“Family-making” values on public display by congresswoman Lauren Boebert?

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,226
Reaction score
11,150
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I think it's just as likely they have no idea, and this woman's people don't want her voters to know, if they can keep them from knowing.

Also, it's not hypocritical for a politician and their voters to say they care about one thing, but it's a means to an end for something else. That's not hypocrisy, that's lying, self-deception, ect ect.
I'd argue it's hypocrisy if they scream "What about the Children?" and attack "morally degenerate" behavior displayed by the "other side" of the aisle, though, while shrugging off or excusing even worse examples set by their own candidates and officials.

There's also the matter of hypocrisy from the Right re their imposition of so-called Biblical values in public life, as they fight for the right to discriminate against others at work, at school, in places of business, and even in medical settings, when the folks insisting on this right to refuse service yet don't follow the letter of the law wrt their religion either. This gal springs prominently to mind, but there have been plenty of others in this fight to establish the right to discriminate with religious freedom. A failure to apply those scriptures to their own life when they want to hold everyone else to said scriptures is definitely hypocrisy, and Lauren Boebert, a Christian Nationalist, is definitely guilty of this.

ElaineA's comment sums a lot of what's behind this up. The Right is really about preserving and re-establishing laws and social values where the powerful have near-total social freedom, where everyone else must live in the shadows. But they haven't (yet) come out and said this in so many words (aside from those guys on the internet or at parties who, when drunk, insist there should be different rules and morals for men and women, because biology, or God, or whatever excuse they are using today). Amusingly, Boebert probably wouldn't be electable (let alone forgiven for her public debauchery) in the kind of patriarchy she wants to impose.

Mind you, take anything I say with a grain of salt (a big one) regarding the motives of politically conservative evangelical Christian nationalists. I still can't figure out how people who say they worship the "Prince of Peace" can be so hung up on the right to bear arms, for instance. What would Jesus pack? My inclination is to think that they really don't believe in their religion at all and are cynically using it as a tool, but some of them must believe in all the self contradictory stuff, or it wouldn't be a useful tool to use cynically.
 
Last edited:

dickson

Hairy on the inside
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
3,760
Reaction score
4,605
Location
Directly over the center of the Earth
Mind you, take anything I say with a grain of salt (a big one) regarding the motives of politically conservative evangelical Christian nationalists. I still can't figure out how people who say they worship the "Prince of Peace" can be so hung up on the right to bear arms, for instance. What would Jesus pack? My inclination is to think that they really don't believe in their religion at all and are cynically using it as a tool, but some of them must believe in all the self contradictory stuff, or it wouldn't be a useful tool to use cynically.
A sword, as I recall.
 

Tiger1b

growl. snarl, etc.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 1, 2022
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
1,242
I'd argue it's hypocrisy if they scream "What about the Children?" and attack "morally degenerate" behavior displayed by the "other side" of the aisle, though, while shrugging off or excusing even worse examples set by their own candidates and officials.

I’d argue that it’s not my morals I’m judging her against, but her own.
 

SWest

In the garden...
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
23,129
Reaction score
12,527
Location
Where the Moon can see me.
Website
www.etsy.com
Well, you have to know the difference between a metaphorical sword...

34‘Ye may not suppose that I came to put peace on the earth; I did not come to put peace, but a sword; 35for I came to set a man at variance against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, 36and the enemies of a man are those of his household.

and a real sword...

51And lo, one of those with Jesus, having stretched forth the hand, drew his sword, and having struck the servant of the chief priest, he took off his ear. 52Then saith Jesus to him, ‘Turn back thy sword to its place; for all who did take the sword, by the sword shall perish; 53dost thou think that I am not able now to call upon my Father, and He will place beside me more than twelve legions of messengers? 54how then may the Writings be fulfilled, that thus it behoveth to happen?’
 

SWest

In the garden...
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
23,129
Reaction score
12,527
Location
Where the Moon can see me.
Website
www.etsy.com
And then people argue about Gospel of Luke 22:36-38.

Being religious is hard work.
It's the same scene as in Matthew 26, but earlier on.

And, again, one must read with distinction...does Jesus mean for people to go around unclothed-and-armed? If not, then he meant something else.

Does he mean for his followers to literally bring weapons, then contradict himself hours later when he commands them to cease using them? If not, then he meant something else.

OR...did he mean to set up his friends to behave aggressively so that his narrative fit into prophecy about the messiah being "among transgressors/criminals"? In which case Jesus did not advocate for other/random/all/American people to be armed as a matter of course.

35And he said to them, ‘When I sent you without bag, and scrip, and sandals, did ye lack anything?’ and they said, ‘Nothing.’ 36Then said he to them, ‘But, now, he who is having a bag, let him take [it] up, and in like manner also a scrip; and he who is not having, let him sell his garment, and buy a sword, 37for I say to you, that yet this that hath been written it behoveth to be fulfilled in me: And with lawless ones he was reckoned, for also the things concerning me have an end.’ 38And they said, ‘Sir, lo, here [are] two swords;’ and he said to them, ‘It is sufficient.’

39And having gone forth, he went on, according to custom, to the mount of the Olives, and his disciples also followed him, 40and having come to the place, he said to them, ‘Pray ye not to enter into temptation.’ 41And he was withdrawn from them, as it were a stone’s cast, and having fallen on the knees he was praying, 42saying, ‘Father, if Thou be counselling to make this cup pass from me —; but, not my will, but Thine be done.’ — 43And there appeared to him a messenger from heaven strengthening him; 44and having been in agony, he was more earnestly praying, and his sweat became, as it were, great drops of blood falling upon the ground. 45And having risen up from the prayer, having come unto the disciples, he found them sleeping from the sorrow, 46and he said to them, ‘Why do ye sleep? having risen, pray that ye may not enter into temptation.’

47And while he is speaking, lo, a multitude, and he who is called Judas, one of the twelve, was coming before them, and he came nigh to Jesus to kiss him, 48and Jesus said to him, ‘Judas, with a kiss the Son of Man dost thou deliver up?’ 49And those about him, having seen what was about to be, said to him, ‘Sir, shall we smite with a sword?’ 50And a certain one of them smote the servant of the chief priest, and took off his right ear, 51and Jesus answering said, ‘Suffer ye thus far,’ and having touched his ear, he healed him. 52And Jesus said to those having come upon him — chief priests, and magistrates of the temple, and elders — ‘As upon a robber have ye come forth, with swords and sticks? 53while daily I was with you in the temple, ye did stretch forth no hands against me; but this is your hour and the power of the darkness.’
 

CWatts

down the rabbit hole of research...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
1,523
Location
Virginia, USA
ElaineA's comment sums a lot of what's behind this up. The Right is really about preserving and re-establishing laws and social values where the powerful have near-total social freedom, where everyone else must live in the shadows.
It does fit right in with how Jerry Falwell, Jr. and his wife took advantage of a 20-year-old "pool boy".

The quote about hierarchy is dead on. Trump is just the 21st century version of "Defender of the Faith" Henry VIII and Pope Alexander VI Borgia. I guess Boebert's doing her part by bringing the Showtime?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ElaineA

Kaiser-Kun

!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
6,947
Reaction score
1,921
Age
39
Location
Mexico
I swear, Americans have this mind-crunching quagmire regarding anything even remotely sex related that it permeates their entire existence. They flip between mormonic prudes and horny fratboys at the drop of a hat. This lady is America's sex drive personified.
 

JJ Litke

People are not wearing enough hats
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
8,138
Reaction score
4,992
Location
Austin
Website
www.jjlitke.com
I’d argue that it’s not my morals I’m judging her against, but her own.
That's why hypocrisy is an accurate term. It's literally the definition: behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel.

You can prefer a different framing (and maybe that's where this debate is coming from), but Roxxsmom did use the word correctly.
 

Brightdreamer

Just Another Lazy Perfectionist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
13,456
Reaction score
5,075
Location
USA
Website
brightdreamersbookreviews.blogspot.com
I swear, Americans have this mind-crunching quagmire regarding anything even remotely sex related that it permeates their entire existence. They flip between mormonic prudes and horny fratboys at the drop of a hat. This lady is America's sex drive personified.
To be fair, I believe it was inherited from the Old World, particularly the people who fled here to establish their particular visions of a rigidly "perfect" society, but, yeah, we're a nation that definitely needs some solid sessions on the psych couch for Issues.

If people could be more mature and adult about being, well, mature and adult, the world would be a much better place... but there's just so much darned power-fuel in all that misinformation and fear and pearl-clutching and taboos...
 

Tiger1b

growl. snarl, etc.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 1, 2022
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
1,242
That's why hypocrisy is an accurate term. It's literally the definition: behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel.

You can prefer a different framing (and maybe that's where this debate is coming from), but Roxxsmom did use the word correctly.
Yes. I know what the word means. When I adopted Roxxsmom’s use of “argue” that wasn’t meant as a challenge or correction—more like an ‘amen.’ I can look back and see many more grammatical (for example) errors I’ve made in much shorter posts than hers. Per usual.

Of course I apologies if I came across as argumentative, as attempting to be pedantic would have been neither appropriate nor qualified (and yes I could have phrased it better).
 
  • Like
Reactions: JJ Litke

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
11,292
Reaction score
16,606
Location
Massachusetts
I’m weaning myself from Quora, because it’s become an absolutely miserable, troll-ful place. But I still occasionally dip a toe in. This answer, to “How can US evangelicals still support Lauren Boebert”, makes some sense, as demented as the logic is.


I have extended family who are Evangelical (they’re part of the Quiverfull cult). It’s easier for them to justify people like Trump and Boebert than you might think.

Sorry, this answer got long, but it spells out the Evangelical mindset as I understand it.

The usual rationalizing goes something like this:

  1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
  2. The Holy Spirit can move within anyone who accepts salvation through Jesus Christ, no matter how fallen.
  3. Since everyone is a sinner, but only people who accept Jesus can be moved by the Holy Spirit, it is far better to vote for a politician who is sinful but open to receiving the Spirit than a politician who is sinful but turns his back on God.
  4. Boebert has received Jesus Christ. She may be sinful, like we all are, but through her God may still do good works. A godless person is incapable of good works.
  5. Isn’t it better to vote for someone who can do good works, whatever their private failings, than someone incapable of good works?
That’s basically it. That’s the “logic” I’ve heard.

Now, of course, in order to believe this line of “thinking,” you have to believe that Trump and Boebert have actually accepted Jesus. If, as the Bible says, you will know them by their works (Matthew 7:16), they clearly aren’t Christians. They are, in fact, exactly who Matthew 7:15 warns about.

You also have to assume their political opponents aren’t Christian. Which is actually pretty easy for Evangelicals; to them, anyone who isn’t a member of their particular Evangelical sect isn’t really Christian. Like, my Evangelical family thinks Southern Baptists are fake Christians because they aren’t conservative enough.

Christians enjoy trying to define God into existence and trying to define other Christians out of existence.

And Evangelicals are psychologically conditioned to accept two standards of behavior, one from leaders and one from the flock. They do this weird thing where if a member of the congregation has lunch with a woman not his wife he’s expelled, but a leader who is photographed having sex with his mistress on a private yacht is worshipped.

It looks like hypocrisy, but they legit don’t see it that way.

Evangelicals are authoritarian and rigidly hierarchical. They literally see their leaders as army generals, engaged in literal, not metaphorical, spiritual warfare against the demonic armies of Satan. In war you obey your leaders without question. If their generals sometimes slip into sin, what of it? They have the most pressure, God has placed the most responsibility on their shoulders. Sure they slip from time to time—they're fallible, like all men, and all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, remember?

But God placed them in leadership because that’s where He wants them. It is not for us to question God’s decisions.

To the Evangelical, God orders all things; God is directly, personally involved in every aspect of our lives. If you’re rich, God made you rich as a sign of His favor (Proverbs 10:22, 2 Corinthians 9:8). If you’re in a position of authority, it’s because God has judged you worthy of being an agent of His action.

That’s why it does no good to point out to an Evangelical that Boebert is a drunk sex offender screwup so stupid, she had to try four times to pass the GED.

That’s the thing: they will agree with you. To them it’s proof that God has chosen her.

Yes! Boebert is a drunk sex offender screwup who’s dumb as a post. That’s why they follow and support her! There is no way such a person could be in Congress except that God Himself wills it so.

She did not get elected through her own efforts, like those elitist West Coasters who use their connections and their money and their fancy education to game the system. She’s just a common, ordinary person who beat the system and beat those elitists at their own game through God’s grace and power, amen.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,226
Reaction score
11,150
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Yeah uh, this is an issue where I've seen people quote verses for both positions. It's really tricky.
Yes, and and I'd argue that's one of many reasons why ancient scriptures might possibly not be the best basis for modern laws. As far as I know, however, no one claims Jesus actually went around wielding that (likely metaphoric) sword, let alone stabbing people with it.

Sigh, many people really have trouble parsing metaphors and analogies, even ones that reference aspects of the modern world (as a teacher, I'd say that this is an increasing problem too, with more and more students inclined to take analogies, allegories, and metaphors literally).

I think Introversion has a point, at least re the way some Fundamentalist Christians see things, though they certainly have no trouble poo pooing the faith of liberal Christians who have also accepted Jesus while behaving in ways the Right considers sinful. I am not sure I buy the argument that most really see all sins, all moral shortcomings (as they see them), equal. If so, why do they spend so much more time decrying certain specific "sins" than others? They certainly seem to be willing to throw more stones at some "sinners" than at others, and many conservative Christians support the death penalty (which, if you think about it, puts a person's demise into "man's" hands, not God's, thus denying them a chance to come to eventual repentance and salvation.

By their logic, someone who divorced and remarried is just as fallen, just as sinful, as someone who marries a member of their own gender. Both can be redeemed through the grace of that version of God. Both can be forgiven their sins if they ask (even if they continue to do those particular sins). If the laws of the land are supposed to stop people from doing things that are contrary to an evangelical Christian's interpretation of "God's Law," then a county clerk should have refused to issue Kim Davis's current marriage license as well.

IMO, this is a very lazy version of faith, one that allows people to simply commit whatever sins they enjoy while continuing to act on whatever their personal "squick" factors are without any self examination or reflection. That's why I call it hypocritical (I know we can split hairs all day about the exact definition of hypocrisy).

I know plenty of Christians are not in this camp, and believe that while no one is perfect (not to mention having plenty of disagreement about what is really a sin to begin with), some sins are worse than others, and it's important to try to do good in the world and to live as well as one can.
 
Last edited:

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
15,478
Reaction score
27,843
Location
Massachusetts
Website
elizabethbonesteel.com
Sigh, one problem with religion is that many people really have trouble parsing metaphors and analogies, even ones that reference aspects of the modern world (as a teacher, I'd say that this is an increasing problem too, with more and more people inclined to take analogies, allegories, and metaphors literally).

Also, given the wide variety of religions out there, basing our laws on just one seems...short-sighted? Undemocratic?
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,226
Reaction score
11,150
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Also, given the wide variety of religions out there, basing our laws on just one seems...short-sighted? Undemocratic?
I totally agree, which is why I think discussions about what the scriptures "really" say are great for philosophical discussions, religious studies courses, and religious settings but have no place in the government of a country that has established a separation of religion from state matters. It's not relevant, as we are all free to believe what we will, but not to publicly enforce those beliefs when the only justification for doing so is that it is mandated by some interpretation of said scriptures.

Against divorce, same-sex relationships, eating pork, or dressing a certain way? Then don't have one/do that, or do have one and do that and be forgiven if your god does that. But stop worrying so much about other people's relationships or behaviors. Please note that I don't give a rat's butt hair whether or not Boebert and her boyfriend are into groping one another and vaping wacky tobackey etc. But the fact that they were ruining other people's enjoyment of a musical was a problem.

The framers, for all their flaws and hypocrisies, seemed to be aware that history was filled with long, bloody wars (and countless pogroms/massacres/holocausts/witch hunts etc) where each side claimed to have some god/gods or other in their pockets, thanks to the intertwining of religion and government. Most of the framers seemed, at least, to want to avoid this.
 
Last edited:

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,704
Reaction score
4,444
Location
CBUS
Lauren "Hand Job" Boebert is undeserving of a serious critique, and I'm not going to give her one. Sorry, but not sorry if this comes off as sexist, but her behavior at the Beetlejuice theatrical performance wasn't just rude or tacky or inappropriate but goes right to being skanky.

Allowing a dirty Democrat who owns a gay bar to grab a handful of right-wing MAGA boob meat is one thing, but to return the favor and yank his crank is the sort of behavior if you saw it happening in front of you and your kids at the theater, you would not hesitate to report to the usher and management of the lewd behavior, and DEMAND those pervs be moved to the other side away from families or kicked the eff out altogether.

You would be totally in the right to feel that way and in offense and disgust take decisive action in the face of such tacky, tasteless behavior.

So why should we cut Congresswoman Boebert any slack? She's done nothing to deserve it and she has spent a great deal of her totally wasted time in Congress demonizing LGBTQ+ people as groomers and sickos. In a Congress full of fools, Boebert is one of the biggest fools on Capitol Hill.

Why treat her as though she's not?

Boebert is not simply another politician we disagree with politically. This is a radical right-wing extremist who allows groping and being groped in public, so why the hell should we on The Left be so much more gracious to The Right than they ever are to us?
The price of constantly turning the other cheek all the time is running out of cheeks to be slapped. :e2moon:

Boebert is no more deserving of the benefit of the doubt than any other horny randos whose names you don't know because they aren't elected U.S. Congresscritters, and she will get none from me.

GET A FUCKING ROOM. :e2brows::e2brows::e2brows:
 
Last edited:

Unimportant

Masked and muffled
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
20,892
Reaction score
25,199
Location
Aotearoa
Her skank behaviour in front of kids was disgusting, but hopefully their parents can smooth things over. Her verbal attacks on staff trying to do their job will leave them traumatised. Her vaping after being asked to stop by a pregnant woman whose physical health was at risk was just plain horrific.

How is it possible that this person is the people's representative?
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
12,074
Reaction score
7,313
Location
west coast, canada
Her skank behaviour in front of kids was disgusting, but hopefully their parents can smooth things over. Her verbal attacks on staff trying to do their job will leave them traumatised. Her vaping after being asked to stop by a pregnant woman whose physical health was at risk was just plain horrific.

How is it possible that this person is the people's representative?
Tells you something about the people who voted to elect her, I suppose.
#Not all Coloradans
 
  • Like
Reactions: dickson

Unimportant

Masked and muffled
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
20,892
Reaction score
25,199
Location
Aotearoa
My sister is a Colorodan. I need to kick her arse.
 

MaeZe

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
12,869
Reaction score
6,651
Location
Ralph's side of the island.
Chances are good the voters didn't know about the real Lauren Boobert at the last election. They saw a devout religious person, happily married, pro-gun, small business owner ... and even then nearly half the voters must have seen through the facade because she won by a very slim margin.
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
12,074
Reaction score
7,313
Location
west coast, canada
Chances are good the voters didn't know about the real Lauren Boobert at the last election. They saw a devout religious person, happily married, pro-gun, small business owner ... and even then nearly half the voters must have seen through the facade because she won by a very slim margin.
Well. I'd be wondering why a devout person is going into politics. Also, where does a person with a marriage and a small business to look after find the time?
This, I'm guessing, is why so many lawyers go into politics: it's easier to pick up or put down as your interests wax and wane. Or, doctors. Things where the business is you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mccardey and MaeZe

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
11,292
Reaction score
16,606
Location
Massachusetts
I'd be wondering why a devout person is going into politics.
Because God told them to, duh.

Also, where does a person with a marriage and a small business to look after find the time?
I know, burdensome gummint regulations and woke nonsense are destroying the nation! If you want to save America, send $100 to GriftOrDie.com.

Sigh.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: dickson and MaeZe

MaeZe

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
12,869
Reaction score
6,651
Location
Ralph's side of the island.
Well. I'd be wondering why a devout person is going into politics. Also, where does a person with a marriage and a small business to look after find the time?
This, I'm guessing, is why so many lawyers go into politics: it's easier to pick up or put down as your interests wax and wane. Or, doctors. Things where the business is you.
But no doubt you are not a low-information voter.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: frimble3