Monday, January 18, 2016

Man to Man: Combatting the Crisis of Manhood

All right, men! Stop right now and find ten minutes to watch this incredible video that was lovingly prepared just for you by other Catholic men who are your brothers (and in the case of Diocese of Phoenix men, it comes from your spiritual father, Bishop Olmsted).

Women, grab your men and (after you watch this) invite them to immerse themselves in this message.

Too many Catholic men -- and too many of all men, frankly -- are floundering, wandering, trying to find their mission and identity. Let's get to it:

(Go here for Spanish subtitles.)


  1. A beautifully made, inspiring video. Thank you Leila, and all who have contributed to it.

    Let me ask you about the reality of American life for men in your own case. Dean and you have raised 8 children. That's quite a few mouths to feed. How much time was/is Dean able to spend with his family, and participate in the Christian education of his children, instead of working to make enough money? Would they say that he has spent enough time with them? My question is, does today's culture and economy make it possible for the fathers of many to spend time with their families?

    I am privileged in many ways and therefore able to spend quite a bit of time with my family. But I have also made conscious choices (sacrifices if you will) to earn less, live a somewhat more modest life, and forgo other things. That is as it should be. But I simply wouldn't be able to do this if I hadn't saved up early on, and married relatively late. How are men of average means in America able to have large families, be there for them, and feed and educate them?

    It's a whole other problem with fatherless families, the main problem really. But most of these men are closed to the Church anyway, no? We're speaking to the deaf in this case.

  2. Those are excellent questions, Sebastian. My husband works in a high stress, higher earning profession. He often works 50 hours per week. In the evenings, though he wants to engage with the kids, he is physically exhausted. I stay at home and probably do about 90% of the childcare during the week. On the weekends, he's much more involved. We only have two kids and have talked about having more, but at my age (early 40s) it is less likely. Our youngest is 4 and we put off having more due to financial and health concerns over the last few years.

    In American families where both parents work, I don't know how they do it. It's difficult to have the energy to care for your children when you're stressed and exhausted. And I don't know how you can have more than 3 or 4 kids, both parents working, and actually meet all the children's needs. People I know who grew up in larger (5 or more) families seem to have done better when their families had a homemaker mother. But, even then, many of them will say that they didn't have enough individual time with their parents.

    In some American Catholic circles, there is this tendency to romanticize early marriage and early childbearing. In reality, unless you are already established in a job with a living wage, the stress that comes with young parenthood and poverty can break families. Many of the voices you'll hear from American Catholic blogs are of the upper middle class or professional class. It isn't representative of the larger American Catholic population. Most American Catholic families do not homeschool or have a single income earning family.

    I'm not sure what the purpose of the video is. What is it exactly trying to do? Get men back in the pews? Get them to join the Knights of Columbus? It it aimed towards families in which the mom is the driving force behind the families' spiritual life?

  3. Sebastian, thanks for the question! It's a good question and I always sort of puzzle over answering it. When we started out, my husband was making very little (I think by the time we had three kids, he was making around $30K?). More kids came, he worked himself into a better salary, and we also had help from extended family (my parents, specifically). As far as I remember, we never once used income as a determiner to expand the family. Thankfully, God has provided and we are comfortable! However, Dean is always one client away from disaster, ha ha. I don't know what to make of it when people say that it's so expensive to raise kids. I mean, I get that they eat food and need clothes, but I think most people believe that children need a ton of activities, private school tuition (I do wish Catholic schools were tuition-free for parishioners, but we have a tax credit thing here in AZ which is a godsend; plus we have homeschooled and use public charter schools as well -- lots of options, praise God). Most middle-class Americans feel they are responsible to financially provide for college (and Dean and I used to think that), but we have told our kids from the beginning that one of the things about having a big family (and they always begged for more siblings) is that they would have to get loans or scholarships, and to plan wisely. So far, so good. We help when we can, but we don't take on that responsibility. For example, my fourth child, our second son, is headed to engineering school in the fall, on a full academic scholarship. He will come out with no loans and a great career! We are thrilled. Now, he could have chosen a top engineering school, but he would have been stuck with loans. Instead, he choose a solid engineering school (but not top tier) and will have no debt, with the same degree and excellent opportunities. These are choices a lot of people are not willing to make.


  4. PRG, like you, I've found the bishop's paper to be a bit of a mystery. Catholic media (radio and internet) has been promoting it heavily - it's glitzy and dramatic and all that. Someone in the diocese got a media budget and spent every penny. (While in the Phoenix parishes that I attend, many have totally ignored it.)

    Anyway, what is the real message? What exactly did "men" do? After all, both men and women have been steadily leaving the church for two or three generations now.

    I found a partial answer in this radio show produced by the diocese.

    My conclusion is this: the bishop had good intentions, he wants people to stop leaving the Church. But he consulted an advisory panel of mostly women, and they turned it into a man-bashing exercise. If only men would just do what women tell them to do! If only men will read the paper, after their wives print it out for them! Listen to the radio show, the women do all the talking and the men (who hold lay management jobs in the diocese) are mostly silent. It's kind of embarrassing.

    You're absolutely correct, PRG. The single-income married-early large-family model is still held up by many Church insiders as a romanticized ideal. Even if it was never really was all that common. Mega-churches seem to do a better job of supporting people "as they are" - the struggling two-income families, the single-parent families, and the singles. Catholic parishes mostly ignore those groups.

    Want proof? I looked at the bulletins of ten Phoenix East Valley parishes. I counted twelve different "married couples" events - marriage renewal, date night, etc. And for the other groups? Nothing. The facts speak for themselves.

    As to the Knights of Columbus. I inquired about joining it awhile back. I asked what they did, and the answer was "Oh, all kinds of family activities." I said "Well, I'm single." "Well, we like for our Knights to be good family men." Message received; I never asked again.

  5. I can tell you the other stories of my adult kids but I don't want to bore you. Each one wants a big family (and two are started on that path, with husbands and babies) and none as ever said they can't because of finances.

    As for time.... Thankfully, I have been a stay-at-home mom, and Dean has had pretty regular hours. He has a "busy season" in the winter/spring (when the Arizona Legislature is in session), but usually during the rest of the year he is home by dinner time, and on the weekends he is home. He took a risk and started his own one-man business, and he is able to have more flexibility in the past four or five years. He's a hard worker, though!

    But it's a curious thing we have here in my community. We have an incredible Catholic community and diocese, and we are privileged to know literally hundreds of people in big Catholic families.... Though we may be an anomaly in our neighborhoods or the public schools, no big Catholic family feels "alone" in Phoenix. And as far as economics, they run the gamut from very poor to very rich. And yet, they have large families. The poorer to middle class (and the rich, too, since we all take care of each other!) share maternity clothes, baby clothes, etc. Their is not a ton of materialism, as I know many, many regular Catholic families who would live in nice big houses if they had two kids and two jobs, but they live in smaller, more modest neighborhoods, older homes, smaller homes, because they want to be able to welcome children. It's very "non-materialistic" -- that's one way to describe it.

    It's so natural and normal that people live their faith here and don't try to "keep up with the Joneses", and so I never really think about it. People just prioritize, they ask for help when they need it, they keep their faith ahead of materialism, they budget accordingly, and somehow it works! We need so much less than the culture says we need, you know?

    And thankfully, the fathers seem to be very much involved in their children's lives, as they take their vocations seriously, praise God.

  6. Uncle Fester, I am going to call you out for a flat out lie. You posted the link to a radio interview of ME, with three others: The radio hosts (a married couple, neither of whom were on the advisory panel) and Mike Phalen, a man who was on the advisory panel. On the advisory panel that you describe as "mostly women", there were FOURTEEN MEN and FOUR WOMEN. You are not telling the truth, and I don't know why? I don't want to ascribe bad motives, so can you explain why you are telling falsehoods?

    And, far from being a man-bashing session, the men were pouring their hearts out and the women were affirming them. We love men! What are you talking about? Wow....

    1. If you would like to see the advisory panel, here we are, in the photo:

      Mostly women? Um......

    2. And the idea that Mike Phalen was "mostly silent" in that interview? Uh, I was there. I also listened to it when it was on the radio. He was not "mostly silent". I am beginning to think there is something else going on here with you?

      And as for the Knights of Columbus, the ones I know are elderly (not all... there are good young groups coming up) and their kids are grown and gone, and they are even widowers. My son-in-law joined the Knights before he even had a girlfriend (as a single man), so maybe they just sensed that you were not a very nice guy?? I am sensing that here, honestly, with all the bitter, defensive things you've said on this blog over the months, and also now the untruths, so perhaps others have picked up on this? I honestly don't know, but if you lie again, I am going to ask you to stop commenting.

      Since you are a Catholic gentleman, I assume you will now apologize for your gross "misrepresentation" of both the advisory panel of which you were not a part, and the radio interview, which you completely mischaracterized. Sheesh.

    3. I know what I heard. The principal speakers that you all gushed over, were women. Men's contributions weren't mentioned at all. The bishop needed men to step up and challenge... to defend men in specific and pointed ways. I see none of that in the paper. I'm confident in my conclusions.

      PRG asked it, and again so will I: what exactly have men done that women are not equally guilty of? Maybe you could consider the entirety of what I posted, please.

      If the diocese ever starts a meaningful discussion on this topic, I'd be glad to move my ideas there. But until that happens, you're as close to a Diocesan representative that exists. Disagree with me if you like, but please do so constructively. No "sheeshes", please.

  7. PRG, you said:

    In some American Catholic circles, there is this tendency to romanticize early marriage and early childbearing. In reality, unless you are already established in a job with a living wage, the stress that comes with young parenthood and poverty can break families. Many of the voices you'll hear from American Catholic blogs are of the upper middle class or professional class. It isn't representative of the larger American Catholic population.

    I am a proponent of young marriage, not so much in forcing the issue, but in making sure there is a voice AGAINST what is the prevailing cultural voice. That prevailing voice is, "Do not marry young. Your education and career are your priority, and eventually you can think about getting married, but never do it young. You must focus on your career, and then, as an afterthought, you can settle down if you'd like."

    In other words, the culture (yes, even American Catholics) sees the first "vocation" as being "career". That message is implicit everywhere. The vocation of marriage (which is a real vocation, and which is in dire straits in the west) is the one that is neglected, put off, not made a priority at all.

    Can anyone dispute this, really?

    Not five days ago, I received a message from a young friend (I've known her since she was a girl). She has her university degree, and so does her fiancee. They are in their mid-20s, adults. They are so excited to get married in a few months and they know their Faith, and the Sacrament they are undertaking. I was stunned (but yet not) when she said that she had been getting a lot of pressure from those around her to postpone her marriage. That they are not "financially ready".

    Uhhh.... because waiting to marry and living apart will somehow make it cheaper for either one of them to live? And the idea that we prioritize the material over the spiritual (vocations/sacraments) is not a Catholic principle at all. It's reflective of the materialistic culture that we are seeped in, the very air we breath (or pollution we choke on!).

    This is not my opinion, it is a fact, and it something that our Holy Father has spoken on several times, and emphatically, in his pontificate. He asks young people NOT to be afraid to get married young, to make a commitment for a lifetime, to not be swayed by the voices that say it's not a priority, not prudent, etc. Obviously, we want young people to KNOW what marriage is before they enter it, and we also understand that not everyone is called to get married young (for sure!), but generally speaking, marriage is what matures people. Marriage should be seen as the cornerstone, not the (optional, possible) capstone of life.

    We have a huge vocations crisis and I'm not talking just about the priesthood! Marriage is in big trouble in the west, and we would do very well to heed Pope Francis' words!

    1. PS: And as I mentioned in my comments to Sebastian, I know plenty of working class Catholic families personally, and they started young and have fabulous big families. They are wonderful people and they were not "broken" by their circumstances. I am also part of a few Catholic wife/mom Facebook groups (hundreds and hundreds of members), and these are mostly young women (I am one of the "old ladies" of the bunch). They are not rich, many are living with parents (and their husbands/babies), and they are (as was always the case in life) struggling with finances (which is what young married couples are expected to do -- it's a journey, and no one starts at the top). They are not "broken", they are normal human beings navigating life in all it's riches and poverties, the peaks and the valleys, and they are learning and growing as we all do on our journey. The best thing is watching their faith in action. They give me hope for the future of the Church! Really great ladies.

  8. A lot of Christians put off marriage (actually people in general) because they're putting off commitment and responsibility. The idea of a lifelong, sacred covenant made before God is daunting and they want to be young and free of responsibility for as long as possible.

    That being said, if I had to call it, I'd advise against young marriage, because almost every instance of it I've personally seen turned into fiascos. A good friend from college got married in her junior year and she was divorced shortly after she graduated. I have a lot of stories like these. And to be honest, the reason she, and a lot of other young Christians I see, get married young is because they want to sleep together. Which is the absolute worst reason to get married.

    People don't know who they are when they're 20, 22, etc. their core principles usually form after 25 or so I think. If they've met the one, they can be mature, prove themselves, and wait. This isn't something to rush into. Granted, every individual is different, but from what I've seen, marrying young usually ended poorly.

  9. I agree with that first part, Sunwoo Shim, for sure. I don't quite agree with the rest (and anecdotally, I have so many stories of young marriages which have thrived, to offset the disaster stories; I imagine it's the same for those who marry older as well). I have seen countless young marriages thrive, including my own, including many of my (now older) friends. I mostly feel sad that young people who have a (natural, God-given) desire for marriage are being discouraged and scolded. I stand with the Pope on this and I say we need to begin to encourage young people to consider marriage as a very worthy endeavor and calling for their (yes, young) life.

    I wish I could find that website that is all about Catholics marrying young and telling their stories. It's so beautiful! Can anyone help me out and direct me to that site? I loved it and should have bookmarked it, ha ha.

  10. To clarify, when I say young marriage, I'm talking about teen/very early 20s marriage. I don't consider mid-20s to be young marriage, in fact, that's the ideal age for marriage. However, there is so much happening between the end of high school and when someone is around 24ish. I really don't understand the push to get kids married off by 20. Those four or five years after high school are critical to maturation and part of that is becoming financially stable. Young men have a lot of pressure on them if they consider marriage and family- that's why so many opt out.

  11. Reality is not going to change. Many serious and well-grounded kids will continue to focus on their education, first undergraduate and often graduate school, and then need to get established in their careers. Would you really want doctors, scientists or engineers who weren't serious in that way?

    The consequence of this is that many people are not ready to start considering dating and marriage until they are past 25 or even 30. They weren't living sinful lives; they were being prudent, chaste and responsible. They have probably moved far away from family and other friends who in earlier generations were primary "matchmakers", often with the support of the Catholic parish who provided a social network and activities.

    Today's parishes offer no social network for these adults. That's the reality they face. Beating the drum for marrying young is of no value to them.

  12. Just to clarify, who's pushing? 98% of America is not pushing. The push is in the opposite direction.

    I got married at 23. Best decision of my life. JoAnna (regular commenter) got married at 20. Best decision of her life. My oldest daughter got married at 22, my younger daughter at 19, my mom at 21, and yes, it's all anecdotal, but yet...

    As for young men: My son is 22. He would like nothing more than to fall in love, get married and start a family. He has even had folks ask if I am pressuring him (ha ha ha, ask him yourself; he does what he wants). I would never discourage him, even though he is in his first year of med school and will have debt. He wants to go through life and build a life with someone. He will likely have debt for a couple of decades due to college and med school loans. If he waited until he was financially "stable", who knows when he would marry and start a family? I guess I don't get what that means, to be financially "stable".

    As for pressure, men were made (by God) to be protectors and providers. To say that that calling is "pressure" and that they see it and want to opt out... that says more about the immaturity of our young men than anything else. It's exactly why we have a crisis of manhood. Arrested adolescence is a huge problem.

    I like how Mike Phalen (who is a great man, the head of our family life center at the diocese, and the guy in the radio interview with me) put it: Boys/men these days go from the GameBoy to Playboy to LazyBoy.

    This is not manhood! That is why the Bishop's exhortation is so important. We should want men who don't "opt out" because of the "pressure" of protecting and providing. That is the very thing we want them to do!

  13. Uncle Fester, no apology for lying about blatantly misrepresenting the advisory panel, both in the number of women and in the tone?

    Very few men end up as doctors or engineers, but let's go with that. My son in med school wants to be married young. I support that. Most of the men and women in his class are older than he is, and a good number of them are married already, some with kids, so it's definitely possible to do both (and that used to be the norm. My parents married while my dad was in residency, I think?). My daughter's husband is still in law school. My other daughter's husband just got out of the Navy and is now a full-time student, working towards his engineering degree. My son who is going to engineering school in the fall is also very much interested in marriage (although we all think he may have a priestly vocation....).

    I don't get why we would actively discourage marriage. That's all I'm saying. Take the pressure OFF of young people who are pressured NOT to marry young, even if they feel they are called to marriage. It's okay to marry later, absolutely! But for some reason we "enlightened" (materialistic) Americans (as a whole) have decided it's not okay to marry young. I call BS on that. And so does Pope Francis, just sayin'.....

  14. Thank you PRG and Leila for your considerate answers. Perhaps I should clarify that I am not in any way against marrying young, but in today's economic environment I would only encourage it if both bride and groom have some grounding in the Catholic understanding of marriage and are prepared to go through all sorts of difficulties, financial and otherwise, together. As Leila pointed out, not all newly-weds will be engineers or doctors where you still have reasonable assurance that you will be able to provide and pay off debts.

    It's also great if both are committed to abandoning themselves to God's providence come what may, and not have materialistic aims. But I guess that is still very much the exception and always will be. Fallen man is worried and thinks about his needs, safety and security first.

  15. "I like how Mike Phalen (who is a great man, the head of our family life center at the diocese, and the guy in the radio interview with me) put it: Boys/men these days go from the GameBoy to Playboy to LazyBoy."

    And if stereotypical and insulting nonsense like that comes from an official representative of the diocese, can you see why he has no credibility in my eyes?

  16. Uncle Fester:

    You BLATANTLY lied about the make-up of the advisory panel. No apology from you when corrected. You also have no idea whatsoever what was said in that advisory panel, because you were not there, and yet you keep insisting that you know. I encourage everyone to listen to the radio show that you posted and they can judge for themselves the merits of what I and Mike talked about (hint: We did not disclose the contents of a very lengthy and incredible round-table discussion comprised mostly of men. In fact, two of the four women were not even presenters). Again, to willfully misrepresent others is a sin. You are now willfully misrepresenting others, as I have corrected your errors and yet you persist.

    Please refrain from any more comment here. I've given you enough of a forum for your opinions, and now they don't even comport with the truth. Enough.

  17. Sebastian, yes! I totally agree with this, and I start with this as a given: I would only encourage it if both bride and groom have some grounding in the Catholic understanding of marriage and are prepared to go through all sorts of difficulties, financial and otherwise, together.

    And more than encouraging young marriage in the general population, I would simply not discourage it, as is done nowadays.

  18. Fine, the panel had some men. But they did a lousy job of representing men. How's that? Why is this such a sore point with you? It doesn't change my observations that the paper and the video both bash men in a subtle and non-specific way.

    You want me to leave? Fine. This blog has been a miserable experience so far, looking at the insults you've tossed my way. Just like the Knight who told me that "non family men need not apply," you'd prefer I just go home and close the door. OK, done.

    But if the diocese ever holds an open forum discussion, I guarantee I'll be there. I will remember this interaction.

    And BTW, PRG and I STILL want to know what men are guilty of, that women aren't equally guilty of. This is the fourth request.

  19. "Fine, the panel had some men. But they did a lousy job of representing men. How's that? Why is this such a sore point with you?"

    That's your apology?


    The panel did not have "some men", the panel was majority men, unlike your false accusation. And since you were not there for those hours and presentations, you have zero way of ascertaining that "they did a lousy job of representing men". Give me a break.

    I hope you do go to an open forum discussion. Join some mens' groups, even lead them (I know single, older men who do that, even in my own parish). Then, you will be able to have a bigger voice.

    God bless and farewell.

  20. "And BTW, PRG and I STILL want to know what men are guilty of, that women aren't equally guilty of. This is the fourth request."

    Guilty of? I have no idea what that means. The letter and the video are a call to action by men, for men. If you don't see that men are floundering in a culture that disregards them and their gifts, then I can't make you see it, nor can I make you appreciate what the Bishop has done here.

  21. Ok I see a fight has broken out but I'm not going to get into that.

    Leila - I see where you're coming from. You're not saying get married young, you're saying don't discourage people from getting married young. I guess what I'm saying is that like 99% of people aren't ready to get married young. The people you know who married young and it turned out well come from a statistical minority - people who were raised by godly, devout parents who set a great spiritual example in the home. The vast majority of Americans aren't raised in those homes, so marrying young is a recipe for disaster. What a wonderful place the world would be if we all were raised right and we're ready for marriage by 21 or 22. But that's not our world.

    Marriage is a worthy vocation, but, most aren't worthy.

  22. It's not at all a coincidence that the successful young couples you know are religious, but now I just realized you probably were talking to religious people mainly with this post. Which makes sense (although again I know a lot of Christians who aren't ready for young marriage).

    Marriage in and of itself is what we were designed for and destined for though, I agree. And I wish our culture took it more seriously and encouraged the youth to strive to become worthy of it one day too. It's really hard for religious and romantic people like me living in this hookup culture, it really is.

  23. Sunwoo Shim, I agree with everything you have said! Yes, you are correct. Here, then is the problem: If 99% of young people are not ready to get married, what makes them "ready" in four, five, or ten ensuing years? I would say that nothing except (maybe) finances? Because unless they get a sense of God and a sense of the truth of marriage, won't they still encounter the same pitfalls and dangers, and be at risk of divorce even later?

    As for the "fight" with Uncle Fester.... that began several posts ago, unfortunately. I didn't realize he was still so upset about Bishop Olmsted's wonderful exhortation to Catholic men. :(

  24. Without God it is impossible to have the best marriage. I know people who aren't religious who have good marriages, but it isn't what it could be if they were religious. If you are coming from a completely secular standpoint, marriage loses its divine meaning and origin. Unless you believe in the creation story, what meaning can marriage have beyond the material?

    But we are living in an increasingly godless society, so of course marriage is also falling apart. Look at the 50% divorce rate. But if I try to tell my secular friends this, they look at me like I've lost my mind. So I really don't know what to tell you. Unless people submit to the Holy Spirit, we will keep going in circles!

  25. And I'm off on a tangent again...

  26. You are right. That is why evangelization is so important. People need to know Christ, intimately. They need to turn to God. So, I think in many ways, I am trying simply to get the Catholics in America to see that many of their (our) assumptions are more in line with secular values than any Catholic principle or truth. I'm always going to try to reach those weak Catholics, like I was for so much of my life.

  27. Haha I'm not Catholic by the way - I'm seventh day Adventist.

  28. I stumbled upon your blog a few years ago. I had wandered from the Adventist church but I was still interested in religious discussions. Your blog, though at the time clashed with my political views, spoke to me because it was very biblical. I knew deep down inside you were speaking some hard truths the world didn't want to hear. So I kept reading and only recently started commenting. I came back to my church also so I am starting to see more and more where you are coming from. I genuinely don't have the courage to say half the things you say on your blog. My liberal, secular friends would crucify me.

  29. Wow! God bless you! In time, the courage will come. It will be quite freeing, actually. God is funny that way, but He's also so gentle, and He will not push. (But He will nudge! ha ha!)

  30. There have been several comments here about how you should delay marriage until you are financially stable and earning a living wage. I think these commenters are getting it backwards - we shouldn't be advising people to wait for marriage but we should be putting a lot more pressure on employers to pay living wages, so that people don't feel trapped by poverty. You're never going to see an encyclical on why you need to be financially secure to get married, but more than one pope has written about the fact that not paying living wages is an injustice that cries out to heaven for vengeance. (See Rerum Novarum and Laborem Exercens).

  31. One of the problems I see here is that the landscape of American life has changed a great deal. We are no longer living in a post-war America; (for a man) finish high school, do your military service, come home, find a good paying job, marry, buy a house, have kids. There used to be an order that most Americans followed. America isn't like that anymore.

    How many 21 year old men earn enough to just support themselves, let alone a wife and children. Not many. Entry-level employment requires more than just a high school diploma. Some college or technical education is the only way to earn more than $10 per hour. As far as being financially stable, the very least a man should be able to do is support himself without financial assistance. If you can't afford to move out of your parents' house or live without roommates, you aren't ready to support a family. For many men in their 20s, this is the reality.

  32. One other thing; the American marriage crisis falls along socio-economic lines. The lower classes are opting out of marriage, while the upper-middle, and upper classes continue to marry. This video doesn't directly address this, but the main issue for lower/working class men is marrying the mothers of their kids, and the main issue of the higher earners is to turn away from materialism. Family life improves when a father is married to the mother, and isn't distracted by materialism.

  33. So the makers of this video think gay people are serpents?

  34. Bob, what a bizarre question. What on earth would make you ask such a thing?
    If you are just trolling, please move along. If you want an intelligent discussion, feel free to stay and ask something intelligent.

  35. They showed a gay pride parade immediately followed by a slithering snake. Subliminal message maybe? The rest of the video is just a shamefest directed at men. If you really want to know the real deal, then read Helen Smith's book; "Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - And Why It Matters."

  36. Bob, the devil (represented by the serpent) wants nothing more than to see us fall into sin. Homosexual acts are grave (mortal) sins. So yes, all sin is championed by the devil. He prowls throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls, and the sin du jour is, collectively, the LGBT "agenda" and normalization that permeates pretty much every aspect of American life on a daily basis anymore. Hope that helps.

    Sorry you feel that way about the "shamefest". My husband and others think it is powerful and amazing. Men, step up! We love our men and we want them to be strong and honorable. Most men want to be strong and honorable, too, I really believe. But no one calls them to it anymore. Men are degraded in this society. Time for that to stop.


PLEASE, when commenting, do not hit "reply" (which is the thread option). Instead, please put your comment at the bottom of the others.

To ensure that you don't miss any comments, click the "subscribe by email" link, above. If you do not subscribe and a post exceeds 200 comments, you must hit "load more" to get to the rest. We often have meaty and long discussions -- trust me, they're worth following!