The Flaws of #MeToo

I’ve written any times through out my blog on issues such as the hypocrisy of the #MeToo movement by the Left! How, while a noble premise, to give women voices against powerful abusers in authority, it does the exact opposite of what it’s supposed to do: empower women and bring justice and fairness. The problem is, while #MeToo sounds great in theory, in practice, it has some very detrimental implications and unintended consequences.

#MeToo Casts Women as Helpless Victims and Little Children

#MeToo implies women are merely helpless little victims, damsels in distress if you will, little children who are naive to what sexual coercion is. The narrative of “always believe” because alleged victims don’t lie, or at a minuscule chance of it, is flawed for the application to grown women! Even teenagers! Look, a small child does not know much at all about sexual coercion, or the slimy tactics and red flags of grooming and exploitation. Nor would be familiar enough with such concepts to lie about them. However, this is certainly NOT the case for a grown woman, even an older teenager! Yes, some may be uninformed and naive, but must learn in order to protect themselves. Forewarned is forearmed. My parents always talked to me about such dangers, and even from the tender age of 12, I knew the concept of rape and sexual assault! Thing is, while extremely unpleasant to have such conversations with young children, it must happen to empower them! Even the Left can agree and does encourage parents to teach very young children how to spot sexual abuse and inappropriate situations and most importantly, tell someone immediately! Point is, a grown woman is not a mere helpless child: she is aware of sexual dangers and should be empowered to put safeguards in place for her protection before hand too! It seems to me, incredibly misogynistic, and condescending to view women in any other way than empowered and capable of spotting and putting a stop to unethical coercion!

Not Telling Has Endangered Countless Other Women Over These Decades of Silence

Another point: If you don’t tell, and wait decades, like many have, it only endangers other women, countless others who then say “me too” later on! Think of it. If it stopped at woman #1, if the allegations are true, then women numbers 3,4,5….100 don’t have to! While being victimized is not ever deserved, not speaking out so other women won’t be makes you have a part to play by your silence letting the perpetrator get away with more crimes. Think of it this way: Not reporting a burglary makes it easier for more of the neighborhood to get robbed when they can get away with it! You may have been a victim, but your silence is letting others just like you become victims too!

It Also Casts Women as Being Easily Mentally Overpowered by Men

Not quite the feminist idea #MeToo wants to go for! 😉 While I think we can all unanimously agree many men are physically stronger than women, and can force and hold one down to assault them, and have the upper hand, many instances of #MeToo was about sexual coercion. A man in a position of authority pressuring women to submit to him to get ahead or avoid some consequence. Unless that consequence was threat of harm or death to herself/family, a woman can still say “no”. “No” may come at a greater cost, but is a job promotion, or benefits, or such worth your integrity? Giving away one of your most precious gifts and your personal dignity for some career? Look, I get some women may feel forced financially, but many #MeToo cases were from women in high powered careers making loads of money! Not to mention, we can all agree it is a vile thing to abuse authority to coerce women or anyone for that matter! That is NEVER in doubt here! Accordingly , there are more and more things in place, such as human resources and steep penalties in the workplace for sexual harassment. Giving in only lets the perpetrator win, instead if saying “no” and reporting those unethical slimy acts to the proper authorities! Coercion is a slimy, sleazy, unethical thing to do, and authority figures must be held accountable for it! Saying “no” to their demands, and speaking up immediately to proper authorities helps fight that, and “no” is always on the table unless he’s physically forcing you down or making violent threats! “No” may come at the greater cost, yes, but sometimes doing the right thing comes at the greater cost. Ladies, we are strong, empowered and capable. We should not believe our fellow women are so weak to be mentally overpowered by a man doing unethical things!

#MeToo is Hurting due Process and “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”

The noble aspect of the #MeToo movement, to give a voice to the once voiceless against unethical men in power, has now swung too far the other way: never believing the alleged perpetrator could be innocent also. The law of the land says “innocent until proven guilty in a court of law”, yet, in the court of popular opinion, a man smeared with such vile allegations as raping and assaulting women will forever be guilty regardless of proof! The fear of “but what if he really did do it?” is understandable. Admit it: Even I feel that way sometimes when I hear the stories… However, we must rise above that and think: What if he were me? What if were the one being smeared unfairly? Would I want a fair trial, and if innocent, a full pardon and clearing of my name? What about for our fathers, husbands, brothers, male friends? Those we care about? The guilty should be punished under the fullest extent of the law, but the innocent found out and spared! Indeed, if the wrong man is punished, three, not just one injustice was done. An innocent man is punished, the victim gets no real closure, and a guilty man walks free! Defending the innocent for itself is a higher principle: if innocence does not matter, no one is safe from unjust punishment! Vile cases of women being hurt in the worst possible way gets everyone hot under the collar and emotional, myself included, but facts MUST trump feelings to get to the bottom of every allegation!

It is Also Casting Unnecessary Suspicion on Men

#MeToo on a very related note, is also causing more and more women to fear men. Now, every man is eyed as a potential rapist! The innocent elementary school boy crush and kiss is now “sexual assault” because the girl said “Eew! cooties!” The male coworker who complimented your blouse is now lecherous. The boss who called you into his office and shut the door is now at great risk for any false allegation. The family man and devoted husband and father is now an abuser and potential pedophile! Even consensual sex is viewed as “he must have pushed her to do it”! In some cases, when the “victim” said she said YES!!! The narrative of the damsel in distress must be believed at all costs, even when she said she said “yes”! Any woman can derail a man for his entire life, ruin his career, ostracize him from society, even imprison him on a dubious claim! This, ladies, should concern you for every man you know and love in your life. Your father, brother, husband, son, etc… As the men in your life should be concerned for you, their wife, daughter, sister, mother etc… about potential sexual assault. As any woman could be hurt, any man now can be falsely accused of doing the hurting. One does not negate the validity of the other. BOTH sexes can look out and protect one another! We need to stand by our men, and defend them too from a false allegation, as they would give their lives for you heaven forbid you be hurt!

Any Valid Critique is Considered “Victim Blaming” and Justifying Sexual Assault Against Women

This one is the biggest misconception and flaw! Criticizing #MeToo and bringing valid scrutiny on sexual assault allegations is perceived as victim blaming and shaming. However, is is not true! Getting to the bottom of an allegation, and thoroughly investigating and cross examining both sides is just standard procedure! The real implication in this is that women are never lying, or are always correct in the who, what where etc… In reality though, it has been proven eye witness testimonies are often flawed, memories are foggy and incomplete, especially from decades ago! The assault may have indeed happened, but it was a blur, and you misidentified the suspect! That happens all the time too in many cases, not just sexual assault! Who robbed your house? This person or that one who looks very similar? How tall was he or she? Build? Eye color? Hair color? Hair style? Distinctive facial features? etc… See what I mean! Now remember it from 30 plus years ago…. Where there other witnesses with a more solid memory or proof? Police reports? Forensic evidence collected? A lot of factors go into a fair investigation of any crime, more importantly in ones such as these! Even assertions such as saying the woman had some personal responsibility in preventing it or preventing others from being victimized too does not justify what was done to her if it was proven it was done to her! Causation is NOT justification!

For example: Being drunk at a party and someone taking advantage is wrong for the person who took advantage. Period. However why did you get so drunk you made yourself vulnerable to such victimization? We can say we need to teach boys and men to treat women with respect and never harm them. That is valid and I totally agree. However, there will still always be those who don’t. Same with robbers. We teach our children not to steal, yet there have been thieves since humanity found the concept of private property. One could argue you’re blaming the victim of a robbery too by asking them why they didn’t lock their doors, hide valuables and walk in dark secluded alleys,that and yet, it’s not some horrible victim shaming thing to ask such valid inquiries! No one has the right to steal your stuff because you made a foolish choice, ever. No one is justified in mugging you because you walked down the wrong street and had valuables on you. However, is it wrong to say you should have been more careful? Taken more precautions? No! Look, it’s not fair women have to watch out for creeps and predators. It’s not just that women can’t go to a party and get a little buzzed or wear skimpy outfits without being at greater risk. But that’s the cold hard reality, ladies! We have to take precautions to be proactive in protecting ourselves. If something happens despite all that, it happens. But don’t cry “poor me” if you literally walked into the lion’s den! We protect ourselves by doing proactive things, like locking doors, being alert to our surroundings, self defense etc… to help reduce our chance of being victimized by criminals. If a crime happens despite all that, it’s NOT your fault, but if you were careless, a part is on you for putting yourself in such a compromised position, in any crime, not just #MeToo matters!

Overall, #MeToo has too many flaws for a reasonable woman to hop on board with. I appreciate the good intentions and its noble premise, but we must judge things on effectiveness, not solely intention. The consequences of adopting this view is a lose-lose for BOTH men and women! We are empowered, capable, human beings, ladies! We are not helpless victims, little children or damsels in distress! We are accountable for our actions, and should be held to a fair standard in our integrity and honesty like anyone else. #MeToo should be for vulnerable women who in earnest, want justice for themselves and due punishment for those who would be so vile as to abuse their power and a woman in such a way! However it’s been used as a political smear tactic that makes #MeToo crying wolf, hurting REAL victims of assault with all these dubious claims in recent months and years! Look, I want what everyone wants: Justice for women who have been abused. However, we need something more objective than #MeToo. I say #NotMe! 

Image result for woman and man edwardian painting

Advertisements

58 thoughts on “The Flaws of #MeToo

  1. I have very good reasons to believe the next Metoo in underway. This time it will be based on women labelling their former partners as sociopaths.

    It’s been going on for many years (there are small communities based on venting about disordered exs, and surprise-surprise, they are 95% comprised of women). At least one such community has ties to the Socialist Workers Party.

    It all recently exploded into the mainstream in the form of an amateurish YouTube “documentary” which already garnered 50 million views in one month. It makes the claim that one in 25 people are sociopaths and attempts to stick that label on a bloke who makes entertainment videos. Videos are now coming out about sociopaths being everywhere, and of course, the women who consider themselves survivors after breaking up with them.

    The most supportive of this BS media storm are teenage girls, brought up with feminism, who think that anyone who hurts their feelings is inherently evil.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I am sorry but I could agree with you only on one point that – #MeToo is Hurting due Process and “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”. Women accusing others were not saying ‘No’ for some benefit could be right in few cases. But there are plenty women out there who has been harassed by unknown people when they were walking on road or just traveling by public transport. There are instances when women has been literally forced leaving no choice of saying ‘NO’. I believe, if we as a society, could just take #metoo in right direction, it has capacity to have right impact.

    Priti Patil
    https://preetylifeblog.wordpress.com/2018/10/13/metoo-believesurvivor/

    Liked by 1 person

    • “Innocent until proven guilty” is a must for a fair society, that everyone, including women in this situation, would want to live in. It’s a principle applying in any situation and cannot be overridden, because the reality is that false accusations or demands for disproportionate consequences for certain actions do exist.
      If this principle is overridden for one type of accusation, it’s basically nullified as that society permits the possibility of injustice. The same people demanding this might one day find themselves accused of something unjustly, or in an exaggerated manner, and want the same presumption of innocence in order to prove their case.
      No one should be tried in the court of public opinion when there is zero evidence against them.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. What a wonderful piece on the subject. Very well articulated.
    This article under, by me, is about those survivors’ partners who want to be more supportive and sensitively help their partners through the healing process. I believe that Survivors’ partners encounter some real challenges related to the trauma, too.
    https://alifelessordinarywithsaurabhavna.com/2018/10/13/how-to-help-when-your-partner-has-a-metoo-story/

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “However why did you get so drunk you made yourself vulnerable to such victimization? We can say we need to teach boys and men to treat women with respect and never harm them.”

    It would seem that someone needs to teach women to not get drunk and thus reduce their vulnerability. I suspect this is the number one factor in most sexual crimes.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. “It Also Casts Women as Being Easily Mentally Overpowered by Men”

    Yes, it does.

    It’s different when a man physically forces himself on a woman or drugs her, like Bill Cosby did. But I don’t know what to think about claims that women accept unwanted sex out of fear of violence, without a indication that violence might happen (because the guy is her boss or something). If you don’t want to have sex with someone, you reject them – you get physical if you have to. You have self-defence laws on your side. You don’t just “let it happen”, I imagine.

    It’s different for women in a controlled environment (the Catholic church, a cult etc). But most women don’t live in that kind of environment (not in western countries, anyway).

    Liked by 1 person

      • I kind of meant it the other way; if you are physically overpowered, there is nothing you can do, as rape statistics prove – women do try to fight men off and fail if those men are really determined to rape them.

        But being just mentally overpowered and just “letting it happen without fighting back” is a weird notion.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I mean, with coercion. If someone pressures you to do something, it’s not the same as physically forcing you to do it! You can still say “no”, just at a cost, but what price is your dignity and self respect???

        Like

  6. Lady of Reason you have said what I’ve wanted to say on my blog. Thank you for being bold. I guarantee some of the men being accused are innocent. And I get very irritated, no make that angry when a little boy, not even seven years old, gives his teacher a hug and the teacher cries sexual harrassment! The child probably doesn’t even know about the birds and the bees! I’m sure some of the men are guilty. And what about the women perpetrators? Do they think because they are women that no one will believe their accusers? Okay, I’m done venting. Thank you for your very brave post.

    Liked by 2 people

      • You are welcome. Oh I got your request for my WordPress profile. I’m rather embrassed to say there is nothing there. I had to set up a WordPress account to comment on blogs that didn’t have the option of using Google profiles. I commented just now using my Google and that one is public but I do moderate comments. Anyway you are more than welcome to visit my page. Have a blessed day!

        Liked by 1 person

  7. Metoo is also about child abuse. It’s about women who were molested as children. Women who were physically assaulted by parents when they were kids. Women who were beaten, kicked, thrown down stairs. It’s about seeing and experiencing violence and sexual assault. It’s about teen girls being molested by their mother’s boyfriends. And it’s about men who experienced these things, too.

    Usually there is so much shame associated with these things that victims are silent. It’s so good that women are breaking that cycle of shame and finally speaking up. I know we are all against these things.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. You have hit the nail on the head. This has all been driving me nuts. As someone who has experienced a sexual assault, I feel free to call out the victims in these situations. Get on with your lives, ladies! Get therapy if you need it, talk to friends, family, counselors, do whatever it takes. You can’t change the past, you can only change the future, and you, yes you, are responsible for your own life. You can choose to wallow in the injustice that’s been done to you, or you can fight back, get on with your healing and live a full, joyful life. Just quit hating and blaming half the population for what one guy did!

    Liked by 1 person

      • Sadly it seems to me that most of these women were perfectly aware of the dangers of sexual assault but seemingly under the impression at the time that flirting with the risks or even consenting was acceptable for career advancement.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. It is a recent discovery that respectability does not come with dress , a suit and tie does not make you respectable , nor does a dog collar or the robes of priesthood. Being well spoken , having a university degree , being a professional all must be counted for nothing these days when we look for sexual offenders. Sex is an extremely powerful force , not easy to channel and control , and made more dangerous with alcohol consumption.
    As this balanced article points out women must come forward at the time not years or decades later, but I suspect that attractive young women are well aware of their manipulative abilities and occasionally bite off more than they can chew. Then the rot has set in and it is not easy to back out. We had a recent case in the UK where a plain clothes Scotland yard detective had an affair with an activist ; surprise ! surprise ! he carried duty too far. Another absurd incident a schoolboy of sixteen was arrested and placed on the sex offenders register for having sex with his fifteen year old underage girl friend.
    My daughter could easily be taken for eighteen when she was fifteen ; fortunately I took her to the clinic ( against my wife’s wishes) to let professionals chat with her and she did not become pregnant.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Thank you for this article. You have captured what I have been saying for a long time. In America in 1920, women were given the right to vote. In the last hundred years, women have been legally allowed to own property, own a bushiness, pursue a college degree. I was sent to school at a young age and taught to think. And yet, if I think for myself, I am wrong. The GroupThink is soooo out of control, I fear for our great country. A lot of Women on TV, in the Media, in Politics, set poor examples of a free minded, informed woman in this world. My father told me at the young age of 12 that if I wanted to “hop in the bushes” with someone, to tell my father and he would get me some protection. This sounds strange to some people, I am sure, but that in turn made me ALWAYS examine my motivations for going places with young men. Did I want to get lucky or not? Consequently, I never had to pretend I didn’t want what I got or try to have these “Day after regrets” nonsense. Self honesty and honesty with other people, those concepts kept me safe, I feel.Humans recreate by sex. For a society to function, this fact must be dealt with in a way to not harm people. One of the ways our society dealt with this was that the two people involved got married. Sex is for making children and by becoming married, any children would be taken care of by the people who created the children. The hope of being able to have sex without making children I feel is a wrong way for our world to be going. Many people seem surprised when their actions cause the woman to become pregnant. That is what sex is supposed to do!! Expecting less mental and emotional self reliance from women also harms men and our society. Facts are Facts and if women want to be taken seriously for their minds, they can not flaunt their bodies. No amount of blaming men for being men is going to change that biological fact. I feel that women who dress scantily are trying to take advantage of men, clouding a man’s mind by using his biological drives against him. And then women are surprised when a men gets expectations of sex when that is exactly what she is doing in the first place. Both sexes have the responsibility of their own actions and trying to change that will not work. This narrative only gets more and more people hurt when it does not work in the real world. Our country needs a lot more honesty and expectations of self reliance for everyone. I hope we can find it.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sex is for far more than just making children it is the loving bond of a man / woman relationship that may result in having children if they so wish.

      Like

    • “Humans recreate by sex. For a society to function, this fact must be dealt with in a way to not harm people. One of the ways our society dealt with this was that the two people involved got married. Sex is for making children and by becoming married, any children would be taken care of by the people who created the children. The hope of being able to have sex without making children I feel is a wrong way for our world to be going. Many people seem surprised when their actions cause the woman to become pregnant. That is what sex is supposed to do!!”

      I couldn’t agree more and I think that the feminist obsession with birth control and sex education leads us inevitably to an ever greater acceptance of promiscuity and frankly to men expecting (and even pressuring) women to be promiscuous. Feminists regard this as ‘liberating’ until men call their bluff and then regard it as sexist oppression.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. I also you made good point with the implication about a damsel in distress. It does weaken the ability of women if now even mentally they are inferior to the ability to refuse men by saying no.

    That should be offensive to a feminist to claim that men overpower women like this but somehow on their pure hate on men then can’t put together that by trying to make women al innocent they are now creating the mythical super powerful man that they despise.

    Why not work on teaching women how to say no to men of you believe it is the case and empower them. But they can’t becaue it is accepting even partial blame on women of they must change. Therefore it is better to say men are stronger physically and now mentally to get their sexual needs with women.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. How can women habitually dress like whores, drink to excess and have absolutely no morals and then be surprised that men just assume that they are sexually available? Something else I don’t understand is the whole attitude of these women to sexual intimacy. As far as I can see most are completely amoral. They don’t believe that there is anything wrong with casual sex with numerous men who are little more than strangers. They regard it as a ‘right’ to show their bodies to anyone. They do not place any value on virginity, purity or innocence. They often use their bodies to gain career advancement. And finally from what I can understand they put themselves in moral and physical danger and often deliberately arouse men. But they take great exception and express surprise when men call their bluff?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Exactly this. I can feel no outrage when an amoral person gets what they are advertising for. I also can feel no sympathy for the woman who goes alone at night with a man, has sex, but then the day after claims coercion or rape.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I’m afraid I’ll have to agree with her. Women do indeed regret hookups and cry rape. Women are NOT naive little children or helpless victims. They are just as capable as anyone else of lying. Also, why advertise you want sex by dressing like a skank then be shocked when a man takes up the offer??? 😉

        Like

      • Yes, but why wear something that sends off those signals??? There will always be predators, no matter how much we teach men not to assault… It’s never condoned by what a woman wears, but I see it like not locking your doors at night. No one has the right to burglarize your home if you leave your door wide open, but you’re at a greater risk of getting victimized. Causation is NOT justification!!!

        Like

    • This is what is known as blaming the woman when she gets raped. It assumes that men have no self-control and are weak Rape is a crime … not even a crime of passion but rather one of control and intimidation. Note that children, women under 18 (most frequent who are raped). Most women/children are raped by people they know (family member or friends of family). It helps so much to get the facts.

      Like

      • Indeed, it helps to have the facts. And in some cases, the facts point to rape, and in other cases, it’s quite unclear what actually happened. Some women pointedly say, “No, get away from me. Leave me alone!” If the man persists and uses physical force or intimidation, that’s rape, regardless of what the woman was wearing, drinking, etc. But if she’s wishy-washy and sends mixed signals, or is too sloppy drunk to communicate effectively, I’m sorry, you can’t lay the blame solely on the man. The woman may even experience the event as rape, but if she didn’t clearly convey her objection, the man’s experience may honestly be one of consensual sex. From a legal perspective, he shouldn’t be held accountable for that, although he often will be–again, the presumption being that the woman is too weak or stupid to have managed the situation better. And I’m not saying we shouldn’t be sympathetic to a woman in that case, but that sympathy should not extend to punishing the man legally or by kicking him out of school or job for an honest misunderstanding. We can be supportive of her without destroying him.

        Caveat that I am speaking about adults here. As you pointed out, many rape victims (male and female) are legally minors. In those cases, I’d use facts about the age difference and the relative knowledge and power of each party in drawing any conclusions.

        Liked by 1 person

  13. I also wonder what about the guy in some cases. Maybe he believed the woman loved him and how she can cry rape because she found someone else or it meant nothing to her.

    The definition of rape and unwanted attention even has never been fair. If a woman didn’t want to date me if I was single she would say no.

    I know other guys that she would laugh, say no, tell friends and others, can you believe so and so wanted to date me.

    Women are allowed to act passive in all these matters and men that are known to be horrible mind readers are supposed to know what a woman wants now and into the future.

    And lumping all metoo unwanted stuff together does weaken it, because it now stands for things reasonable people don’t want.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. It’s an extension of the relative morality common society promotes. Good and evil can be perceived as which sex you are or what emotions you feel…as opposed to whether you follow God’s commands or are disobedient to God.

    It’s why I reject the notion that sex is moral or licit when (female) consent happens or the fact feelz and love wants to deem sodomy as good. It’s still be fornication, adultery, sodomy etc. which are sins. Sex is only licit/moral in lawful marriage because that’s how God set it up.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Let me also add, as a side note to the drunken excess part, that it is so very wrong and evil that if both of them are drunk and something happens – and not even including any real “force” – it’s only the guy who called out upon it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ‘it’s only the guy who called out upon it.’

      I am reminded of the Biblical account of the woman caught in adultery. Many, but not Jesus, have asked why the adulterous man was not also brought to Jesus. In that case, only the woman was being called out.

      In most cases today, it is indeed the opposite situation. I wonder how many Christians  are doing the same, except with a reversal of the sexes, as the scribes and Pharisees in that Biblical account?

      Liked by 2 people

      • ‘Many, but not Jesus, have asked why the adulterous man was not also brought to Jesus. In that case, only the woman was being called out.’

        Further confirming that people have this weird idea that privilege and justice are only based on what sex you are.

        They probably also gloss over the fact that Jesus called out the MALE Jewish leadership for their hypocrisy.

        Liked by 2 people

      • The point of the story surely lies in the last line ” let he who hath no sin throw the first stone ” making the tremendous point that we can never point the accusing finger at others.

        Liked by 1 person

      • kersten said: ‘The point of the story surely lies in the last line ” let he who hath no sin throw the first stone ” making the tremendous point that we can never point the accusing finger at others.’

        First, this is found in John 7:53-8:11, a passage that is questionable as it is not found in the earliest manuscripts. In other words, there is doubt that this passage should be accepted as part of the Bible.

        More importantly, it appears that kersten is one of the many Christians who have been duped into believing that it is wrong for Christians to judge the behavior of others. It seems that every one, Christian or not, seems to know and use the “do not judge” argument to try to silence any Christians who dare to point out sin. Some of the most vocal proponents of this argument are Christians  who are actually guilty of sinning.

        What does the Bible actually say?

        1 “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2 “For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. [Matt. 7:1-2 NASB]

        The first verse is actually a conditional statement, not an absolute command. Looking more closely, we find “Do not judge” is followed by the condition “so that you will not be judged”. This reason is then extended in the next verse (which almost no one mentions if they even know of its existence). In it, Jesus explains that when a Christian judges, he will be treated by the same standard.

        Jesus also taught that Christians are definitely expected to judge other Christians. Most people do not realize that Matthew 18:15-17 is teaching on this topic. It begins with “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private”. How does a Christian know that his brother is sinning if he does not judge him? He must be judging.

        Returning to kersten’s statement, I expect her understanding has been skewed by hearing repeated misuse of Jesus’ teaching. As can be seen above, it is not true that Christians cannot point an accusing finger at others, but are, in fact, told specifically to do so in a loving fashion, not a self-righteous one.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I must reply to your answer although we must remember this is not a religious blog and religion is very contentious.
        Jesus Christ taught a new Gospel , not the old testament idea of stoning a man or woman to death , not an eye for an eye but turn the other cheek. It is an impossible Gospel to follow because we are human and our human laws are based in the western democracies on the old testament. We need the law to keep us in place but Jesus was above the law and an example to all of us.

        Liked by 1 person

      • kersten,

        I realize your understanding of Christianity is far different from mine. Specifically, I note that you do not acknowledge that Jesus, even in his “new Gospel” as you put it, is the one who specifically teaches that Christians judging other Christians is not only acceptable, but expected. It is important that those who wish to follow a religion have a good understanding of its teachings. If one instead denies some of those teachings, effectively choosing to have their own religion, then they should be honorable enough to admit it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • You are quite right about me , as for having my own religion I think that is driving a point too far , Christianity in all its forms and variations belongs to us westerners and is the basis of our civilisation after all do we not call any act of generosity a Christian act regardless of the beliefs of the perpetrator. We need to widen the scope of Christian thought not narrow it down to set of rules and regulations.

        Liked by 1 person

      • “We need to widen the scope of Christian thought not narrow it down to set of rules and regulations.”

        Jesus said:

        13 “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14 “For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”[Matt. 7:13-14 NASB]

        The majority view of society today is that one cannot judge another, that is, the “gate is wide” and many “enter through it”.

        My point is not that I think Christianity should be a set of rules and regulations ala the Mosaic Law, but that we need to know the concepts that Jesus actually did teach. For example, judging is acceptable when done in Christian love with the intention of helping another, but not when done out of spite and totally lacking grace.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thank you for your explicit reply it looks as if I’m destined for destruction but I cannot agree to such a confined expression of Christian thought. We live in enlightened times when the church has taken a much wider view of humanity. We now have same sex marriage , women pastors . It seems to me you wish to turn the clock backwards. Let me say I believe in religious freedom but no group has the right to dictate the behaviour of others.

        Liked by 2 people

      • kersten,

        There are many today I would call churchian, used to distinguish people whose beliefs reflect those of the humans in a “church” from Christians, whose beliefs reflect those of Christ.

        As you believe “no group has the right to dictate the behaviour of others”, do you restrict that concept to religious behavior, or are you fully libertarian and extend it to all areas of life? If you restrict individual liberty in any fashion (and I expect you do), what is the basis for such restriction?

        Liked by 1 person

      • The laws in a democracy are debated and decided by the elected government , if we break the law we must expect to be held to account. What this means is there is no such thing as complete individual liberty , but we as individuals also restrict ourselves by engaging in civilised behaviour towards those we live with and those we come into contact with.
        Some groups , such as your own one , have great restrictions on the liberty on members and if you wish to be a member you must obey the rules . The snag of such tightly controlled groups is they can cause problems for those who wish to leave and also families can be split by such groups.

        Liked by 1 person

      • kersten,

        “Some groups , such as your own one , have great restrictions on the liberty on members and if you wish to be a member you must obey the rules.”

        I think you have made unwarranted presumptions about me and my “groups”. I find that rather arrogant but not unexpected.

        It appears that you espouse individual liberty as a general principle, yet you accept that the majority (a “group”, by the way) in a democracy has the right to dictate the behavior of others. On the contrary, you maintain this right should not be applied to religious belief and practice. You have not yet provided a basis for this demarcation, nor provided examples of any other such restrictions.

        “The laws in a democracy are debated and decided by the elected government , if we break the law we must expect to be held to account.”

        I want you to understand that Christianity is not a democracy, but a monarchy headed by God. As such, the “laws” are determined by God, not by the subjects. If a subject breaks those “laws”, then they should be held to account. The consequences may well include expulsion from the kingdom.

        You earlier stated that the “church” has changed its stance on various behaviors. In fact, the churchians  have put themselves in the place of God, considering the Church to be a democracy where the majority (or, in many cases, the minority in power) have knowledge greater than God and the authority to change the “laws” accordingly. They are grossly mistaken, but they may not experience the consequences for their unlawful behavior until God exercises His right to judgment. I believe there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth when that judgment comes.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I apologise if I appeared arrogant I am sometimes rather forceful in my opinions. I think you misunderstand democracy it is the best form of government yet devised by man although far from perfect. It’s not what I espouse , the law applies to all without exception and I’m sure this is true in your religious set up. I would hazard a guess that the only practical difference between our two modes of living is yours is far more restrictive .
        It’s arguable that Christianity is a sort of democracy since all churches are run by elders who make decisions and I might add the decisions that are made depend upon the particular denomination. If a person finds one church unacceptable they can leave and move to another , in the same way as people move from one job to another or one country to another.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s