Quoting Quiverfull: Why Hand Holding in Courtship is a Slippery Slope to Sin?

Quoting Quiverfull: Why Hand Holding in Courtship is a Slippery Slope to Sin? January 22, 2016

quotingquiverfullby Anonymous from their blog Necessarily Anonymous – How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Arranged Marriages Part 2

Editor’s note: This is a newer quiverfull marry ’em off while they are young once daddy picks the spouse blogger I found through our old pal Vaughn Ohlman. I’m always dismayed to see Christians so hung up on every single small thing that they have to stop, study scripture and then extrapolate what they’ve read into ever more strict rules and don’ts. That type of legalism is a killer. It doesn’t ‘save’ people from sin, it only makes them sneak around in a guilty fashion.

These penalties seem to be harsh, death in the case of classic adultery. It would naturally follow that the only standard for this penalty or remedy to apply is where the action is clearly in violation. In other words, just for a hand placed on a shoulder or breast, we would not see a death penalty. Nor would such things as mere touching or kissing remove a girl’s virginity. Oral sex (in either direction) would also not make the girl not a virgin. There is no clear line except vaginal intercourse. Yes, this leaves open a lot of stuff. But we know that from Matthew 5, that to even look on a woman to lust after her is adultery in our hearts. While there might not be a death penalty or forced marriage penalty for these cases, we know even thoughts in the heart can violate the spirit of the law. It is more reasonable to conclude that, like we already know, it is not appropriate to have any romantic feelings for your neighbor’s wife. Likewise, it is not appropriate to have romantic feelings for a girl not your wife (and vice versa for girls and not-their-husbands).
Based on this understanding of God’s righteous laws, I had to conclude that I had no rights to allow my daughter or her suitor to violate the spirit of the law and Matthew 5. I had no grounds to make one rule restricting kissing, but allowing hand holding or a romantic private phone conversation. Either I allowed all but premarital vaginal intercourse or I protected my daughter from premarital relationships. Some may say this is a false dichotomy, but I would have to ask those detractors to find the place which delineates Matt 5 plus the law and says women who aren’t married can have relationships and what would govern what they can and cannot do with anything close to the clarity I have already shown.
QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders, cultural enforcers and those that seek to keep women submitted to men 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 and Spiritual Abuse honestly and thoughtfully.

If this is your first time visiting NLQ please read our Welcome page and our Comment Policy!

Copyright notice: If you use any content from NLQ, including any of our research or Quoting Quiverfull quotes, please give us credit and a link back to this site. All original content is owned by No Longer Quivering and Patheos.com

Comments open below

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement by Kathryn Joyce

13:24 – A Story of Faith and Obsession by M Dolon Hickmon

""And just like that Debi is claiming how many formerly severely autistic children she’s seen ..."

Create a Better Brain Through Neuroplasticity ..."
"Every time you post another chapter overview I think this can't get any worse. But ..."

Create a Better Brain Through Neuroplasticity ..."
"In case you didn't look it up by now, home birth is natural pregnancy with ..."

Do Quiverfull Homeschooling Mothers Rely Too ..."
"You’re kinder than I am. I took a peek at their profile."

Create a Better Brain Through Neuroplasticity ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Saraquill

    I need to wash my eyes.

  • MizzKittay

    I need a lesson in this kind of logic. You can’t have feelings for each other before marriage? Perhaps dum-dum there is a reason the bible prohibits intercourse but is more slack on these other things? So the couple can get to know each other a bit better? Otherwise men will marry a women just because of lust. Lust can blind men as you are forever reminding us of. I’m left with three conclusions you’re either two-faced, really fucking stupid or perhaps both.

  • Allison the Great

    That blog is Rushdoony ass kissing. The bottom feeders that have posted there are into the whole Dominionist/Reconstructionist bullshit. These are the same types of people that decry Sharia Law and then praise Rushdoony in the same breath. They’re not smart enough to know that Sharia Law and Biblical Law are the same thing. Delusional fuckwits. I left a comment expressing as much.

    They’re trying to tell us that sex (and even hand holding, I mean REALLY?!?!?! ) before marriage warrants the death penalty? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?

  • Nea

    There is no clear line except vaginal intercourse. Yes, this leaves open a lot of stuff. As all those jokes about Catholic schoolgirls would let you know. Draw a line, people find a way around the line. Draw a clear line at vaginal and watch the oral and anal take its place.

    Based on this understanding of God’s righteous laws, I had to conclude that I had no rights Dude, you needed to stop right there. You REALLY needed to stop right there. Because the only “clarity in what [you’ve] shown” is that you have creepy ownership issues and a major false dichotomy.

  • Julia Childress

    Has this guy even read Matthew 15? “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” It clearly says that looking leads to sin. And allowing any conversation at all is equally dangerous. I mean, just hearing the sound of the beloved’s voice, a young man can start to imagine the source of those dulcet sounds. The smooth skin of her throat, her full lips, her tongue. Nope, no way. The clear answer to avoid adultery is to choose a mate for your child, make an arrangement with his/her parents, make the wedding plans, then introduce the bride and groom at the altar (she will be fully veiled until after the ceremony, of course).

  • Allison the Great

    This fuckwit has no rights at all when it comes to his daugher’s relationships. They’re none of his goddamn business. You’re right, it’s creepy as hell that he thinks that he does.

  • Mel

    I remember taking my first Church History class in eighth grade where we discussed the disagreements in theology that lead to the Protestant Reformation. I could not for the life of me figure out why the Catholic Church was so strongly opposed to having laity read the Bible. Over time, I understood – although still thought the Church was overreacting – to the potential dangers of letting people read the Bible without commentaries.

    Well, I was wrong. Bloggers like this exemplify why Biblical interpretation without grounding in literary and cultural understanding is terrifying. The injunction about “looking with lust = adultery” is a standard example of rabbinic hyperbole and has never been meant as an actual requirement.

  • Allyson Smith

    Oh for pity’s sake! The reason that vaginal intercourse before or outside of marriage was specifically prohibited was to prevent illegitimate babies from being born and to ensure that men that their kids with their wives were biologically theirs. That’s why nothing else is specifically prohibited.

  • pl1224

    Well stated, MissKittay–kudos!!! 🙂

  • Antoinette Herrera

    Shorter Anonymous: My daughter, my property, my rules. Because nobody has the right to perv over her but me, at least until the transfer, oops, wedding, has taken place.

  • pl1224

    And, for Heaven’s sake, watch out for those patent leather shoes!

  • pl1224

    Is it too much to hope that your above comment is meant as satire? What if her face is full of acne, her lips are thin, and her voice is like nails on a blackboard?

  • Donna Beth

    The last sentence ends “with the clarity I have already shown.” Clarity? Are you kidding me? I read just a bunch of bumble jibberish that makes no sense. Plus, I read it twice! I’m going for a snow walk and try to clear my head.

  • Julia Childress

    Totally satire. Sorry if I got your blood pressure up, but the idiocy of his argument just begged to be taken to its logical conclusion.

  • Anonyme

    I saw a donut and wanted to eat it. Now I’ve broken my diet, because I looked at it as if I was GOING to eat it.*

    Same logic, right?

    *Please be assured I am not comparing women to food as some evangelicals featured on NLQ have. Just deconstructing this RIDICULOUS analogy.

    I really would like a cinnamon donut, though…

  • Anonyme

    If my father was so involved in the state of my vagina, I’d be totally creeped out.

  • Allison the Great

    Same here. I’m of the opinion that the only person who should decide who has sex with me, is me. I’m sure that the vast majority of the world’s population of humans feels the same way.

  • Astrin Ymris

    Fortunately, ConcepcionImmaculadaPantalones left us an emergency eyewash station!

    http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3093/7215/original.gif

  • Astrin Ymris

    Translation: Nobody but Christian Patriarchs has any right to agency. Period.

  • SAO

    The world is full of gray. Whenever someone tries to put a line between black and white, either they allow a lot of dubious stuff or they are forbidding holding hands. Either way, the result is ridiculous.

    Trust people to use their judgement.

  • KarenH

    Re: cinnamon donut

    Well who WOULDN’T want one?? 😀

  • Abigail Smith

    Yeah, that approach worked with Josh Duggar (snark)
    Side hugs only—–> adultery is the logical conclusion if you look at the Duggar data….

  • Vaughn Ohlman

    Just to clarify, while it is true that you found this article via my blog, you do know that I don’t hold that particular view, eh?

  • Allison the Great

    Noted, Vaughn.

    Even though you don’t hold those exact same views, you’re still pretty fucked up.

  • BridgetD

    I’ve met a lot of people who have told me that context doesn’t matter when it comes to the Bible. :-/

    I simply can’t wrap my head around why someone wouldn’t think about or acknowledge the literary, historical, and cultural context surrounding ANY document or work, much less the Bible, given its age and how many times it has been translated/revised.

  • Nea

    Didn’t forget the incestuous child molestation because that’s apparently how “pure” boys satisfy their sexual curiosity.

  • Allison the Great

    Right. What was that number that Derp and Derpina Duggar gave on TV? 2/3 of quiverful families are into raping their children and siblings? And look how moral they are!

  • MizzKittay

    Why repost or connect yourself to a blog that you don’t agree with? I don’t post christian stuff on my facebook because I’m not a christian. Same idea yea?

  • Abigail Smith

    How could forget? Can’t blame that on the side hugs, though

    Watching your parents fondle each other both at home and national TV/ listening to them talk about sex constantly/yell “Nike” to avert their eyes—–> child molestation

  • Steph Lane

    You are right!

  • Friend

    This leap of illogic will tear your mental ACL: “…like we already know, it is not
    appropriate to have any romantic feelings for your neighbor’s wife.
    Likewise, it is not appropriate to have romantic feelings for a girl not
    your wife (and vice versa for girls and not-their-husbands).”

  • Vaughn Ohlman

    >>Why repost or connect yourself to a blog that you don’t agree with?

    An extremely odd question asked in a thread on a blog called ‘quoting quiverful’.

    Just like this blog I will frequently post people I disagree completely with, in order to try to show where they are wrong. However in this case the question isn’t whether I ‘agree’ or ‘disagree’ with the person themselves, but whether I agree with this one small aspect of their post. Or their philosophy.

    I believe the OP made a mistake as to what the nature of betrothal was, and avid readers of my blog will no doubt understand that. Just didn’t want the casual mention here to confuse anyone. I’m sure you can find thousands of things to disagree with me on, but I, myself, happen to believe that handholding (and more than handholding) is perfectly OK for the betrothed couple.

  • Aimee Shulman

    You joke but I was once at a wedding that featured a “transfer of headship” as part of the ceremony. I’ve never seen anything like it at a wedding before or since, and I’ve been to quite a few weddings of people who believe in wifely submission.

  • Evelyn

    Oh, that’s so gross. Eew.

  • Antoinette Herrera

    That’s quantum squick. Please pass the brain bleach.

  • persephone

    Purity culture: Causing terrible wedding nights and crappy sex lives since the 1st century CE.

  • persephone

    I have a language issue that has been known to embarrass sailors, but you are on fire today.

  • Allison the Great

    Thank you. I actually blushed when I read this. I take pride in my swearing.

  • guest

    We want our children to marry wisely, so let’s take the whole fun out of it. No more getting to know an interesting person, going on dates, even “courting” and feeling the butterflies, the excitement, the in-loveness…..ack. Do away with all that! It isn’t “Biblical” enough (except for that dirty little book called “Song of Songs”, but that’s all about a spiritual romance anyway, innit?)

    Who does he think he is to rob his sons and daughters from the pleasure and excitement of young love? What an awful, awful, power-thirsty man!

    ETA:This whole system is based on fear and lack of trust: Fear of mistakes, fear that God will zap anyone who makes a mistake, and lack of trust in their adult children’s ability to make good decisions (who raised them?) and in God’s ability to guide their adult children.
    It’s sad that people who claim to trust God are relying so heavily on the counsel of fear and lack of trust.

  • ConcepcionImmaculadaPantalones

    In case anyone needs a cat bath eyewash station:

  • Astrin Ymris

    Oh, yay! I love your Emergency Eyewash Stations so much. *purrs*

  • ConcepcionImmaculadaPantalones

    I aim for equal representation of puppehs and kittehs in emergency eyewash stations because it’s the right thing to do! 😛

  • Astrin Ymris

    Absolutely! ;-D

  • megaforte84

    … Why does this remind me of the way some upper-class classical-era Athenian wedding arranging had to involve proving the daughter in question existed to the prospective groom’s father because the cloistering of unmarried (and married) citizen women was that intense whenever possible?