She’s their successor to Christ, their man of the year.

Social Justice Warriors have been outdoing themselves with Greta Thunberg.  After I wrote A (new) child to save us, I saw in Fabius Maximus’ post Using girls for propoganda that a church in Sweden has declared her a successor to Christ.

Now GQ has made her one of their men of the year for 2019.  The headline of the Daily Telegraph reads:  GQ Men of the Year 2019: Andrew Scott, Rory Stewart and Greta Thunberg

As usual, it would be petty to point out their pettiness.  So I will not point out the petty envy that is driving this absurdity.

This entry was posted in Envy, Fabius Maximus, Feminist Territory Marking, Greta Thunberg, Social Justice Warriors, Ugly Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

67 Responses to She’s their successor to Christ, their man of the year.

  1. I am amazed at the enthusiasm with which western institutions liquidate their legitimacy.

    Do the owners and executives believe that GQ’s “Man of the Year” will retain any stature after they give that honor to a 16-year-old girl?

    As for gender equality, have any feminist organizations declared a man to be their “Woman of the Year?”

  2. JR says:

    It is becoming very difficult to write for the Babylon Bee when the most absurd satire becomes indistinguishable from real stories. Recently a woman showed up to an AOC town hall and stated that the only answer was to eat babies, citing some tenured professor who is suggesting cannibalism as the only way to save the planet. Jonathan Swift had the same “Modest Proposal” in 1729 to that other eco terrorist Malthus in 1729 :
    When tenured professors are seriously advocating what was over the top sarcasm we can say that madness is not just afoot, it is to the eyeballs. I hate Islam, but Islam is more right about women than modern Curchianity (grammar intentional).

  3. Scott says:

    Not that I’ve ever had any regard for what GQ thinks, but “liquidate their legitimacy” is a pretty awesome turn of phrase.

  4. William of Orange County says:

    The left’s obsession with children isn’t just fetishistic, it’s proven fact.

  5. scarletlagomorph says:

    The frantic slouching toward relevance by the old guard in the post-status West is hilarious to watch.

    I hate Islam, but Islam is more right about women than modern Curchianity (grammar intentional).

    Right in the letter but just as helpless in the execution. I’ve known many Muslims, some of them very devout, and they were to a man henpecked within the four walls of their own houses, often in full view of guests. Ultimately, any man that accepts the arrangement of legally and financially enforced monogamy is a slave what’s between the woman’s leg.

  6. Anonymous Reader says:

    There is a narrative. It will be pushed via all available communications channels. This should be obvious to the most casual of observers, yet many people in my extended family and social circle remain mostly oblivious to the existence of the narrative.

    There’s a whole lotta cognitive dissonance going on. It will get worse, too, as we are nowhere near peak feminism. Secure your mind, then secure your space around you, then help others to clarify their thinking. Fight where you are, with what you have.

  7. Anonymous Reader says:

    Lol @GQ. The name is fake advertising, although I guess it’s still quarterly.

  8. Novaseeker says:

    I am amazed at the enthusiasm with which western institutions liquidate their legitimacy.

    Do the owners and executives believe that GQ’s “Man of the Year” will retain any stature after they give that honor to a 16-year-old girl?

    Larry —

    In their own eyes, the “institutions” have no legitimacy to liquidate. Remember, per the NYT, which is Holy Writ for the editors of GQ (if GQ can even be seen as an “institution” in the first place …), the US began in 1619, with the import of the first African slave, and everything that came after that is fundamentally based on that, tainted by it, corrupted by it, and therefore lacking in fundamental legitimacy. Per this view, what it needed is a reset, a “year zero” re-founding, with new institutions, new fundamental principles, and new structures.

    From their point of view the entire exercise of “Man of the Year” is an exercise of irony, and nothing more. It’s a way of pulling down structures they see as lacking in legitimacy already, but merely doing it from the “inside out”, per Gramscian tactics, rather than from the “outside in”.

    You really do need to keep up.

  9. Anonymous Reader says:

    Recently a woman showed up to an AOC town hall and stated that the only answer was to eat babies,

    I’m not sure who ran that troll,the vid is still easy to find. The actress was pretty good, but needed more hysteria in vocal tone and tears. Nevertheless it was a great example of “agree & amplify”, since “we only have a few months!” is just a hyped up version of AOC’s “12 years to doom”. One source claimed it was the LaRouche organization, which if true would be fascinating given that he’s been dead for years.

    Probably it would not be possible to show up in the audience at a Dem Presidential debate with an #EatTheBabies T-shirt, but entertainment could ensue anyway.

    On reflection, I did not know that GQ was still publishing. Perhaps there’s a “search for relevance” involved in this stunt?

  10. Novaseeker,

    That’s a great comment, going to the heart of the matter.

    I’ll restate what I said, hopefully, more accurately: how can the owners and executives of GQ mock their own business – and in effect mock their customers – and hope to stay profitable?

    These people apparently haven’t seen the meme “get woke, go broke.”

  11. Damn Crackers says:

    This made me laugh:

  12. Novaseeker says:

    how can the owners and executives of GQ mock their own business – and in effect mock their customers – and hope to stay profitable?

    These people apparently haven’t seen the meme “get woke, go broke.”

    They don’t need to make money, really — at least not more than nominal money. There’s always an ideological deep pocket around, of which “Soros” (as a man and as a meme for a group of them) is but a notable one of many, to provide cash which is obtained through international financial markets, much of which operates outside the memesphere they are influencing in this way. GQ is useful to this class as a way of creating a kind of feminine consumer culture which benefits them by, among other things, keeping most men in the culture down, and therefore not challenging them.

  13. Anonymous Reader says:

    Tailgating off of Novaseeker:

    A friend of mine out here in flyover informed me earlier this week that his Sunday School the other day consisted of a video on the early church in the US, focusing on the Puritans of Massachusetts. During the discussion afterwards a college-aged woman brought up the “fact” that from the start the Puritans owned slaves, because the first slaves arrived in the colonies in 1619.[1] He didn’t know what to make of that at all, because he doesn’t read the NYT. Another woman from that same church was concerned because sometime in the last few years she took grandchildren to Boston, bought a tour, and the tour guide spent quite a bit of the trip disparaging the Pilgrim / Puritans – she was confused why that was.

    There’s a cold civil war, it’s been going on for years, and all this stuff is part of it.

    US began in 1619, with the import of the first African slave,

    Slavery is the “original sin” of the US, and it can never be fully compensated for.

    There are still Puritans in the US. They are all found on the Left, the 白左 as the Chinese refer to them. Not the Taiwanese, the mainland Chinese.

    [1] Apparently she was a bit geographically challenged, and did not know that Jamestown, Virginia is hundreds of miles away from Boston, MA.

  14. Novaseeker says:

    There are still Puritans in the US. They are all found on the Left

    Indeed, see this book for a good explanation of them:

  15. Anonymous Reader says:

    I have zero interest in debating the theology of the 17the century. Rather, I’m attempting to use the word “Puritan” in a sense that is as close as possible to the original subgroup of English Christians, even though the word has become encrusted with all sorts of baggage over the last 250+ years. The English settlers and colonists of the 17th century who traveled to New England largely were self-described as “Puritan” for some period of time, and apparently that’s what the vid in the Sunday school was focused on.

    1600’s note:
    The English in Mass. Bay nearly starved to death because they chose initially to hold all their garden and farm land in common. A communal arrangement for religious reasons. The gentleman adventurers in Jamestown nearly starved to death because too many of them were off searching for gold and didn’t get around to planting any food crops. Such social and cultural differences do matter.

  16. Midwest_Product says:

    4 out of the last 5 posts? I think Dalrock has a crush!

  17. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Larry Kummer: As for gender equality, have any feminist organizations declared a man to be their “Woman of the Year?”

    I’m sure it will happen. Feminists love to virtue signal as much as any other SJW. Someday they’ll declare a gay man or tranny to be “Woman of the Year.” It will be a gleeful assault on both men and less woke feminists.

  18. In other words, GQ is saying:

    “None of you have any real balls!”

    In too many ways GQ is absolutely correct.

    Over the last 50 years men have ceded all authority, rights, power and privilege over to women believing they would appreciate our deference, but men held on to all of the legal, financial accountability and responsibility they had before, and assumed even more.
    Now men stand there dumbfounded to learn women hate us even more than before, and have a whole new list of rules for us to comply with, or else they won’t be nice to us anymore.
    The rest just point and laugh at the incredulous looks on our faces.
    At the same time, the complaints, tantrum-throwing and deplorable sexual and reproductive behavior of women continues unabated, no consequences, and no end in site.

    The Muslims were right.

  19. Jim says:

    constrainedlocus says:
    October 9, 2019 at 2:10 pm

    The Muslims were right.

    Yup. Completely. Put them in their place by legal force or you’ll get what we got now and worse.

  20. c matt says:

    As for gender equality, have any feminist organizations declared a man to be their “Woman of the Year?”

    Didn’t Time magazine name Bruce Jenner woman of the year not too long ago. Time’s as feminist as any other organization.

  21. Mentally ill child spouts Leftist talking points provided to her by adults, so we should undermine the world’s economy and give unlimited power to Leftists. No thanks.

  22. Frank K says:

    a church in Sweden has declared her a successor to Christ.

    And not just “a church”, but the Church of Sweden, which used to be the official state church of Sweden, which allegedly has 5 million baptized members and even claims to have Apostolic Succession and a valid Episcopate.

  23. Pingback: She’s their successor to Christ, their man of the year. | Reaction Times

  24. Anonymous Reader says:

    And not just “a church”, but the Church of Sweden

    I believe you are overstating the facts.
    This search:

    Produced this article:

  25. feministhater says:

    Ah yes, the patroness saint of Greta Thornybush, who saved the world for the original sin of burning fossil fuels and returning humanity to using sticks and stones. All hail that mighty bush!

  26. Gunner Q says:

    Anonymous Reader@ 12:48 pm:
    “Lol @GQ. The name is fake advertising, although I guess it’s still quarterly.”

    Yeah, for a moment I thought Dalrock was linking to me. I covered Andrew Scott in passing for his portrayal of a sex predator priest in “Fleabag”, one of those shows that gets a 105% rating from Approved Critics and 1% rating from the general public. At least, I think he played a sex predator priest… but it’s possible he instead played a priest who got raped. I didn’t look too closely.

    HAHAAA! The GQ “Inspiration” award went to…

    *drum roll*…

    The England Womens’ Football team!

    Does anybody feel inspired by that?

  27. Anonymous Reader says:

    Does anybody feel inspired by that?

    I dunno. How many men in pinnies are on the team, pretending to be girls?

  28. Opus says:

    I could not say that I had ever heard of Andrew Scott or Rory Stewart (looked them up – Homosexual Irish actor and despite the appropriated name not a Scot but a British Jew former Tory with whip removed for being traitorous – colour me shocked, respectively – well done Boris and well done for yet another prorogueing of the traitors at Westminster) and was thus surprised to learn that those two and the anti-weather Swede were but three of the award winners at an awards ceremony hosted in the Turbine Hall of London’s Tate Modern (vast concrete space). god I hate the Tate Mod – a good walk ruined by tat more tat and don’t trip over the imported from America eight equivalent bricks. I see the English Women’s soccer team also received an award presumably for losing (so British that), in fact all the award winners – David Beckham, Ian McKellen to name but two – seem to be of the sort that all but trendy lefties laugh at. I once saw McKellen in Shaw: shout shout shout, that was his performance. I am just surprised that your descendant of slaves – obviously been deslaved as we don’t allow slaves over here – never have – The Duchess of Sussex has been snubbed for she failed to win the award for most inspirational Royal woman of colour or some such. Obviously she failed to post her own nomination being busy as she is impressing the natives down in southern Africa – look at me bitches and despair and kiss my ass. Colonialism never goes out of fashion (not that we call it that nowadays).

  29. Anonymous Reader says:

    Opus, are you commenting from the pub after your third gin? Just wondering.

  30. Spike says:

    The sad part of this is most men will laugh off the illegitimacy and stupidity of GQ Magazine for having nominated a gay man and a 16 year old brat as Man Of The Year. We will not take it seriously and therefore will not retaliate.

    Not so women or their obsequious White Knight enablers. They will point this out at every opportunity and add a “Men Need To Step Up!” scold, thus increasing the rhetoric and claiming more ground.

    I suggest going to your nearest newsagent, opening GQ and spitting in it before returning it to the shelf, un-bought.
    If they’re going to spit on their readers metaphorically, it’s quite alright to spit on them physically. Let them go the way of Gillette.

  31. Scott says:


    Like I said upthread. It has never occurred to me think of GQ as a legitimate source of cultural guidance.

    I went through a phase when I was like 15 where I was super concerned about men’s fashion, and thought the articles were edgy or whatever, and then I grew out of it.

  32. Frank K says:

    I believe you are overstating the facts.

    From the link you provided:

    “The national church of Sweden is evangelical Lutheran but is no longer the Nordic nation’s official religion.”

    This was the Church of Sweden, not Pastor Olaf’s non denominational church.

  33. Anonymous Reader says:

    Frank K
    “The national church of Sweden is evangelical Lutheran but is no longer the Nordic nation’s official religion.”

    Can you point to the part where one “ward pastor” has the authority to speak for the entire Swedish church? I can’t seem to find it, and don’t know anything about the governance of that church.

  34. info says:

    This is nothing more than a humilation ritual intended for us.

  35. Frank K says:

    Can you point to the part where one “ward pastor” has the authority to speak for the entire Swedish church?

    Was the pastor rebuked by the church’s episcopate? All I recall was them hemming and hawing, saying nonsense like “we have room for many understandings of who Jesus is” or something along those lines. Then after that all they did was delete the tweets.

  36. imnobody00 says:

    “how can the owners and executives of GQ mock their own business – and in effect mock their customers – and hope to stay profitable?”

    When SJWs take an institution traditionally associated with masculinity, Chistianity or the traditional Western culture, they could not care less about profitability.

    First, the left is a parasite and has never done anything to make a profit. They prefer to leech the government or big companies

    Second, if the institution goes broke, it’s icing on the cake. SJWs only want a thing more than to poz comics, esports, churches or men’s magazines : they want to destroy these things

  37. Opus says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    I am sorry to disappoint – it just comes naturally to me – but I have not had a drink since last Friday night.

  38. Rum says:

    Since it is a near solid certainty that Ms Thunberg is going to embrace Islam and take the Burka, sooner than later, maybe the Swedish “Church” should try to sober up a bit.
    Joan of Arc, Shinead O’Connor, Greta Thungberg — all have belonged to the Sisters of Perpetual Attention for at least long enough to lock down the hardest addiction there has ever been to over come.
    Joan got herself killed by going on repeated, pointless forays against the English; just to keep being seen.
    O;Connor went from publically begging for deviant sex to embracing the most transgressive religion on offer (Islam). Note: She is still active in her quest to be noticed always and forever and so decent people should shrink from guessing her next move.
    So, Greta, after the Burka, will you go to Syria and suicide-bomb a group of policeman ? The cameras will catch everything, I promise. I mean, that would be like eternal life or salvation, or whatever for you, when it gets on youtube.
    Or not…

  39. Adam Dorsey says:

    The only explanation for this is that GQ is being propped up by cabal as an infiltrated mouthpiece, another station to flog normalcy at. It is hard to keep a magazine profitable. There must be dozens of these zombie cabal infested orgs. Sports Illustrated, I am looking at you.

    The playbook had been:
    1. Identify a respected institution.
    2. kill it.
    3. gut it.
    4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.

    Now we can see that what ashes of respect remain are used for the leveraging of clownworld against Christian dignity.

  40. @Adam Dorsey

    “The playbook had been:
    1. Identify a respected institution.
    2. kill it.
    3. gut it.
    4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect”

    This is well stated. A nicely described humiliation sequence that keeps playing over and over again.

    Since we’re in October, let’s talk about making adult amateur and professional male football athletes (college and NFL) wear pink uniforms all month long. And if you are at all opposed to it, well, you are a heartless misogynist and pro breast cancer.

  41. feeriker says:

    And not just “a church”, but the Church of Sweden, which used to be the official state church of Sweden

    Proof before our very eyes that any “church” tied to a nation-state is inherently apostate.

  42. VFM Bear says:

    It’s not just that they sell out, or how quickly they sell out, or that they are actively looking for any and every chance to sell out, it’s also that they sell out to the lowest bidder.

    Really sucks to have sold your soul and no longer have any say in your actions.

  43. Scott says:


    It tends to be more subtle than that.

    Whether it’s dressing in a fairy tutu to go trick or treating with your daughter or playing football in pink, if you don’t what to participle it is said that you can’t just have a little fun or that you are not secure in your masculinity

    This is what Dalrock is referring to with his line about it being petty to point out how petty it is

  44. Scott says:

    (Or if the details of the Emelia Earhart story actually matter to you)

  45. Red Pill Christianity says:

    A bit OffTopic: Red pill real-life lesson.

    I attended a funeral this weekend for my father’s friend who passed. I met his dad maybe twice (divorced parents and my friend grew up with his mom and stepdad). Whenever my friend’s mom “complained” (spoke) about her “abusive ex-husband”, she had this longing in her eyes and voice. I always had this impression from his mom. The ex-husband/absent dad, now dead, looked like a “pissed off Dick Van Dyke” when he was older to me, about 6’5″, fit, but just not a very nice guy overall.

    When I asked my friend about his dad, he would say he would yell at kids a lot, actually slapped one of his friends on the face years ago growing up, drank from Friday afternoon to Sunday night, and was definitely abusive to his mom when they were together. I asked him how his relationship to his father had been over the years, and my friend said “shaky” but that his stepdad filled the void a lot.

    I met his stepdad many times over the last 16 years and he is indeed a solid guy. Engineer, upper-middle class life he provided these kids. A really good guy, he was always helpful, played catch with kids growing up, decent physical shape, but beta. Beta men are often good husbands and “fill-in dads”.

    Anyway after the funeral, I noticed my friend’s mom was visibly devastated by the death, They have been divorced the entire time I have known my friend, that is at least a decade and a half. And here is his EX-WIFE bawling uncontrollably about this alleged abuser.

    When I asked my friend about it after the service, he said “my mom has been in love with my dad all her life”. When I stopped him and questioned why, since she always talked about abuse and since he had his great stepdad… my friend looked at me literally disgusted and sickened by his mother’s display and said “she is Rhianna and he was Chris Brown, dude”. My friend was visibly angry about his mom’s display in front of his stepdad and all.

    Bottom line: no matter how good a beta male may be, if his woman had a “thing” for an abusive Alpha, you can bet money she is probably gonna be thinking of the a-hole in bed.

    Something to think about.

  46. Anonymous Reader says:

    Frank K
    Was the pastor rebuked by the church’s episcopate?

    Is that even part of the Swedish Lutheran church? I don’t know what the governing structure is, are you asserting that you do?

    All I recall was them hemming and hawing, saying nonsense like “we have room for many understandings of who Jesus is” or something along those lines. Then after that all they did was delete the tweets.

    So? You have an imperfect recollection, therefore mumble mumble fallacy of composition presto?
    Pretty sure that this Persson didn’t speak for that entire church, no matter how much you want it to be so.

    In any event, it’s just another data point. The official Church of Sweden is as pozzed as any US mainline, but apparently can get a leetle embarrassed by really stupid words.

    The EuroTrash press has elevated Greta to some sort of totemic status, and paraded her around. Given that she’s got mental problems such as Aspergers, some form of Autism, a tendency to depression and maybe more, it’s frankly (heh) cruel of the Narrative Keepers to use her as a puppet in this way.

    But…at least we all learned that GQ still has a physical presence on newsstands, a remarkable fact in the digital age, so the exercise wasn’t without usefulness.

  47. What an insult to Joan of Arc! She won victory after victory and was killed after her king dropped all support; she even had Paris won if the king didn’t flake on her.

    Not everything is about your hangups.

  48. virginia says:

    Cracks in the progressive alliance?


  49. Asaph says:

    “Geographically challenged” I like that phrase. Gunna be using it from now on

  50. Trust says:

    Hi Dalrock,

    Please excuse the off topic post, but I’m unaware of a better way to communicate to you.

    I saw a clip of Carol Swain at PragerU where she said the Republican Party was established in 1856 and opposed the “twin relics of barbarity: polygamy and slavery.”

    I was contemplating our child support model as a replacement to marriage, and it occurred to me that this is in fact polygamy by another more noble sounding title, where one woman draws husbandly support from multiple men.

    I’ve posted here about a close friend whose wife blew up her family, and is now remarried. She is living with her current husband who pays all the bills, and her ex husband sends her child support even though he has the kids at least twice as much as her. Well, the situation devolved further. The oldest of their four children was biologically from a prior boyfriend. After my friend raised him as his own son his entire life, he just left for college. So his mom was just awarded back child support from the biological father. So she is drawing support from three men in addition to working full time and keeping her entire paycheck for herself.

    Polygamy is back, repackaged as a benefit to its most helpless victims, and not even Christians realize it.

    God bless you for your wisdom and works, Dalrock. You are appreciated more than you know.

  51. locustsplease says:

    @trust you are correct. Same as cuckholdry the opposite of having a harem she has multiple husbands. Instead of multiple sexual husbands nsa the child support whore has multiple financial husbands nsa. This or course makes her a great humanitarian closer to god than you will ever find on earth or so im told.

  52. Anonymous Reader says:

    Search for “serial monogamy” on this site, you will find many essays.

    This one is a good starting point.

  53. sipcode says:

    GQ: Scripture never speaks of becoming a gentleman. Scripture demands “Shew thyself a man.”

  54. TheTraveler says:

    English saying, back when Brittania still celebrated strength and masculinity:

    “An English gentleman knows precisely when to stop being one.”

  55. BillyS says:


    A man who is called abusive is not necessarily abusive. This guy sounds like he was, but I have no idea.

    My own mother clearly had mental/emotional ties to my dad up to her death. He was not an abuser and they both were quite messed up when they divorced, but she caused her own problems when she pushed him out.

  56. Paul says:

    David Wood has made an excellent analysis on David Chappelle’s “Sticks & Stones” special. In it David Chappelle brilliantly exposes the inconsistencies in modern women (=feminist) mindset, on the issue of abortion. Maybe the cracks in the feminist position are beginning to show in society as an indication the pressure is rising, before it will burst into pieces…

  57. tteclod says:

    “Narrative Keepers.”

    Excellent. I’m gonna remember that.

  58. tteclod says:

    The formation of the Republican Party and it’s successful election of Abraham Lincoln to President prompted the American Civil War. In 1856, their party platform

    (found at )

    included the resolution:

    “That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign powers over the Territories of the United States for their government; and that in the exercise of this power, it is both the right and the imperative duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism — Polygamy, and Slavery.”

    The context of this resolution was Congress’ legislation to permit slavery in Kansas and Nebraska territories, and Southern efforts to annex Cuba. [History since has proven that the failure to secure Cuba as an American territory has led to several national crises.]

    While “slavery” is mentioned five times in that 1856 platform, polygamy is mentioned only the once, and there is no mention of Negroes – as if there were no racial distinction between enslaved men and free men living in the United States and its territories.

    It seems to me a safe assumption that the Republicans who affirmed that party platform thought only of Negro slaves and polygamous men with many wives. Nobody at the time thought much about the things which followed: the temperance movement, women’s suffrage, “single mothers,” gay marriage (approved by “Christian” churches, or a “majority minority” national demographic. where Judaism and Islam receive equal respect with Christianity, the religion whose Son of God declared, “No one comes to the Father but by me.”

    Certainly nobody expected the United States to wage a worldwide war not with its neighbors, Canada and Mexico, but with opponents separated from the United States by the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. What did we get from this war? Not treasure, and not territory.

    You’re right: polygamy is back, but it’s not the (Mormon?) polygamy those foolish Republicans denounced; Mormons readily abandoned “the principle,” to expediently join the Nuevo United States and share power with the post-bellum powerful new federal government. They even persecuted their own polygynists who wouldn’t observe the new rules and abandon “extra” wives. But back when the Civil War raged, Brigham Young

    “…saw the conflict as God’s punishment of the United States for its past mistreatment of his church, especially its failure to protect Joseph Smith, the Mormons’ founder who was murdered by an Illinois mob in 1844. In Young’s view, the war was a prelude to the “winding-up scene,” the end times in which American society would collapse under the weight of divine judgment and Mormons would save the Constitution, welcome the return of Jesus Christ and participate in his millennial reign.”

    I suppose that, in a way, Brigham Young was right. American society has indeed collapsed, but I don’t think divine intervention of any kind is required. Heavenly Father has instead left us to wallow in our depravity and endure the causality, as Paul wrote to the Romans.

    “For what can be known about Heavenly Father is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal Heavenly Father for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

    “Therefore Heavenly Father gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

    “For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

    “And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.”

    Of course, we here know all this and see the consequences about us every day. Is it any surprise that a mentally-challenged girl becomes the figurehead of a movement which, at its core, advocates murder of any person who dares argue not merely that “Jesus is LORD,” an empty invocation, but also that all the things he told the Jews, Samaritans, Romans, and any other person within earshot was not merely “good advice” but also TRUTH.

  59. tteclod says:

    That bit between David and Solomon didn’t end well.

    “When David’s time to die drew near, he commanded Solomon his son, saying, “I am about to go the way of all the earth. Be strong, and show yourself a man, and keep the charge of the LORD your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his rules, and his testimonies, as it is written in the Law of Moses, that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn, that the LORD may establish his word that he spoke concerning me, saying, ‘If your sons pay close attention to their way, to walk before me in faithfulness with all their heart and with all their soul, you shall not lack a a man on the throne of Israel.’ ”

    Time passes, then,

    “Now Jeroboam was a man of standing, and when Solomon saw how well the young man did his work, he put him in charge of the whole labor force of the tribes of Joseph. About that time Jeroboam was going out of Jerusalem, and Ahijah the prophet of Shiloh met him on the way, wearing a new cloak. The two of them were alone out in the country, and Ahijah took hold of the new cloak he was wearing and tore it into twelve pieces. Then he said to Jeroboam, “Take ten pieces for yourself, for this is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘See, I am going to tear the kingdom out of Solomon’s hand and give you ten tribes. But for the sake of my servant David and the city of Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, he will have one tribe. I will do this because they have forsaken me and worshiped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Molek the god of the Ammonites, and have not walked in obedience to me, nor done what is right in my eyes, nor kept my decrees and laws as David, Solomon’s father, did. “ ‘But I will not take the whole kingdom out of Solomon’s hand; I have made him ruler all the days of his life for the sake of David my servant, whom I chose and who obeyed my commands and decrees. I will take the kingdom from his son’s hands and give you ten tribes. I will give one tribe to his son so that David my servant may always have a lamp before me in Jerusalem, the city where I chose to put my Name. However, as for you, I will take you, and you will rule over all that your heart desires; you will be king over Israel. If you do whatever I command you and walk in obedience to me and do what is right in my eyes by obeying my decrees and commands, as David my servant did, I will be with you. I will build you a dynasty as enduring as the one I built for David and will give Israel to you. I will humble David’s descendants because of this, but not forever.’ ” Solomon tried to kill Jeroboam, but Jeroboam fled to Egypt, to Shishak the king, and stayed there until Solomon’s death.”

    It kinda makes me wonder what Heavenly Father has in store for whoever does as He commands as these United States forsake Him.

  60. Trust says:


    The point was that nearly 2 centuries ago polygamy was considered barbarity by a major party and it is back. I don’t care to get into a debate about which party is good or bad, considering the modern repackaged version of polygamy by a more Noble sounding name has bipartisan support, albeit for different reasons.

  61. Pingback: Friday hawt chicks & links – The couldn’t care less edition. – Adam Piggott

  62. Pingback: Fruits of chivalry | Dalrock

  63. Red Pill Christianity says:

    @BillyS says: A man who is called abusive is not necessarily abusive. This guy sounds like he was, but I have no idea.
    I wish that was the case, but it is not. My friend told me (a long time ago) that his dad grabbed one of his little friends by the arm when they were kids and smacked him in the face during a party! 😮

    When I say “abusive” I mean physically violent. I got spanked A LOT as a kid, but I was a terrible kid and deserved it. I never called my dad “abusive”. I was bad and even when we got hit with a leather belt on the butt (with pants on), I deserved it because let’s face it, I was terrible and got it all out of my system as a kid.

    I do not buy the “mentally abusive” or “emotionally abusive” that is thrown around liek it is nothing these days.

    As someone posted here, a goofy nerdy 19-year old dude read online about “how to make a friend” and touched some girl’s arm in the UK and now has been found guilty of “Sexual assault”. ANYTHING today = abuse, assault, or rape or whatever.

    I do not throw labels of “abuse” easily. But grabbing an 8-year old by the arm and slapping his FACE in a kid’s party is… well, sign of someone violent. He told me other stuff I rather not share here, but smashing stuff, yelling at kids over nothing, etc.

    You meet his dad, you can feel it, he seems always angry. His now-departed dad looked like Dick Van Dyke, but acted like Mike Tyson before the ear-biting incident. Abuse, actual abuse, is real, but not nearly as common as the Left and their harpies in the Feminist movement make it out to be.

    Ps. 40% of domestic violence in UK is committed by women. Probably less than that in USA, but I do not have US stats.

    I personally know of a case of a men who is battered by his live-in girlfriend, he wants to fight back, but is afraid to. I knew a few years ago (worked together) with a guy who was attacked by his drunken wife WITH A KNIFE, he dodged and tried to knock knife out of her hand. She attacked his twice again with knife that same night, he finally clocked her once in the face and knocked her out. Neighbors called cops in a “noise complaint”. Wanna guess who got arrested?

    Men want to fight back, but are afraid of the Gestapo coming in and sending them to prison for decades, even though these men are the real victims fighting back.

  64. Red Pill Christianity says:

    @Trust says: Nearly 2 centuries ago polygamy was considered barbarity by a major party and it is back.

    Going back to this discussion…. How is polygamy back? Women have to divorce these men before legally re-marrying. I understand unless marital infidelity occurred, that the initial divorces are and were invalid in God’s eyes, but in secular, State or Federal laws, divorce is easy and unilateral. You can file for divorce because you hate that your spouse wears blue too often is totally fine. It is a lawyer’s dream come true.

    Polygamy, which is defined in State and Federal Statutes, as marrying or being married to more than one person at the same time, is 100% illegal in all 50 States, DC, and all US territories.

    I know many illegal aliens that come to the US, marry some 400lbs junkie loser for a Green card and when his background check is done with his country’s consulate, we find out he lied and he is still married in his country of origin. THAT is polygamy, a crime. That is automatic deportation.

    Why would anyone marry more than one woman today anyway?!? One marriage is already a massive legal and financial liability and most guys are running away from one single marriage as fast as they can.

    I do not even entertain the prospect of dating more than one woman at the same time. One is more than enough time-sucking person for me. Can you imagine two women complaining about stuff and making demands on my time and money? Sweet Jesus, have mercy on my sanity and my wallet!

  65. Trust says:

    Red pill,

    What I mean by Polygamy is Back is that it is existing functionally by another name, usually child support.

    A woman may only have one man legally recognized as her husband, while having two or more men legally obligated to financially support her.

  66. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Gotcha @Trust, but that is not REAL polygamy. I think when people think of polygamy, they think of multiple wives, married, under same roof. I could never do this, one woman under my roof is plenty and I do not even allow that anyway!!! LOL

    I think today’s situation is WORSE than legal polygamy. The dude gets used as a sperm donor, does not have any rights to his kid(s) including no rights on how to raise his kids, and has to pay for it all, and more. He may even live in a 1-bedroom efficiency apt while his whoring wife took his house and kids and money! It is the worst of all worlds, man.

    Or in as it is in this 7-year old little boy’s case, the man’s kids are taken from him and then kids are then abused by his ex-wife with the courts possibly begining enforcement of the abuse and providing armed police power behind it.

    We will know by Oct 18, 2019 if this little boy will be chemically castrated for life or not. Irreversible procedure!

    If this little boy, James, gets castrated by his mommy, I hope he grows up and remembers who abused him like that, including the judge. And pays them a visit when he comes of age. Let’s hope he learns how to handle Rambo-style knives too. Will be the only justice he will get being de-balled for life.

Comments are closed.