Quoting Quiverfull: No Votes or Anything Else For Women?

by Vaughn Ohlman of Persevero News – unFair Fatherhood

The state, currently, has emasculated men. Men who, in a former age, would die rather than allow anyone to kill their child are now ‘forced’ to stand back and allow the mother of their child to ask ‘doctors’ and ‘nurses’ to kill their child for them.

Even a husband, the father of the child, will be forced by the state to ‘stand back’. Grief unimaginable… and these husbands do, indeed, stand back. “It is her choice,” is the mantra.

Except it isn’t. Or, at least, it isn’t supposed to be. God’s law doesn’t make it the woman’s choice.

Her choice to kill the child: obviously not. Such an act is forbidden by God’s law. The mother, doctor, nurses, and judges who allow or command such an act should be put to death.

But Scripture goes beyond that. Way beyond that. The wife is supposed to be obeying her husband ‘in everything’.[I Peter 3] How far we have come from that!

Some denominations, nowadays, have made it a rule that churches must send one man and one woman to ruling conferences and the like. The idea is that they are trying for ‘equality’ and ‘to get the woman’s perspective’. But surely this must be a denial of either Biblical doctrine or simple logic. If the woman is obeying her husband ‘in everything’ then this includes, obviously, her vote and the opinions she expresses.

So what is the point of the woman at the meeting? It must either be because their logic has not reasoned out that a woman who is obeying her husband is a mere intermediary in a meeting, or else because they deny the doctrine itself.

Our society has put this in place with the woman’s vote. And I would be willing to guess that the men complaining of ‘unFair Fatherhood’ are amongst the chief proponents of women voting. The woman who votes is either voting in agreement with her husband or father, or in opposition. And if in opposition, then this system denies the very authority that God has put in place for families, an opposition which has led inexorably to the situation we have. Or if an agreement then what is the point? Adding to the vote of successful patriarchs? Somehow I doubt this was the plan.

You can’t have it both ways. Either our society is going to accept Biblical law or we aren’t. If we are, then things are going to have to  change, and change radically, in the area of fornication and sex roles. If we aren’t, then these men have nothing to stand on, nothing to appeal to.

Satan loves the current situation. In the world and in the church God’s Word is being blasphemed. Where God’s Word calls for young fruitful marriage and the ever increasing blessing of children, the world calls for fornication and child murder and the church calls for barren and blasphemous celibacy.

But the modern church, including the writers of the Life Site News Article, are unable to see where the answer must, perforce, lie: in a return to the authority of God’s Word and God’s Law. The church needs to make up its mind. Will it follow the narrow path of Scripture? Or the wide path leading to destruction, the modern path, the easy and ‘tolerant’ path, where ‘all men are paid for existing, and no man must pay for his sins’?[Rudyard Kipling, The God's of the Copybook Headings]

Comments open below

QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders and ask our readers: What do you think? Agree? Disagree? This is the place to state your opinion. Please, let’s keep it respectful – but at the same time, we encourage readers to examine the ideas of Quiverfull honestly and thoughtfully.

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment‘ by Janet Heimlich

Quivering Daughters‘ by Hillary McFarland

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement‘ by Kathryn Joyce

 

About Suzanne Calulu
  • http://www.nightphoenix.com Amaranth

    *snort* Celibacy is blasphemous now? I can’t help but think St. Paul would have something to say about that… :/

  • Saraquill

    Wow, this man is incredibly insecure.

  • Kristen Rosser

    This man has turned the Bible into a god in order to make men the only real humans, and women merely appendages and slaves.

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    1) “The state, currently, has emasculated men. Men who, in a former age, would die rather than allow anyone to kill their child are now ‘forced’ to stand back and allow the mother of their child to ask ‘doctors’ and ‘nurses’ to kill their child for them.”-Vaughn

    Whoa! There are remarkably many women who abort largely because of pressure from their fathers or boyfriends. Men are not poor victims who stand back while they really want the children. In fact, one male commenter on my blog recently complained how unfair it is that women can abort their children and men cannot (unless they can influence their female partners to feel the same). He don’t want to save children – he wants to kill them too!

    2) As for women obeying husbands in everything, that is not in my Bible. Having to obey husbands at all (not in everything) is only in one spot in some Bibles, because of bad translation. It is not in the untranslated Greek.

    3) It is terrible logic to say WOMEN should not vote/ be representatives if WIVES should obey husbands – some women are not wives. There is a God who cares about justice towards widows and orphans – would he say the widow and orphan should have no voice?

    4) “Satan loves the current situation. In the world and in the church God’s Word is being blasphemed. Where God’s Word calls for young fruitful marriage and the ever increasing blessing of children, the world calls for fornication and child murder and the church calls for barren and blasphemous celibacy.”-Vaughn

    Blasphemous celibacy? “1Co 7:27 … Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife.” “1Co 7:33-34 but he that is married is careful for the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and is divided. So also the woman that is unmarried and the virgin is careful for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married is careful for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.”

    And where does the Word call for young marriage? Ps 127:4 is not a command, unlike 1 Cor 7:27.

    5) The church could follow the “narrow path” without giving attention to anything Vaughn say. Vaughn cherry-picks and ignore everything in the Bible that does not fit in with his view, like how not marrying is as much “commanded” in the Bible as marrying, or how the Bible is really much harder – in the one spot it mentions causing miscarriage – on killing women than killing the unborn. (A monetary fine for killing the unborn, “an eye for an eye/ life for a life for killing or hurting the mother.)

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    He actually uses the Bible as a smorgasbord – picks only the bits he like best, to serve his agenda.
    The Bible is not his god – for that, he would have treated the text with more respect, appreciating it in a less one-sided manner.

  • persephone

    I would love to know Vaughn’s back story. That is some incredibly screwed up talk.

  • Madame

    I never knew “obeying in everything” meant having no opinion. Sorry, Vaugn, you can obey and still disagree very strongly.

  • Madame

    unmarried women were under the authority of their fathers and widows were under the authority of the church unless they remarried.

    (I’m not endorsing his ideas)

  • Madame

    He’s a very poor excuse of a man, I think. Poor wife. Poor kids.

  • Madame

    “Whoa! There are remarkably many women who abort largely because of
    pressure from their fathers or boyfriends. Men are not poor victims who
    stand back while they really want the children.”
    This is often true. Many abortions could be prevented if the fathers would assume responsibility for their offspring.

  • newcomer

    “Either our society is going to accept Biblical law or we aren’t.”

    This woman votes for ‘aren’t.’ Especially this guy’s bizarro version of Biblical law.

  • Baby_Raptor

    Who is out there murdering children right and left? Actual children, I mean. A first trimester pregnancy is not a child. It’s not even a baby. Words have meanings, fundies. You don’t get to change them simply because you disagree.

    And the God of the bible *ordered* abortions in the Old Testament. He ordered husbands of women who they’d thought were unfaithful to drag them to the Priests, who would then make the woman drink a concoction that would abort a pregnancy. He also commanded his Soldiers to rip the fetuses from pregnant womens’ wombs. Sure doesn’t sound pro-forced birth to me.

    But, hey. When were the fundies ever known for telling the truth?

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    Never mind women voting. How could any civilized society allow Vaughn Ohlman to vote?

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    Where does God command “his Soldiers to rip the fetuses from pregnant womens’ wombs?”

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    Mara struggled to get in here to comment, so she responded on her blog to the above comment: http://frombitterwaterstosweet.blogspot.com/2013/06/men-that-are-ignorant-of-history.html

  • mayarend

    “Either our society is going to accept Biblical law or we aren’t. ”

    Well, we aren’t.

  • Theo Darling

    LOL biblical law? No thanks.

  • Baby_Raptor

    Apologies for the delay in responding; I work nights and am asleep most of the day.

    These are the two that a quick Googling brought up:

    Hosea 13:16

    2 Kings 15:16 mentions it being done, though it doesn’t say God ordered it.

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    The first text prophesy that it will happen, the second say it happened. Neither say God ordered it.

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    You don’t have to apologize for taking time to respond.

  • Independent Thinker

    This has been preached for the last five years from the pulpit of Vision Forum ministries at every homeschooling convention they are invited to speak at. Just another mouthpiece of the movement spewing the same redundant talking points set forth by Vision Forum and other like minded “ministries”.

  • aim2misbehave

    “Her choice to kill the child: obviously not. Such an act is forbidden by
    God’s law. The mother, doctor, nurses, and judges who allow or command
    such an act should be put to death.”

    No, no, he’s got it all wrong, according to God’s law (Exodus 21:22) the judges should be telling the doctors and nurses how much to pay the woman’s husband for causing the fetus to die!

  • gimpi1

    Again, Mr. Ohlman proves just how round-the-bend he is. All I have to say is I couldn’t be more grateful that I live under SECULAR law, not Mr. Ohlman’s version of God’s law. He ought to be, too. Under the kind of totalitarian rule he seems to want, it’s only a matter of time before they start turning on their own. Oh, wait, of course, in order to know that. Mr. Ohlman would have to know some actual history. Never mind.

  • http://ourgirlsclub.blogspot.com/ Ginny Bain Allen

    A life begins at conception. Period. As soon as a woman conceives, she is carrying a human baby, not a flying squirrel or any other animal. There is no moment that what has been conceived all of a sudden magically transforms into a human. It is conceived a human, and it is referred to as a baby from conception on. Yes, words have meanings, and just because you are in moral rebellion against life doesn’t make it any less a baby. Your words are convoluted and devoid of meaning.
    God is THE one who gives and takes away, however He chooses to do it. Not humans! He is God and we are NOT! Period.

  • http://ourgirlsclub.blogspot.com/ Ginny Bain Allen

    Obviously you need to study history the way it REALLY happened, not the lies that are taught in our secular government schools. You have no clue about the truth concerning the separation of church and state! NO CLUE! You have been done a grave injustice by this corrupt world!

  • gimpi1

    Actually, I have a pretty good grounding in Western history, from the medieval period through the 20th century. I’m a bit stronger in early European history, and pretty well set up on the founding of the United States. My interest starts to wander around WWII, and I admit, my knowledge of Oriental and African history is rudimentary at best, with the exception of Pharaohnic Egypt. I’m guessing that’s not what you’re referring to, however.

    I assure you, we live in a secular state. Virtually every historian agrees with this, as has the Supreme Court. And my knowledge of European history shows me just what a good thing that is. No religious wars. No pogroms. Only one witch-hunt of note. No mass heresy trials. Much better than the mess Europe experienced. That’s a big chunk of what motivated our founders to create a secular state.

    Then again, if I remember right, you might like to try a few heretics. I know Mr Ohlman would.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Your evidence? Not seeing it.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Petty personal attacks are not allowed on other posters in comments. Calm the fuck down or I will ban you.

  • http://ourgirlsclub.blogspot.com/ Ginny Bain Allen

    You are rebellious, hard-hearted, stubborn and narcissistic. That’s why you refuse to “see it.”

  • http://ourgirlsclub.blogspot.com/ Ginny Bain Allen

    The depravity of this world won’t allow me to “calm down.”

  • texcee

    Kettle, meet Pot.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    The sad thing to me is that we probably know each other from my years as a fundy traveling to conferences and doing teaching myself in your area. Yet, you personally attack me, the moderator/admin on No Longer Quivering instead of making a rational argument using supporting facts/material. I’ve banned you from posting at NLQ again until you can learn to be civil with the other commenters.

  • fiona64

    The mother, doctor, nurses, and judges who allow or command such an act should be put to death.

    A trifle late to the party … but this just goes to show how much lunacy there is in the anti-choice/forced birth/Quiverfull movement. They call themselves “pro-life” when it comes to a non-sapient, non-sentient embryo … but have no qualms about calling for the murder of born, sapient, sentient persons.

    Why am I not surprised that this nutjob is against women’s suffrage as well?

  • fiona64

    Or, if the woman is suspected of being unfaithful, force her to consume an abortifacient! (Numbers 5)

  • fiona64

    It is conceived a human, and it is referred to as a baby from conception on.

    Yeah, not so much. The stages of human development (actually, they are identical for all viviparous vertebrates, but we’ll go with this for now) are: conception, zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus. This is all in utero. Once it is ex utero, we have infant, child, adolescent, adult.

    “Baby” is actually an emotional term that comes form a root word meaning “to swaddle.” I prefer to use medically accurate terms for stage of development. A conceptus is not an infanta.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X