Vice President Pence’s “never dine alone with a woman” rule isn’t honorable. It’s probably illegal.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

"Dispensed with"?  My, but we are full of ourselves this morning. That sounds like rapture.

Look, I am not saying Pence cannot do whatever he wants.  

So, to change my opinion, he needs to act like a responsible adult and quit insulting women. (That's what I meant when I said "correct", not that I would force him to.

My opinion of his behavior is that it's an admission of his own character flaws and an insult to women in general, not to mention childish.

If that is being "narrow minded" then you are narrow minded for believing I don't have a right to my opinion.

You have a right to your opinion.  You just don't have a right to act as if it's the only possible solution to the matter.

[homersapien 11,393]

14 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I have similar rules, they just aren't as strict as his are.  Billy Graham had this rule during his ministry years.  There are many Christians of both sexes who are at the very least guarded about such situations or they have a general rule of not doing that.  It's both to prevent any compromising situations from developing as well as to guard against any accusations or appearances of impropriety.  It's not dissimilar to ethical guidelines and practices in various industries.  Some apply them very strictly - avoiding even the appearance of something untoward, even if that makes doing business more complicated.  Others follow the legal and ethical requirements codified in law to the letter.

No, his rule isn't an absolute requirement of Christian theology.  The proactive stance to avoid potential moral compromise is though.

 

 

I'm sorry if the evangelical minister you quote isn't the stone tablets handed down from Mt. Sinai on the matter.  No, rules alone aren't a panacea for anything.  But that doesn't mean rules aren't reasonable and good.

This "rule" is neither.  Unless maybe you are a child. 

 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, homersapien said:

This "rule" is neither.  Unless maybe you are a child. 

Again, narrow.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Your suddenly favorite evangelical finishes with this bit of wisdom:

Quote

It is prudent, too, not to get too bent out of shape over one man’s good-faith efforts to guard his marriage wisely. If our shared goal is equality for women in the workplace and protection of marriages and families, we cultivate the virtues in ourselves — and model them for others who are struggling to do so along with us — for the good of all.

In all things, moderation — even in our responses to those we wish were more moderate.

 

[homersapien 11,393]

11 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

You have a right to your opinion.  You just don't have a right to act as if it's the only possible solution to the matter.

Oh I agree it may be a solution for Pence, albeit one that reveals his lack of integrity and character and one that insults women.

I never made the argument that it wouldn't work.  All I have discussed is what it says about him and how it insults women.

You are the one who is trying to characterize it as being a generally good "solution" that is compatible with Christianity when it is neither.

 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I'll also add that I believe the application or need for some of these rules differ from person to person, position to position.  Unfortunately today, people in positions of influence, fame, power and so on tend to be targeted in ways that the average person, even the average boss, isn't.  I've stated before that my rules on these sorts of things is not as strict as Pence's are.  But I might think differently were I in a more public, prominent position like Pence, Billy Graham, a pastor, etc.  

I know some Christian musicians who'd gotten famous and well-known who had a similar rule in place for themselves.  Being on the road so much, in a city where outside of Christian circles they can be less known, there are certainly temptations.  And some that I knew have told me how more than a few occasions while touring, they get propositioned.  Yes, there are women (and I assume men, I've only spoken about this with guys) who seem to be drawn to Christian pastors, speakers and recording artists.  It's not constant, or at every stop, but it happens.  And they understand how people in such positions are held to a higher standard - and how there are people out there that relish the opportunity to expose a hypocritical prominent Christian.  So they put rules very much like the Billy Graham rule in place.  It was a safeguard not just for themselves personally, but to prevent misconstrued situations from being portrayed wrongly.

I think the same is true of public figures, politicians and so on.  Some people are attracted to people in power.  Maybe their political enemies would try to set them up.  Who knows?  But I can see placing a stricter standard for oneself in some positions for that reason.

[homersapien 11,393]

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Again, narrow.

No, not narrow, just honest.

Someone who refuses to have a private business session with a women because they don't trust themselves not to make it sexual is obviously immature.   I don't see that as narrow minded.

But if you think that is the behavior of a intellectually mature adult, then we'll just have to disagree.  

 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Oh I agree it may be a solution for Pence, albeit one that reveals his lack of integrity and character and one that insults women.

And I disagree.  It's a huge assumption on your part.

 

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I never made the argument that it wouldn't work.  All I have discussed is what it says about him and how it insults women.

It's not anymore of an insult than it is for the evangelical female professor to only meet with male students and colleagues in an office with open windows.

 

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You are the one who is trying to characterize it as being a generally good "solution" that it is compatible with Christianity when it is neither.

It can be a good solution.  It is not intrinsically bad and neither is it incompatible with Christianity.  Sorry, but you are not exactly the most qualified to tell Christians what is or isn't compatible with their faith.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, not narrow, just honest.

Someone who refuses to have a private business session with a women because they don't trust themselves not to make it sexual is obviously immature.   I don't see that as narrow minded.

But if you think that is the behavior of a intellectually mature adult, then we'll just have to disagree.  

 

Yes, narrow.  Because you still insist on only seeing it through the lens of "not trusting himself."  This willful refusal to see any other angles to this is becoming both sad and a bit comical all at the same time.

[homersapien 11,393]

9 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Your suddenly favorite evangelical finishes with this bit of wisdom:

 

Yeah, she is obviously trying to put it in as good of a light as possible.

And from a practical perspective, she has a point.  

If that's the only way to keep Pence from sexually assaulting or propositioning women, then it's a good thing, regardless of whether or not it disrespects women and insults them.

They were going to be disrespected either way.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Yeah, she is obviously trying to put it in as good of a light as possible.

And from a practical perspective, she has a point.  

If that's the only way to keep Pence from sexually assaulting or propositioning women, then it's a good thing, regardless of whether or not it disrespects women and insults them.

They were going to be disrespected either way.

"Obviously."  Again with your magical insight into the minds of the religious.

Or she just sees the nuance and facets that you seem to be blind to.

[homersapien 11,393]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

And I disagree.  It's a huge assumption on your part.

Well, it's an assumption, but not a huge one.

It's no different that the assumption that a pedophile needs to stay away from women, for example.

[homersapien 11,393]

3 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Or she just sees the nuance and facets that you seem to be blind to.

Yeah, I'll admit, sometimes those "nuances" and "facets" are obscure to me.  

I suppose I am just too influenced by the obvious.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, homersapien said:

Yeah, I'll admit, sometimes those "nuances" and "facets" are obscure to me.  

I suppose I am just too influenced by the obvious.

Or just arrogant.  That's a big influence too.

[homersapien 11,393]

5 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Yes, narrow.  Because you still insist on only seeing it through the lens of "not trusting himself."  This willful refusal to see any other angles to this is becoming both sad and a bit comical all at the same time.

Well, I am glad I brightened up your day.

[homersapien 11,393]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Or just arrogant.  That's a big influence too.

Unfortunately, arrogance comes with being smarter than most people.  I've never denied it.

(But that has nothing to do with the fact Pence lacks the self-confidence to treat a woman as a professional equal.) 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, homersapien said:

Unfortunately, arrogance comes with being smarter than most people.  I've never denied it.

(But that has nothing to do with the fact Pence lacks the self-confidence to treat a woman as a professional equal.) 

 

[homersapien 11,393]

Is this thread now about me?  

[homersapien 11,393]

16 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

 Sorry, but you are not exactly the most qualified to tell Christians what is or isn't compatible with their faith.

And you are?

Who said I don't pick up on nuance?

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, homersapien said:

And you are?

I would say that a Christian would generally be more qualified to speak on the subject than an agnostic.  Just like I'd say a Muslim is more qualified that I am to speak to what is compatible with Islam. 

[homersapien 11,393]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

I would say that a Christian would generally be more qualified to speak on the subject than an agnostic.  Just like I'd say a Muslim is more qualified that I am to speak to what is compatible with Islam. 

Yeah, just ask ISIS.

[homersapien 11,393]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

I would say that a Christian would generally be more qualified to speak on the subject than an agnostic.  Just like I'd say a Muslim is more qualified that I am to speak to what is compatible with Islam. 

That's very narrow-minded by the way.

I know a lot more about Christianity than many Christians.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, homersapien said:

Yeah, just ask ISIS.

Exceptions don't negate the rule.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, homersapien said:

That's very narrow-minded by the way.

I know a lot more about Christianity than many Christians.

Hence the use of the word "generally."

[homersapien 11,393]

30 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

You have a right to your opinion.  You just don't have a right to act as if it's the only possible.

Well, please let me know you think I am "acting" on it.  

I certaintly wouldn't want to unknowingly persecute anyone.