chesley wrote:
“I very seldom say this, but you are totally wrong.
The woman has the right to say whatever she wants. But there are always consequences for our actions. The church disagrees with her at a fundamental level. Should she convert to Islam, would that be enough in your mind for the church to separate itself from this couple?
No one owes anyone anything. The church does not owe her husband a position. And why should it give him one from which to spout views at variance with its own?
“Freedom of speech” is about government interference. ONLY!
Not the responses of private individuals to offensive speech so long as it doesn’t interfere with the lives and property of others.
And that comment about women having bridles in their mouths and short whips, etc. What does that have to do with anything? Totally gratuitous and reveals something about your mind.
The thing is, a married couple is a unit, and the husband is certain positions of responsibility, not just in the church, but in the corporate world, will be judged on his wife’s behavior. Not necessarily as to his character, but as to his suitability to fill that position. There’s nothing wrong with that. Does a corporate officer from GM advise his friends to buy a Ford?”
I guess you haven’t interfaced with many GI wives, have you?
What's that?
But, if you mean “GM wives”, then no.
But what does that have to do with anything.
I worked for Republic steel once. They had a rule that you could only drive an American automobile on their property. One co-worker had a wife who drove a Toyota. He never brought in on their property, but the plant manager saw her in it one day, and told the man to get rid of the car.
What do you think he did?