|Phil Robertson, America's Sweetheart|
But, I can only address a few things, so I guess I'll have to pick and choose. Oh, et bien.
Let's start with Simpson's (and some of his floggerettes') comments about a Phil Robertson video posted at Crossroads.
"We all know how concerned Connie Chastain is about sex with minors …"Phil is talking about marriage. Simpson is talking about sex. Anybody surprised?
Isn't it fascinating that Simpson and so many of his floggerettes seem to equate sex and marriage? Do you suppose they don't know the difference? Or are they being disingenuous to make a dumb point? Marriage is the proper place for sex, the proper relationship. But it is not the same thing as sex. It is much, much more.
As for moi, as I have made clear, my concern about "sex with minors" is whether it is married sex or not:
The strongest criticism I would have of Carl's story is not the youth of the characters, but that they're unmarried. ~MoiMoreover, my novels take a strong stand for abstinence until marriage, whether the characters are minors or adults. In my two short stories, the female leads are unwed mothers, and each story is the first in a series about dealing with the aftereffects of youthful transgressions.
Presumably, if Simpson and his floggerette peanut gallery oppose
(A) 15-17 year old minors getting marriedthat means they support one of the alternatives --
(B) total abstinence orI note that the popular culture encourages (C) -- which, presumably to them, is SO much better than sex within a loving, committed, lifelong relationship....
(C) being sexually active -- i.e., hooking up, promiscuity, depression, loss of self-esteem, getting STDs and the risk of cervical cancer, getting pregnant, having a child or having an abortion.
But the more you read this thread, the more bizarre stuff you find. Like this:
Connie’s kind of guy. You can’t go after one person by saying that soliciting sex with a minor is wrong and then say that it’s okay so long as it’s a right wing celebrity advising men to seek out minors to marry. That would make one a hypocrite.Is he really saying that marriage is the same thing as soliciting a minor for sex? Is he REALLY saying that marriage is the same thing as soliciting a minor for sex?
Yep. He really is. Didn't I tell ya? Bizarre
Simpson's famed dishonesty is on conspicuous display in that thread. F'rinstance, Lyle Smith sez,
"15 year old girls are having sex and having children by their own choices. In most states (Arizona and New York to name just two) a 15 year old can be legally married with the consent of their parents and with the consent or order of the court."And Simpson's reply is truly jawdropping --
Are you saying that the state has no business protecting minors from solicitation by adults (meaning 18 years of age or older)?Uh, no, Lyle didn't say that or anything like it.
Are you saying that so long as the minor consents, that’s okay by you?Lyle didn't say anything about that, either. He was simply telling WHAT IS. His comments certainly had nothing to do with sting operations or cases like Confoy's. Lyle was saying what the Guttmacher Institute has reported (but without the Guttmacher stats):
•...16% of teens have had sex by age 15, compared with one-third of those aged 16, nearly half (48%) of those aged 17, 61% of 18-year-olds and 71% of 19-year-olds. There is little difference by gender in the timing of first sex.Simpson's bizarre rant to Lyle continues,
• On average, young people have sex for the first time at about age 17,  but they do not marry until their mid-20s. This means that young adults may be at increased risk for unintended pregnancy and STIs for nearly a decade or longer.
1. Finer LB and Philbin JM, Sexual initiation, contraceptive use, and pregnancy among young adolescents, Pediatrics, 2013, <http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/27/peds.2012-3495>, accessed May 31, 2013.
2. Special tabulation by NCHS, 2013 <http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/abc_list_s.htm#vaginalsexual> accessed May 31, 2013.
3. U.S. Bureau of the Census, America’s Families and Living Arrangements, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2009.
Connie Chastain took a stand on this matter: now let’s see how she rants her way around this one.Simple -- my stand is that sex is for marriage only, and marriage is between one man and one woman. No rants necessary.
As for the embarrassing information he was given about a "Flagger favorite" that he hasn't revealed ... I hope he doesn't throw his shoulder or elbow out of joint patting himself on his own back for his restraint.
Chastain wants to talk about sex with minors?Nah, not particularly, but I don't shy away from the subject, either, particularly when floggers want to use it to demonize people. I'm on record in various places that Southern Man, of necessity, deals with sexual themes because it is an indictment of the Sexual Revolution.
Let her talk her way out of supporting a guy who suggests that it’s better to marry a fifteen year old because it’s easier to control her.Yeah, control her. That means averting hooking up, preventing promiscuity, and protecting against getting STDs, reducing the risk of cervical cancer, preventing getting pregnant out of wedlock and having an illegitimate child or having an abortion. How awful, huh. Everyone knows that sexually active 15-year-old girls love STDs, love going in for cervical cancer checkups, love looking at the pregnancy stick with their hearts in their throats -- and maybe paying a visit to a Gosnell-like abortion mill, and praying she'll make it out alive even if the baby doesn't.... Yep, control, in Phil's view, means loving her and providing her with home and necessities and a committed relationship and expecting her to be faithful (and to cook).
I note that his “defenders” here can’t address directly what’s on the video.Yeah, some of 'em did. I did, too.
To Jefferson Moon, Simp sez,
It’s interesting that you would support his view of the world and of marriage.What's even more interesting is Simpson's view of marriage as a sexual offense. Moon further sez,
"I don't believe at all that Phil’s advice was for older men to marry young girls."and Simp comes back with this bizarre contradiction.
"And yet that’s what the video clearly shows."Ah, no it doesn't. Then this backpeddling:
"All depends on what one means by the word “older.” The men are clearly older than the girls."
|Me and my child groom with his '70s|
bump-toed Howdy Doody shoes
A three or four year difference between a man and wife is not that great. Then, there are those of us "cougar" women, who marry younger men. Most of the boys I dated as a teen were my age or a year or two younger, and I married a man three years younger than me -- and we celebrated our 40th anniversary earlier this month.
This flogger obsession with age and sex is truly bizarre.
Next, consider LibertyLamprey, who chimes in with,
Most 15 yr old girls are not having babies, they are in school and many are going to college from there.As if they can't go to school and have sex. College is hookup-land on steroids. Scroll up and look at the Guttmacher stats on teen sex, Lamprey. Those are school age girls in the stats.
"These people are disgusting sexualizing 15 yr old girls for the objectification of gross filthy old men. No thought at all to the fact that 15 yr old girls need an education and a life of their own."
|Gimme a head with hair (& mutton chops) |
Engagement Party -- Me, 24, Him (barely) 21
Sexualizing 15-year-olds? Take it up with the popular culture Lamprey. Take it up with establishment academia, which teaches "sex education" that's really sexualization. Take it up with the abortion industry. Take it up with the left-leaning entertainment industry (you know, the ones who are soooo upset with Phil for "invading" their airwaves.) Take it up with feminists and the left who have promoted the "sexual liberation" of women for decades. Take it up with Jaclyn Friedman, Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti....Feminism is what's really sexualizing females -- including 15-year-old girls.