2255. Interface of Natural Love, Husband and Wife


Her Highness Prettybeans asked me to clarify #818 in article 2253. It says, “You can focus on the big things that hold a couple together—love, friendship, commitment. However, you’ll do better to focus on avoiding, quieting, and suppressing the little unacceptable irritants, fixations, and offensive habits that slowly shred love into bits and pieces.”

The continually linked interface of his and her love in the home is very complex, so this won’t be clear unless I’m up front, blunt, and candid again. I describe two spouses idealized by their male and female natures—as if they were born already married. It won’t match you and yours, but you may be able to figure out how you can use some of the following.

The wife whether dealing with husband or not focuses on love, commitment, cooperation, friendship, devotion, and she hopes to be cherished. Such emotional connections are vital to her. For the most part, she thinks and depends more on words to substitute for actions and to recover from wrongful actions. ‘I love you’. ‘I’m so proud of you’. ‘I apologize’. ‘Oh, you’re so strong’. ‘Man, you look handsome’. The words mean everything to her. She feels good about herself when she uses them. In fact, she benefits more than husband does.

You see, wife doesn’t love husband because he needs it. He doesn’t need her love as she imagines it. He expects her to like him as her mate and be loyal to him and his interests. By their nature, sons and females need her love, and many men in successful marriages learn to need it. Wife loves all of them because she feels good about herself, she makes herself important by loving them. It satisfies her prime motivation to earn self-importance. (When others are grateful for her importance, the feedback satisfies her need for self-importance.)

Husband doesn’t spend mental energy on major emotional connections—love, devotion, relationship, marriage, etc. Those things just exist and he takes them for granted. He doesn’t depend on words to form or convey his feelings but on his actions. It’s another paradox. Husband is direct by character and habit but expresses his feelings indirectly with actions. Wife is indirect by nature but expresses her feelings directly with words. Her words make her feel good and compensate for having to use her reservoir of patience to follow her natural indirectness.

Wife’s words to husband seldom generate his self-admiration, which is the prime motivator of men. Even his own words seldom earn self-admiration except maybe when he wins an argument with his self-proclaimed superior logic and reason. (Or, reprehensibly, when used for immoral purposes as other men often do—players seducing women, manipulating someone, deceiving others.)

A successful marriage is easily symbolized by this analogy. They fit together as two spoons, both literally and figuratively. Wife experiences it in bed literally as the intimate crown on a great life or another great day with him. He visualizes it as two-spoons bonded in life to shape his future and accomplish his ambitions, a figurative representation of what he bought into by marrying her. It’s another God-designed and Nature-endowed paradox. Wife is primarily focused on the future and he primarily on the present. Yet, when he thinks of the future she’s figuratively tucked in nice and neat in his embrace and the present is beautiful. She has the intimate bedtime moment in the present that brightens her future.

Husband takes her for granted. He doesn’t even think about judging wife until she disturbs his willingness to live with the disappointing actions that she repeats. That is, wife does fine until husband objects. Her words of attention, affection, and love are nice but neither motivate nor satisfy him. She feels great expressing them, but he’s not nearly so energized by them. He judges more her negatives than her positives. The latter he takes for granted because he earned them by giving up his independence. The former remind that he did or may have made a mistake marrying her, and his mind should never get to thinking in that direction. (It switches on his ‘achievement meter’ to do something about it.)

Neat and well-functioning castle, her eagerness to get him in bed, ability to capture and hold friends, ability to mother kids successfully, her smiling countenance and pleasant demeanor. Those a man appreciates; those and many more similar actions confirm her words about the ‘big things’ of love, devotion, etc.

Husband considers home a problem-free zone except for those involved with his personal responsibility. Wife problems are not his; he married because she is so capable.

As to the little things that she should focus on avoiding, preventing, and recovering, the following merely start a list. She complains all the time about every little thing. Never smiles. Sourpuss. Always late. Words don’t match her actions. Smirks at others’ faults. Won’t or can’t cook. Won’t keep the castle clean enough. Can’t nurture kids out of their bad times. Nags him. Won’t accept her responsibility but expects others to fulfill theirs. Reminds constantly about honey-do list. Counts on someone else to recover from her mistakes. Shameful personal appearance compared to courtship. Is very moody. Anger spoils family togetherness. Let’s frustrations control her life.

Within each item on that list are connected daily actions that irritate, confuse, and offend husband. None disqualifies her, but having to live with repeated episodes of just a few is enough for husband to start thinking about life without her.

Of course, wife is entitled to live her life as she sees fit. The point here is merely that husband makes judgments about her actions. Each complaint is an action. Each frustrated outburst is an action. Each smirk is an action. Failure to smile when teased about sex is a disappointing action. Letting kids have their own way is action. Alibis and explanations are accepted more as words than actions, which means they are essentially ineffective to convince husband that wife is right or justified.

So that I don’t confuse, I summarize by reducing all of the above to two concepts over which wife has control—her love and husband’s disappointments. The more her actions reflect love, the more likeable she is. The more her love is weakened by things that disappoint him, the less likeable she is.

Husband’s love is founded on respect and begins with his loyalty to wife because she’s so likeable to him. As her likeability diminishes, guess what happens to his love. And that, dear Prettybeans, is the essence of keeping a family together. He hangs around her for the loving and loveable actions that she uses to spread pleasantness and joy of living around his castle. Her reward comes from harmonizing relationship and family around those things that make her likeable to both herself and husband. IOW, she enables herself to feel good about herself from her actions rather than depending on her words.

Yes, successful wife plays to husband’s expectations by using her interpersonal expertise, natural adjustability, sense of survivability, and almost musical ability to orchestrate harmony in both relationship and home. It’s another paradox. She gets what she wants just by keeping him from getting ticked off all the time, which INDIRECTLY programs his heart with how lucky he is to have her.

But a word of caution. Wife can easily overdo it. If she’s too submissive, too much a lap dog to his desires, too weak to stand up for herself, too unwilling to risk losing him, then her actions take her in the wrong direction. She may still be likeable, but she loses husband’s respect, which is the foundation of masculine love.

I know you think I put by far the heavier burden on the wife. But consider this before making your final conclusion.

  • Wife’s nature empowers her and programs her heart to do what men can’t do.
  • Marriage was developed to enable wife to brighten her future with husband in the most reliable way for longevity and probable success.
  • Her natural adjustability and survivability enable wife to overcome the weaknesses of husband that work against family togetherness and longevity.
  • Husband, being primarily a producer, is great at accomplishments. But wife, being primarily a processor, is best qualified to integrate manly accomplishments with the unexpected changes in the process of married life.
  • Either members of the superior gender flex their feminine strength in order to balance the dominance of the other gender, or male dominance over time works inevitably in the direction of enslaving women.
  • There are two conditions required to contain male dominance within a suitable balance for fairness between the sexes, marriage and the absence of unmarried sex.
  • If wives don’t dominate the culture, society follows the lead of male dominance. Morality and religious values are the mainstays of feminine leadership in cultural values, standards, and expectations for society. It takes feminine and wifely leadership to convince men to live up to someone bigger than themselves, specifically God, wife, children, country, culture.

Love, commitment, friendship, cooperation, devotion, and cherished females do not achieve their worth in society until and unless women convince men to live up to someone bigger than themselves. Only wives have enough access to and influence with the male heart and mind to achieve it. Men disappointed with their wives lose interest in doing what wives want and expect.

I hate to end on that sour note, but modern women are making it happen. Unmarried sex discourages marriage and without marriage we don’t have enough wives to change the direction of America. When sex for pleasure prevails, marriage fails.

Whatever comes of country and marriage in the future, the key interface will be that between male and female love as God designed, Nature endows, and hormones energize. Bless you ladies for carrying on to preserve what went before and used to protect women in the U.S. better than anywhere else in the world or in history.

I kind of got carried away, ladies, and covered too much ground in one post. Unfortunately for you, it’s not the end of either my writing or personal weaknesses.

13 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter, How she wins, sex differences

2254. Masculine Love in Six Stages


It’s another paradox of human nature. Primarily men are producers and women are processors. Yet, women can produce a loving relationship almost instantaneously while masculine love develops through a six-stage process.

Women tend to measure a man’s love by the way she loves; that is, displays of care, affection, and frequent confirmation of their importance one to the other with the firm conviction that words are adequate to convey feeling. Men don’t do it that way. Masculine feelings develop from and tend to follow their actions instead of either his or her words.

A man’s love of a woman is a methodical process that develops in six stages. First, he finds her likeable enough to be loyal to her. Second, he sees that she finds him likeable enough to be loyal to him. Third, he uses words to commit himself to court her exclusively (although she probably initiates it). Fourth, he frequently and repeatedly pleases himself by pleasing her with actions that reflect her importance to him. (She shouldn’t expect it to match her expectations for affectionate words and intimacy.) Fifth, after months of such actions that program his subconscious, devotion develops in his heart. Her worth to him rises and the possibility of having to do without her stirs his imagination. Sixth, imagined anxiety of losing her stirs him to doubling his effort to please her for that purpose rather than to please himself. Thus, he cherishes her.

All women want to be cherished, but some make mistakes that harm their relationship. Here are a few female reactions that sours cherishment:

  • Being cherished is woman’s idea both in concept and whether she is cherished or not. Men treat their woman as it makes them feel good about themselves. If they enjoy pleasing her, then it could be devotion or cherishment but what to call it or what it means is of little concern to them. Bringing up such subjects turns men off. It’s too close to relationship management.
  • He’s a pushover for what she wants or expects out of him. His cherishing her reminds her of puppy love. Too much fawning over and submissive to her, and so she loses respect.
  • She feels deprived that signs of his love are not expressed as affection and intimacy. So, she seeks to have him change his habits. A man may change to suit the woman he cherishes, but it reminds that the most important person in his life doesn’t like him, which is one of the four legs that holds a man’s love together.
  • She expects to hear more than she sees if she is so cherished. So, frustrations set in and she tries to fix it by pressuring him to be more intimate with words. It points in another way that he’s inadequate; few women can do that and keep their relationship.
  • Being cherished is the best she can get out of a man. Does she deserve it? From him? Or, should she have chosen less of a man because that’s all she deserves? Guilt anyone?
  • She doesn’t think she’s good enough to be cherished by him. Consequently, what should be a swollen self-image shrinks, her self-worth slides down, and she easily becomes depressed. It sends subliminal but undeserved messages to him that he’s less than adequate as her mate, which reminds that if not her, he knows he’s a good mate for someone else.
  • She deserves magnificent gifts as proof that he cherishes her. She grows to resent gifts or signs of less value than she deserves, which makes those less than magnificent reduce his value to her, which rebukes his cherishing her, which demeans his efforts to please her, which makes her less likeable, which means her loyalty isn’t trustworthy, which kills his love.

If she expects to be cherished with words, she’s in for disappointment; men primarily cherish through actions. Loyalty earns commitment, which is foundation for devotion to develop, which morphs into cherishment if she provides the time and allows him to please himself by pleasing her. The greatest price she has to pay is to remain as likeable and loyal to him as he expects.

8 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, feminine, How she loses, sex differences

2253. Compatibility Axioms #811-820


811. Your failed marriage boils down to this: You chose the wrong man, tried to change him into Mr. Right, or changed yourself into a woman different than the one he married. [279]

812. Men must be taught to treat a woman according to her expectations. Men learn it fast, best, and long-term by being deprived of conquest. [274]

813. Repeated failure to conquer intensifies his drive to overcome her resistance. Determination spreads out of frustration. Prolonged frustration shifts his primary interest to her as woman worthy of him as her prerequisite of conquest. A conqueror doesn’t quit if the target is worthy of his best effort, which she both defines and expects. [274]

814. If you accept being embarrassed when with men or a man, you misuse and will lose one of your greatest strengths—female modesty. [279]

815. If you tolerate immoral behavior in a man, don’t expect his strength of character to help fulfill your feminine hopes and dreams.   [279]

816. You can expect disputes and should neutralize these sex differences when creating a home together: To you, décor and fashion take priority. To him, functionality makes much more sense. You must find harmony. [279]

817. You seek to be in charge of your future. Best bet calls for bonding with a man spiritually and devotedly before sexually. Why? Sex doesn’t bond men. Spirituality tames masculine aggressiveness and imposes family responsibility. Devotion to one woman seals his side of friendship and permanence.  [279]

818. You can focus on the big things that hold a couple together—love, friendship, commitment. However, you’ll do better to focus on avoiding, quieting, and suppressing the little unacceptable irritants, fixations, and offensive habits that slowly shred love into bits and pieces. [279]

819. Tell any man what he’s doing wrong in the sex department and expect unintended consequences. [281]

820. A man readily assumes that each woman appreciates his sexual performance, or something is wrong with her. [281]

10 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, feminine

Blog 2252 — Her Wrinkles are Good


Her Highness Beloved at 2251 probably doesn’t realize she paid me the kindest compliment. She enabled me to think through a troublesome problem, that of wives blaming loss of husbands on female aging. I use facial wrinkles as the most prominent symbol that women use of their aging.

The sexes age very differently. For this article, I reduce it to two major causes and effects. She loses her youthful appearance and tries to restore it. He loses his sexual ability and tries to rejuvenate it. Out of shame, ignorance, and lack of concern of the other’s nature, they don’t try to compensate together but instead do unhelpful things for their marriage.

Sir Eric recently pointed out that men are primarily attracted to youthful looking females with narrow waists that produce an ‘hour-glass’ appearance. True, but those two factors take on a simpler role in marriage. (She’s already conquered and his urge to conquer others is quieted by marital obligation.)

Her youthfulness is a major part of the glue of their togetherness; it reminds him of his youthful capability or what he wishes he still had. She’s great to have around as reminder of what he once was and had for looks and ability. He sees her change, more from mature actions than appearance. Her wrinkles are not central, just a very small part of her morphing image. Nowhere near the importance that she gives them.

Nevertheless, she blames her wrinkles as losing her beauty and believes that he—were he not so considerate—also thinks the same. Consequently, women overreact about wrinkle development. They easily get lost hoping to find a way to ease their personal pain in hope of assuaging husband’s regret which doesn’t exist.

Her hour-glass waist attracts primarily for sex. Her body attracts his. She’s great to have around as reminder of what he once was and had in bed. Body wrinkles don’t interfere much with sex. The really important things to men don’t change that much with age: lips, vagina, clitoris, eyes, ears, hair, breasts, plus cute or appealing mannerisms she displays during sex. Body wrinkles interfere with touch, perhaps, but a man’s body is also changing before his eyes and aging becomes acceptable with adjustments to expectations.

The Wifely Dilemma. That’s the surface but not the whole story. It deserves expansion of thought because women use wrinkles as an alibi for being cheated on or abandoned. IOW, they let wrinkles motivate them to do wrong things for marriage.

  • Female vanity has a natural purpose. By paying close attention to making herself look her best, she learns to live with, deal with, and adjust to accepting the wrinkling that comes with age. The absence of daily attention, facial care, and mirror time turns wrinkles into a much bigger deal than warranted. (The more they are looked at, the less important they become.)
  • Youthful appearance attracts and holds a man’s interest because it helps justify loving her. Tiny waist attracts him sexually and sex with her confirms his continued interest and love. (Unsuccessful sex casts doubt on his decisions about loving her. I know, women don’t let unsuccessful sex stop their loving their man. But men love very differently from women.)
  • Gracious aging reminds a husband how smart he was to team up with her. She continues to be the gal for whom he gave up his independence. (When husband thinks about his or her aging, wrinkles play no part; too many other things are more important to the masculine side of married life.)
  • As couples age, other emotional connections develop and reinforce a marriage around other than youthful appearance. The sexual hopes and dreams of men do not age but their sex drive declines. So, late in marriage, a thin waist is more appealing to a husband than a youthful face, which means that wrinkles don’t damage the marital landscape nearly as much as overeating for many years.
  • The husbandly view of wives fits this model for life. When they met, he found her emotionally attractive, loyal and likeable as a promising fit for his personality and ambitions, and married her on that basis. Her sexual attractiveness held him spellbound until conquest and subsequent sexual relations reinforced her likeability. Simple, two factors. 1) Her loyalty and likeability confirmed his love and brought him into marriage. 2) Their sexual relations confirm his wisdom about 1).
  • As they age, youthfulness and waist size merge to become part of their relationship. 1) Her loyalty and likeability continue to hold him and wrinkles play no part. 2) Sexual relations deteriorate with his aging and he forever looks for ways to restore his vigor with imaginative prods to his libido. Her sexual ability doesn’t age although her interest may, which may discourage her from helping husband restore his sexual thought and vitality in bed.
  • Husbands neither dump wives nor chase trophies because of wrinkles, so wives do better when they rethink their relationship management style and practice and perhaps calm their ego in the process.
  • Men take aging as inevitable and wrinkles for granted. Of course, women can’t stand being taken for granted, and so they imagine all kinds of spousal discrimination as they pass through middle age and into senior-ville. It’s wasted effort; far better for wives to focus on more meaningful shortcomings that may have crept into their marital persona.
  • Women resent their wrinkles as taking away their beauty. Nature works quite contrary to that. It compensates and better than a face lift too. Men see it this way. Face lifts may remove wrinkles but they also remove lines that add character that nature uses to replace youthfulness with dignity and virtuous maturity. Men prefer signs of strong character to faux youthfulness. They can’t respect what appears to be phony and face lifts produce that impression however subliminal it may be.
  • Wives like to believe that men abhor wrinkles. It provides an alibi. Changes in appearance due solely to aging are beyond her responsibility, so she has an excuse for letting both appearance and relationship deteriorate as if caused by aging. She can blame him as finding fault with her aging and ignore the other things that displease husbands.
  • Woman-think does not make men think like women. That her appearance changes solely from aging means little to men. However, husbands begrudge bad habits that produce less desire for sex or that make them appear as suckers or worse to their masculine peer competitors.
  • If men ever claim a lady’s wrinkles to be offensive, something much deeper and drawn out over time is behind it; wrinkles are the facade. The male nature urges men to motivate themselves to move forward with what they have and not get hung up on what they can’t change. Aging is easily acceptable to men, although the male ego sometimes gets in the way of his aging graciously (e.g., outlandish mid-life crisis.)
  • If husband loves wife, her aging fits right in with his. He’s not going to cheat or dump her because of her wrinkles. Husbands dump wives because they lose their likeability and loyalty to their man. Just one example, he stays in excellent shape and health and she lets herself go to hell in a handbasket. It’s not her aging per se. It’s her unwillingness to stay abreast of his lifestyle—in this example—that means much to him and for which the relationship expert must accept responsibility.
  • Men expect and live easily with slow aging and deliberate acceptance. Except, perhaps, when their woman goes overboard spending hard-earned money—unnecessarily to men—for face lift and other appearance changes the pursuit of which changes her role in his life to that of someone he didn’t marry.

The Single Woman’s Dilemma.

  • I disclose a bias. I personally favor tummy tucks as more appealing to husbands and am against face lifts because they are more appealing to wives. To me, the former aids compatibility and the latter weakens it. Money spent on compatibility is more beneficial than that spent on the female ego. But that’s just this man’s opinion.
  • As for single women, I don’t fault face lifts. But women should be advised of this. To remove wrinkles for the sake of being differently attractive for the next guy can be beneficial. If her reason is to like herself better, it won’t be beneficial and she’s wasting money.

Pardon, ladies. I’ve made a bigger thing out of facial wrinkles than I initially intended. But I don’t have the time to shorten it.

20 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter, feminine, How she loses, sex differences

2251. The 2-year glitch, 7-year itch, and 20-year switch


This was posted 1/19/08 as the 65th on this blog. It’s not been changed here.

It’s a cinch. Three monumental events face each marriage. Prevention starts years earlier. Avoidance is difficult. Recovery makes the steep slope slickier, but it toughens mates.

The two-year glitch arrives quietly as romantic love fades away in a couple’s second year together. Both undergo transformation. If an enduring kind of love has not developed mutually, separation is not far off.

The foundation for the man’s enduring love is laid in the respect she has earned, especially before conquest, and her likeability as a mate. The base of her enduring love is the current and anticipated gratefulness for him and what he does.

The seven-year itch arrives when his wandering eye opens. Devotion to her and commitment to vows are essential for survival.

She’s in charge. Seven years earlier she chose a man susceptible to wander. Or, she chose a man devoted instead of just committed to her; a man with sufficient character to honor his vows.

The twenty-year switch arrives when he wants to start over and hopes to do so with a trophy.

It’s a dream he’s harbored for years, because his sense of significance has been fading, needs rejuvenation, and he’s just dying to prove it to himself with an attractive woman.

12 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

2250. Paradise Crumbles While We Argue


At post 2245 Sir Eric asked me to describe my position on gay marriage, which I condemn as morally, religiously, and politically wrong but those are three different arguments for another time perhaps. When Eric asked, I was reluctant to offer my views; I consider gay marriage more a symptom than social disaster, less impactful than the political poison spread continually across our culture aka eating away the moral fabric of society.

Short History. These principles, practices, and traditions preceded that cultural decay:

  • Our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States, enabled previous Americans over a couple of centuries to morph two male-dominated religions—Christianity and Judaism—into our female-dominated Judeo-Christian culture. The superior female gender was enabled better than ever before to balance and keep the excesses of male dominance under control. The major albeit indirect influence originated and came from wives and ladies.
  • Wifely dominance peaked and faded with loss of mothers’ influence during the cultural and sexual revolutions of the 1960s. Adolescents emerged as rebels, pursued decadent lifestyles, and established societal expectations. Baby boomers took it upon themselves—in harmony with leftist activists—to change the public venue. Each new generation had to exceed the former. Willingly but without knowing, young females gave up their superior ability to balance male dominance. In the process, they also gave up their relationship expertise and empowered men to take charge of relationships for which men are ill-equipped and relationship permanence today reveals their incompetence for it.

Gay marriage is another political activist display of raising ‘victims” as if from ashes, this time the so-called demagoguery of Christianity. Many more than just the LGBT folks, politicized anti-Americans use issues such as gay marriage to keep us busy and not looking at how they destroy the American system without interference by the people. We argue among ourselves while the edifice (world power), structure (representative democracy), and foundation of the greatest nation on earth crumbles beneath our politically impotent anxiety.

Gay marriage is simply another symptom along the road to losing both our culture and sovereign nation. The process is almost complete. We’re already a communist-led, bureaucratic, regulatory, administrative state* where the dominant values, standards, and expectations are political and unfriendly to those outside the political class.

We’ve been moved from a Christian to a leftist secular nation; from a republic toward a totalitarian-capable police-state system; from state and local responsibility to federal control; from economic planning in the marketplace to central planning at federal level; from common decency to immoral focus; from rule of law to rule of man; from individualism to collectivism; from hetero sex as best for raising children to sex for adult pleasure; from two-party to one-party elections; from right granted by God to freedom determined only by central authority; from liberty for all to denial for those who object to excess government power; from personal responsibility to addiction to government gifts; from women as respectable and permanent mates to temporary pleasure playmates; from common sense judgments to political correctness; from cultural evolution by the majority to culture change by parlaying minority unrest; from morality dominated by respectable women to immorality dominated by narcissistic men; from men who respect women to men addicted to porn; from high and free spirit to depression as normal; from women who can capitalize on their relationship expertise to women who must act more like men to succeed as both playmates and in the marketplace.

Our Judeo-Christian heritage once enabled wives to directly dominate cultural values and indirectly dominate social progress. Now, we find ourselves confronted with cultural values, standards, and expectations controlled more by political imperatives such as political correctness and the death of common sense.

Compared to yesteryear, with the smaller number of wives relative to the population, the superior gender is no longer able to balance the dominant one. Women see their opportunities for happiness smashed on the rocks of men intent on conquering as many attractive women as possible and throwing the conquered aside as relationship debris. So many players, so many alpha wannabes, so few reliable men willing to devote themselves to family life, so little mutual respect one gender for the other, so little respect one man for one woman, and so much pleasure generated in response to desire for pleasure more than desire for compatibility, family responsibility, and mutual togetherness/companionship.

Living for pleasure breeds narcissism, which breeds hatred between interest groups, which helps divide neighborhoods and communities from common interest, which further empowers the political class. Our nation has turned this way for one reason crowded with individual rationalizing.

Christians stay home on election day. They find ways to rationalize away their obligation as responsible citizens. They follow their Christian conscience about the immorality of candidates, policies, and current issues. IOW, if candidates won’t live by Christian beliefs the voter has, they are not good enough to deserve the Christian’s vote. The citizen’s responsibility to vote is thus made irrelevant by the Christian conscience.

The symptoms shown above are the direct or indirect result of central planning by those who hate America. Our internal enemies are so far advanced, they ‘own’ the education system at all levels, have co-opted our elected representatives, forfeited legislative responsibility to the executive and judicial branches, and have reshaped the judiciary to favor minority over majority opinion. In turn, the U. S. and other governments are being combined with big business—such as financial and pharmaceutical—as the future for joint global governance.**

By influencing, persuading, and discouraging Christians to not vote, the Christian majority in the U.S. is reduced to a complaining bunch of do-nothings who primarily blame God by waiting for Him to save us. It’s easier to imagine the roar of lions in the coliseum than to hear support of unified Christian civic responsibility from pulpits. Left alone, we can expect Christians to continue to nullify their political influence by finding excuses to not vote. It’s shameful but just another major reason our country goes to hell in a handbasket carried by atheists, secularists, communists, leftists, Marxists, Progressives, liberals, and other opponents of traditional America and American exceptionalism.

——

*If you want to read about newly publicized, unbelievable, freedom-denying burdens foisted on Americans, read Charles Murray’s new book, “By the People.” He describes the regulatory and administrative state. It’s the domineering and bureaucratic government within the federal government, superior to state and local governments, and independent of our elected representatives and most of the judiciary.

**Historical Note. The Soviet Union’s experience taught communists two major lessons. 1) The Soviet form of communism failed because they could not overwhelm the middle class. You will note the middle class is being politically and economically reduced in size, unity, and influence in the U.S. today. 2) Central economic planning does not work. Too much blame attaches to government because planners have too little control and producers have too little authority to provide the desired results. Modern-day communists found a better way. The federal government already recruits big business as the middle man. Government central planners determine the results desired, they tell certain companies to make it so, and the companies shape their policies, production, and distribution to achieve the government goals. Example of central planning today. Requirements are for some number of potatoes, hogs, beeves, and corn to be produced next year. Too many potatoes takes away from corn production. Too many hogs eat up too much corn. Too much beef consumes too much distribution resources (fuel, etc.). The corn for ethanol needs to be doubled. And the marketplace cannot be allowed to make the decisions that balance supply and demand. So, government sets goals for the agriculture and meat processing industries and expects that something close to their plans will be the result. All problems and shortcomings thus become the fault of business and not government bureaucrats are already protected from elected representatives (see asterisk above). See how smart the communists are for dodging the bullets that made a mockery of Soviet central planning? Their game plan is proving to be flawless, two steps forward and one step back until economic control is complete and the future darkens for all of us.

25 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, Dear daughter, exes

2249. Christian Conscience vs. Citizen Responsibility


Elections are coming up. Debates will precede them. Each individual has to figure out what to do. I offer a pre-debate opinion.

The Christian majority that can overwhelm all other voting interests and determine America’s political future will either decide to vote or stay home. In recent elections it’s been the latter and non-Christian interests now govern America.

If your Christian conscience determines your action, you will stay home. No candidate can meet all the requirements of a highly conscientious Christian. That excuse to ignore citizen responsibility works well for those who choose to act irresponsibly to both country and fellow Christians.

Rationalizing is popular to justify Christian inaction and it’s easy to see where it brought us. Yes, non-voting Christians are not totally but primarily at fault for the moral decay, political excesses, and constitutional violations that plague this ex-greatest nation on earth. No other interest group is as concerned with those factors.

Everyone has to vote for someone less qualified than desired. It’s not a violation but a duty under Christian principles to fulfill our moral, legal, and legitimate responsibilities. Your fellow Christians depend on your ability to help them govern the governors, halt the march toward tyranny, restore our freedoms.

We all have to live with our decisions but first we have to make the ones that promote our interest. In elections, that means vote with other Christians in common cause. Non-voting Christians betray their fellow believers in both God and country.

Guy

P.S. With the Christian genocide proceeding in many parts of the world, does anyone hear the roar of lions in our American coliseum? It’s enough to make Christians paranoid, and I say, PARANOIDS, UNITE and get out the whole Christian vote. (I wish we had some pastors among readers, but most have been co-opted or made too fearful by federal pressures.)

G.

9 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, Dear daughter