Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Christian Men Who Don't Believe God?

Expand Messages
  • k_over_hbarc
    ... I don t think they did understand, or they would not have allowed it. No doubt they thought that teachers couldn t possibly matter that much. They didn t
    Message 1 of 6 , Nov 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In aum@yahoogroups.com, "MrMtnHiker" <mrmtnhiker@...> wrote:

      > 1920 was too late. Those men needed to resist the gender-bending when it started, 50 years before in the 1870s when women entered en masse as school teachers. That was unprecedented. Men had always been teachers before because it is a position of authority and people no-doubt understood what the hand that rocks the cradle could eventually do.

      I don't think they did understand, or they would not have allowed it. No doubt they thought that teachers couldn't possibly matter that much. They didn't understand how people's minds are shaped unconsciously.

      > Also, if men would have resisted government mandated forced schooling before it reached the "sacred" status it now enjoys this current mess could have been averted.

      > The first generation of pupils under women no doubt retained some "Neanderthal", "Throwback" ideas of patriarchy (exclusive male rule) but were worked on continually. So by 1920, after the 2nd generation of pupils, once they were teaching the children of their first pupils, all resistance to anti-patriarchy had been socialized out of them. By the 2nd generation of women at the helm (being teachers), the general public was putty in their hands.

      I think this is historically dubious - there wasn't that big a change in attitudes by 1920. It took the modern feminist movement to capitalise on that latent change.

      > Now, several generations later lesbians are put in charge of national security, men are ready to die for Progressivism. We see wars against Patriarchal nations, special prison camps are built for them and Patriarchal citizens here are put on the FBI's Top Ten Most Wanted list or their children taken en masse.

      > This is why the Tea Party movement is setting in motion a move to take the nation back from the Progressives who would destroy it.

      Yeah, right. The tea party is useless and dominated by women anyway.

      Andrew Usher
    • MrMtnHiker
      That may be all there is to it but I see hints of more. The feminist backlash may
      Message 2 of 6 , Nov 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        <<< Yeah, right. The tea party is useless
        and dominated by women anyway. >>>

        That may be all there is to it but I see hints of more. The feminist backlash may really be starting to kick in now.

        Sarah Palin recently said (something to the effect of) she'd only run for President if no one else with the right intentions would do it. If by that she has in mind a godly male leader is best then I could see that as a step in the right direction.

        As Tom posted on FB, and I quote, "Of course they don't lead with the social conservative stuff because the population has been so totally indocrinated against it for 40 or more years and the media consistently ignores or demonizes us."

        There is a train of thought that this crowd is not ready for what really is best for it (good, godly leaders that respect and regard what God has established for men), so they use the current system to bring it about in increments that they can handle.

        The scariest thing is what Jay Leno said after he asked a lovely young woman on the street "Who is running for governor?" She didn't know, she was not up on any issues but assured Jay she was going to vote and that she would decide at the ballot box when reading the descriptions they had there. Later Jay said "You get the government you deserve".

        "If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."
        - Mark Twain

        The only thing scarier then that uninformed woman voting would be an "informed" woman voting.
        - Larry

        ================================================
        --- In aum@yahoogroups.com, "k_over_hbarc" <k_over_hbarc@...> wrote:
        >
        > --- In aum@yahoogroups.com, "MrMtnHiker" <mrmtnhiker@> wrote:
        >
        > > 1920 was too late. Those men needed to resist the gender-bending when it started, 50 years before in the 1870s when women entered en masse as school teachers. That was unprecedented. Men had always been teachers before because it is a position of authority and people no-doubt understood what the hand that rocks the cradle could eventually do.
        >
        > I don't think they did understand, or they would not have allowed it. No doubt they thought that teachers couldn't possibly matter that much. They didn't understand how people's minds are shaped unconsciously.
        >
        > > Also, if men would have resisted government mandated forced schooling before it reached the "sacred" status it now enjoys this current mess could have been averted.
        >
        > > The first generation of pupils under women no doubt retained some "Neanderthal", "Throwback" ideas of patriarchy (exclusive male rule) but were worked on continually. So by 1920, after the 2nd generation of pupils, once they were teaching the children of their first pupils, all resistance to anti-patriarchy had been socialized out of them. By the 2nd generation of women at the helm (being teachers), the general public was putty in their hands.
        >
        > I think this is historically dubious - there wasn't that big a change in attitudes by 1920. It took the modern feminist movement to capitalise on that latent change.
        >
        > > Now, several generations later lesbians are put in charge of national security, men are ready to die for Progressivism. We see wars against Patriarchal nations, special prison camps are built for them and Patriarchal citizens here are put on the FBI's Top Ten Most Wanted list or their children taken en masse.
        >
        > > This is why the Tea Party movement is setting in motion a move to take the nation back from the Progressives who would destroy it.
        >
        > Yeah, right. The tea party is useless and dominated by women anyway.
        >
        > Andrew Usher
        >
      • MrMtnHiker
        Message 3 of 6 , Nov 2, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          <<< Sarah Palin recently said (something to the effect of) she'd only run for President if no one else with the right intentions would do it. If by that she has in mind a godly male leader is best then I could see that as a step in the right direction. >>>

          Still I don't think a woman should ever be elected to any government office. I just think Palin's sentiment may indicate a better direction if other tea party women share it.

          Larry

          =============================================
          --- In aum@yahoogroups.com, "MrMtnHiker" <mrmtnhiker@...> wrote:
          >
          > <<< Yeah, right. The tea party is useless
          > and dominated by women anyway. >>>
          >
          > That may be all there is to it but I see hints of more. The feminist backlash may really be starting to kick in now.
          >
          > Sarah Palin recently said (something to the effect of) she'd only run for President if no one else with the right intentions would do it. If by that she has in mind a godly male leader is best then I could see that as a step in the right direction.
          >
          > As Tom posted on FB, and I quote, "Of course they don't lead with the social conservative stuff because the population has been so totally indocrinated against it for 40 or more years and the media consistently ignores or demonizes us."
          >
          > There is a train of thought that this crowd is not ready for what really is best for it (good, godly leaders that respect and regard what God has established for men), so they use the current system to bring it about in increments that they can handle.
          >
          > The scariest thing is what Jay Leno said after he asked a lovely young woman on the street "Who is running for governor?" She didn't know, she was not up on any issues but assured Jay she was going to vote and that she would decide at the ballot box when reading the descriptions they had there. Later Jay said "You get the government you deserve".
          >
          > "If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."
          > - Mark Twain
          >
          > The only thing scarier then that uninformed woman voting would be an "informed" woman voting.
          > - Larry
          >
          > ================================================
          > --- In aum@yahoogroups.com, "k_over_hbarc" <k_over_hbarc@> wrote:
          > >
          > > --- In aum@yahoogroups.com, "MrMtnHiker" <mrmtnhiker@> wrote:
          > >
          > > > 1920 was too late. Those men needed to resist the gender-bending when it started, 50 years before in the 1870s when women entered en masse as school teachers. That was unprecedented. Men had always been teachers before because it is a position of authority and people no-doubt understood what the hand that rocks the cradle could eventually do.
          > >
          > > I don't think they did understand, or they would not have allowed it. No doubt they thought that teachers couldn't possibly matter that much. They didn't understand how people's minds are shaped unconsciously.
          > >
          > > > Also, if men would have resisted government mandated forced schooling before it reached the "sacred" status it now enjoys this current mess could have been averted.
          > >
          > > > The first generation of pupils under women no doubt retained some "Neanderthal", "Throwback" ideas of patriarchy (exclusive male rule) but were worked on continually. So by 1920, after the 2nd generation of pupils, once they were teaching the children of their first pupils, all resistance to anti-patriarchy had been socialized out of them. By the 2nd generation of women at the helm (being teachers), the general public was putty in their hands.
          > >
          > > I think this is historically dubious - there wasn't that big a change in attitudes by 1920. It took the modern feminist movement to capitalise on that latent change.
          > >
          > > > Now, several generations later lesbians are put in charge of national security, men are ready to die for Progressivism. We see wars against Patriarchal nations, special prison camps are built for them and Patriarchal citizens here are put on the FBI's Top Ten Most Wanted list or their children taken en masse.
          > >
          > > > This is why the Tea Party movement is setting in motion a move to take the nation back from the Progressives who would destroy it.
          > >
          > > Yeah, right. The tea party is useless and dominated by women anyway.
          > >
          > > Andrew Usher
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.