it wasn't right to focus on only her sin, then why is it ok for folks today to talk about the governor's sin, but to minimize what she did?

---

It is illogical to argue logic with someone unwilling to examine more than his/her feelings on a matter.

pooh girl:

divorce in church:

Sanfords case is a great example. The women was married/separated too and knew very well who he was, that he was married, that he had 4 kids....all of it.

I understand she is a divorced singled mother.

So it boggles my mind that some seem to think they both didnt "commit" to the sin, that they both didnt weigh the wrongness, and choose to go ahead anyway. Its absurd.

I will say it again, the article posted does not address mistresses or the women the male leaders have affairs with at all. The article zooms in on that male leaders are more apt to have affairs, committ adultery than women leaders. So, the eagerness you and spare have to constantly add the women did or this or that to every topic is what is absurd. Why not stay on the topic you posted instead of constantly trying to find a way to target women for being at fault in everything.

Pooh, did I say the woman was at fault for EVERYTHING.  No.  Again, only you are saying this.  I clearly said that BOTH are responsible for their actions.

I simply question why we would talk only about HIS actions, and IGNORE her contribution.

That's not blame.  That's a legitimate question.  Why do we only talk about the person who is in power?  Why only talk about the married person?

Didn't BOTH consent to having the affair?

Instead of answering my question, once again, it's being twisted.

Pooh, you have to know I am not blaming her for his actions.  I'm asking why she's not being held accountable for her actions? 

It makes you look like one of those pharisees who only examine one person involved in an affair.

If you are going to drag someone involved in an affair, why not drag both of them into the discussion.

She was just as much a part of the affair as he was. She too made choices to engage in the affair.

So why limit the discussion only to his decisions?

I didn't start the gender based discussion. This article did.  And it failed to address the key issue.  That it's not a gender trait to be in an affair, it's a character trait.

As long as such on-sided things are written, I'm going to keep asking pointed questions about ALL parties involved.  We already know what he did was wrong.  There is no debate.

Why are we afraid to spend the same kind of time focusing on why she decided to volunteer for the affair?

If we only discuss his faults and not her faults in this matter, we lose sight of the fact that it was the consensual sin of two people, not just his sin that created the situation.

So anyone willing to talk about his sin should not have any problem spending equal time on hers.

Unless of course, you are some modern day pharisee, who holds to a double standard.

I don't have a double standard.  Her sin is just as bad as his. 

But it would seem I am in the minority. 

I'm not afraid to talk about his sin.

Who is brave enough to even say she was as much a sinner in the affair as he was?

It is not me who is minimizing his sin.  The only way his sin is minimized is by those who say hers is worse than his.  Since I contend they are equal, those saying her is not as bad as his are minimizing not only hers, but his as well.

---

It is illogical to argue logic with someone unwilling to examine more than his/her feelings on a matter.

BcauseHeLives:

spare_parts:

BcauseHeLives:

Why do these men give in to temptation?

It's a character issue.

Bingo!

How does a man in power not give in to temptation?

How does ANYONE, man or woman not give in to temptation?

1.  Avoid temptation.  We are told to flee from it.
2.  Surround ourselves with folks who will hold us accountable.
3.  When faced with temptation, go to God first.

But this is not a man issue.  As you agreed, it's a character issue, and folks of faulty character are equally represented by both genders.

Contrary to how some folks have tried to twist what I've said, I'm not just blaming the woman.  I've said that both the man and a woman in an affair have both sinned.  They've both fallen short and are both responsible for the decisions they've made.

How anyone could get out of that I was blaming women for the man's choice is beyond me.

I'm blaming the man for his choice, and I blame the woman for her equally sinful choice.

It will be interesting to see how this might be spun.

But the spin will not change that truth.

---

It is illogical to argue logic with someone unwilling to examine more than his/her feelings on a matter.

An equivalent kind of logic would be saying that male drivers in the Indianapolis 500 are more accident prone than women drivers in that event. ( For those who miss the gist of that remark, there are no women drivers in Indy 500.)

The way in which males and females experience temptation is different, so to try to parallel them is like comparing apples and oranges.
But if it were asserted that women tennis players are more likely to flaunt their sexuality then men, that would be a goer. It's nature operating as designed by their Designer.
It's the reverse of the way other creatures have been endowed. The peacock is flashier then the female, also the product of design, to attract the attention of the female.

As for would-be leaders opting not to lead on the grounds that they can foresee failure, it's no more possible for that call to be made, than it is for a child to decide not to grow up for fear of committing some adult kind of sin once adulthood is reached.
 The nature of the temptation is such that it belongs to a different stage of life, one which cannot be envisaged in advance. Like how a lottery winner can know ahead of time what effect the sudden increase in wealth will have on their psyche.

spare_parts:

How does man not give in to temptation?

1.  Avoid temptation.  We are told to flee from it.
2.  Surround ourselves with folks who will hold us accountable.
3.  When faced with temptation, go to God first.

Yep, agreed!  Good stuff.  (And yes this goes for women too, but since this article is addressing the sexual sins of men in power, I'm just going to stick w/that.)

spare_parts:

But this is not a man issue.  As you agreed, it's a character issue, and folks of faulty character are equally represented by both genders.

Of course...as you know I didn't say it was a *man* issue.  I completely get that it's a human issue...not a gender specific issue.  However, this article is in part, discussing men in power & their propensity to adultry.  That's what I'm addressing w/these questions.

spare_parts:

Contrary to how some folks have tried to twist what I've said, I'm not just blaming the woman.  I've said that both the man and a woman in an affair have both sinned.  They've both fallen short and are both responsible for the decisions they've made.

I haven't twisted what you've said.  I'm just trying to focus on one thing at a time.  I agree...both have fallen short.  I'm speaking about the men in power that give into temptation, not about the women that they cheat with.

spare_parts:

How anyone could get out of that I was blaming women for the man's choice is beyond me.

Maybe it's your refusal to speak only to the sins of these men in power?  I don't know, I can't speak for others.  It's just a possibility.  Like I said one is different from the other, God's going to deal with each of them seperately.  One did not force the other to sin.

I'm discussing the men in power to give into temptation in sexual sin.

For example, nothing irritates me more than when I'm holding one of my children accountable for their disobedience than when they start the finger pointing.  So & so did this so I did that.  She should get into trouble too!  Why are you only talking to me, I'm not the only one who did wrong!

To me that's blame shifting.  Pointing the finger to someone else to make themselves look not so bad in their actions...or even to justify their actions. 

I'm really not stupid.  I know that it takes two (or more) to tango.  I'm intellegent enough to realize that I also need to have a talk or maybe even punish another child in the mix.  What I want from that child at that moment is accountability.  Yes I was wrong, I'm sorry.  No finger pointing, no worrying about if the other one will get addressed...just taking responsibility for their actions & knowing they had other righteous options & to work at taking those options the next time.

I'm going to address the other child, but that is separate from the one I am addressing at the moment.

I do understand that polititians are under tremendous pressure.  They live in fishbowls.  Some become power hungry & arrogant.  Some simply fall into temptation.

The answer to the question I was looking for in all of this is that male politicians are human.  They are not perfect.  They will fall.  While they need to be held firmly accountable for their actions, they also need to be extended grace & mercy.  Because we all are afflicted w/the same thing...that is our flesh, our sinful natures.

 

---

Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground...

spare_parts:

pooh girl:

divorce in church:

Sanfords case is a great example. The women was married/separated too and knew very well who he was, that he was married, that he had 4 kids....all of it.

I understand she is a divorced singled mother.

So it boggles my mind that some seem to think they both didnt "commit" to the sin, that they both didnt weigh the wrongness, and choose to go ahead anyway. Its absurd.

I will say it again, the article posted does not address mistresses or the women the male leaders have affairs with at all. The article zooms in on that male leaders are more apt to have affairs, committ adultery than women leaders. So, the eagerness you and spare have to constantly add the women did or this or that to every topic is what is absurd. Why not stay on the topic you posted instead of constantly trying to find a way to target women for being at fault in everything.

Why limit the topic to only one of the two sinners in the affair?

Do you think God's going to say to him, you sinned, and to her, it's OK, you were not the governor, so we don't need to address your sin?

I guess I fail to see why her sin is not worthy of discussion, but his is?

Why minimize her sin, simply because she wasn't the governor?

Focusing on his sin is no different than when the pharasees drug the woman caught in adultery before Jesus.  It focused on the sin of only one party, the woman in that case. 

If it wasn't right to focus on only her sin, then why is it ok for folks today to talk about the governor's sin, but to minimize what she did?

Spare,

Why do YOU  as well as a few other men have an inability to stay on topic?  Why can't you stay on task with what the article posted actually addresses which is leaderers/leadership?  THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT MEN AND WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP PERIOD!  THE ARTCILE DOES NOT AT ALL ADDRESS MISTRESSES OR OTHER PEOPLE IT FOCUSES ON THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN LEADERS.   WHY THE INABILITY TO NOT ADDRESS THE TOPIC AT HAND?  ALL I SEE AND NOT JUST ME BUT OTHERS HERE SEE IS YOUR FOCUS ON ANYTHING YOU AND SOME OTHERS CAN IS TO TURN EVERY AND I DO MEAN EVERY TOPIC INTO THOSE BAD,  SINFUL WOMEN DID THIS, THAT and THE OTHER.  NO MATTER WHAT THE TOPIC IS THERE ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE A TWIST AIMED AT WOMEN.  IT'S RIDICULOUS!!!!!!    

NOONE HAS MINIMIZED THE ACTIONS OR THE SIN OF THE OTHER WOMAN AT ALL!  WE ARE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER WOMAN, BECAUSE THE ARTICLE/TOPIC IS NOT ABOUT THE OTHER WOMAN.   

 

 

 

---

I Love My Husband!
Go Gators!!!

BcauseHeLives:

Maybe it's your refusal to speak only to the sins of these men in power?  I don't know, I can't speak for others.  It's just a possibility.  

I'd say it is since the article is addressing the actions of men and women in leadership, yet some resfuse to address the actual topic.

---

I Love My Husband!
Go Gators!!!

spare_parts:

Pooh, you have to know I am not blaming her for his actions.  I'm asking why she's not being held accountable for her actions? 

Because, the topic isn't about the other woman.   If, you or others wanted to address the other woman or other man you should have posted a topic about them.   This articles focus has nothing to do with them.  Who makes a better leader?  How do men and women handle leadership?  What is there differences?  Who do people trust more as leaders?  Do we need more women leaders?  Would women serve us better in leadership or do men make better leaders?  How do each handle power?  Those are the questions I see in the midst of the article, not the sinful actions of the other women.

 

 

---

I Love My Husband!
Go Gators!!!

pooh girl:

Spare,

Why do YOU  as well as a few other men have an inability to stay on topic?  Why can't you stay on task with what the article posted actually addresses which is leaderers/leadership?  THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT MEN AND WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP PERIOD!  THE ARTCILE DOES NOT AT ALL ADDRESS MISTRESSES OR OTHER PEOPLE IT FOCUSES ON THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN LEADERS.   WHY THE INABILITY TO NOT ADDRESS THE TOPIC AT HAND?  ALL I SEE AND NOT JUST ME BUT OTHERS HERE SEE IS YOUR FOCUS ON ANYTHING YOU AND SOME OTHERS CAN IS TO TURN EVERY AND I DO MEAN EVERY TOPIC INTO THOSE BAD,  SINFUL WOMEN DID THIS, THAT and THE OTHER.  NO MATTER WHAT THE TOPIC IS THERE ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE A TWIST AIMED AT WOMEN.  IT'S RIDICULOUS!!!!!!    

NOONE HAS MINIMIZED THE ACTIONS OR THE SIN OF THE OTHER WOMAN AT ALL!  WE ARE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER WOMAN, BECAUSE THE ARTICLE/TOPIC IS NOT ABOUT THE OTHER WOMAN.   

Exactly. 

The claim is made that there is no folcrum, yet this keeps happening & some of the men on this board cannot understand why some of the women in this board are becoming discouraged.

It's this simple.  Some of the men are frustrated by the man bad, women good outlook in society.  So much so that they are doing to the women what has been done to them & they're blind to it.

I don't feel lifted up & encouraged by these discussions.  Does anyone else?

---

Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground...