Skip to comments.Conservative pundit Dinesh D'Souza steps down from Manhattan evangelical Christian college after
Posted on 10/19/2012 5:24:56 AM PDT by lowbridge
Conservative pundit Dinesh DSouza was forced to quit as president of an evangelical Christian college in Manhattan after it came to light that he became engaged to a young woman while he was still married.
DSouza, 51, had brought his 29-year-old fiancée to a religious conference, and they shared a hotel room.
His resignation from The Kings College was announced Thursday by Andy Mills, chairman of the institutions board of trustees.
A former Ronald Reagan aide, DSouza is a best-selling conservative author and director of the controversial documentary 2016: Obamas America which cast a critical eye at the Presidents upbringing and early influences. The film has grossed more than $33.4 million in the United States, making it the fourth-most successful documentary of all time.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Full title: Conservative pundit Dinesh D'Souza steps down from Manhattan evangelical Christian college after unholy tryst
I had no idea that it is considered wrong in Christian circles to be engaged prior to being divorced, even though in a state of separation and in divorce proceedings, DSouza wrote.
You must have not followed your lawyer’s advice, bro.
I never trusted him. He has an odd manner about him.
Can’t say that I blame him. He’s not that attractive but she certainly is!
Who cares??? What D’Sousa does in his personal life is his business. D’Sousa is not the problem, Communist Barack Hussein Obama is....and D’Sousa has done a maginificent service to his country exposing the farce and America Hater/Destroyer that Obama is!!! End of story!!!
It matters if you are president of an evangelical college. He has to “practice what they preach.”
Honest question for evangelicals: why do so many evangelical Christians tolerate divorce when Jesus spoke so clearly about it in the Gospel?
With so much literal interpretation of the Old Testament, it has always seemed odd to me that Protestants view the words of Jesus himself as “negotiable.”
I have read that divorce rates are about the same for Christians and non-Christians. In Malachi God says “I hate divorce”. Apparently lots of Christians just don’t care.
I guess he was being a big fat liar in this article then:
Careful, FRiend: this Protestant Christian and many others takes seriously his vows before God to be faithful to one woman “till death do us part”.
Two things I see - first, he’d been separated from his ex for two years. This is an affair? Second, Obama and the Thugs are out to get him, and will do whatever they can to bring him down. 2016 was NOT appreciated at the WH. This smells like skunk stink to me.
Divorce is probably the single most damaging social phenomenon of our time, and yet many Christians have essentially vacated the field of battle.
I wish that evangelicals would work with Catholics to restore the actual words of Jesus to their proper place of primacy in mainstream Christian theology and social thought.
Good for you! I know many, many Protestants who agree with you.
My issue is with the church leadership. Why don’t most Protestant churches preach the actual words of Jesus on this issue, when they take a literal view of so much of the rest of the Bible.
Does not move Obama a whit in the polls.
But it does serve notice to all in the future who might dare to be so cheeky as to make such a movie.
Saul would be so proud.
So he’s not perfect either. But he stepped down and paid the price for his actions. (Nothing he did was illegal)
This is unlike Democraps who continue to proclaim their innocense even though there is no history of cherokee blood in their family OR a valid (not forged) birth certificate.
The fact that he made mistakes in his life DOES NOT change one single fact in his documentary about Obama.
I agree. I am totally against homosexual “marriage”, but sometimes I wish Christians would work on building up strong heterosexual marriage. A lot of churches now have Divorce Care. They need to work on preventing divorce. It has become too acceptable. I remember growing up when divorce was scandalous. You assumed if a couple divorced, adultery was the reason. Now you can wake up and decide you don’t want to be married any more and get a divorce. No-fault divorce destroyed a lot of families. And children suffer the most.
First, he was already SEPARATED from his wife for nearly two years before he even met his “fiancee”!
Second, “engaged” has no legal meaning. He was in a committed intimate relationship after his marriage had failed. Engagement is a cultural tradition. (And our culture has no suitable word for such an adult relationship without an engagement; “girlfriend” is juvenile, and “partner” is legalistically cold).
Third: The “got around to filing for divorce” only after he introduced her may have plenty of reasons. There are many reasons to delay filing, and they might actually be in the interest of the ex-wife. The wife may in fact have precipitated the divorce. And delaying may have greatly enriched her.
Fourth: I’m fascinated by this story, because I’m in a very similar situation, with the ages and dates almost identical. The only difference is that I met my new gal a week after the divorce was final (Thank you, God!). But because the divorce was a fast one (initiated by her, thankfully) It was uncomfortable when people saw me with my new girl when they hadn’t even heard I was divorced.
Fifth: While I’m waiting for the old Catholic marriage to be declared a nullity under the rules of the church, I have to wrestle with delaying an engagement until no longer married in the eyes of the church.
Sixth: Dinesh’s gal might be nearly as beautiful as mine, but there’s no way she’s as sweet and loving.
So hes not perfect either.
I suspect the husband of Dinesh’s new squeeze may disagree with that analysis.