KC Chiefs kicker complains about "emasculation of men," gay pride & says women should be homemakers

It was so awesome!!

 

The emasculation of the American Man is well into place. All of our liberal friends here just don’t see it ! The males in this country will be hiding behind their women’s skirts , no their pants very soon . Can you see it in place ?
Commercials
Government
College ratios
Workforce
Men as house husbands
??? And you lib fellas have no one to blame . You have been emasculated and it’s just the beginning!
His speech was so true . I’m not Catholic but I might think about it

 

Wow, I don't think I've been emasculated. Pretty sure my son hasn't. My grandson is only 3 but he's really into Ironman and bulldozers, so I'm guessing he's OK.
But out of curiosity, how do you think men have been emasculated in the workforce, for example? Any specifics?

 

You cant even sexually harass your secretary or make a racist joke at the water cooler these days, you know, manly activities

 

The next Babylon Bee article I read that is funny will be the first.

Here is a bit from the Onion today that lampoons the vast differences in mens and womens sports. It's subtle. The Babylon Bee articles are never subtle which is why they arent funny. The Onion starts with funny and may or may not work in a point to the story or ideology. The Babylon Bee starts with ideology and never really gets to funny. It is epically unentertaining but if you are looking for confirmation bias it is your thing.

Man Starstruck To See Caitlin Clark, Indiana Fever At Greyhound Bus Station

 

Ned Flanders asks Babylon Bee to Tone Down the Edgy Humor a Notch-erino

 

Exactly. That’s what is really meant

 

Well that and commercials about electric razors that can groom your public hair and gay-coded "roommates"

 

Here is the problem. You wrongly impute motive, which is a violation of the 10 commandments FWIW, but then your posting history amounts to far more than my long post. How many times have you mentioned the genocide of the Democrats alongside your constant railing of Donald Trump? There is no way you possibly live up to your own arbitrarily invented standard here. So, by your own standards then your true motives come off as yet another "us vs them" politically based attack vs what is truly wrong with society or whatever. Your words, not mine.

 

I'd change my profile pic before taunting the internet on being masculine. Just sayin'.

 

Empowering my wife and daughter has done nothing to emasculate me.

If empowering yours has emasculated you, then that’s your choice not something being forced upon you.

 

So it started out with macro-level, societal problems and now it’s down to “Oh yeah, well youuuuu”. And for my posts, I’ll continue to post how bad Dear Leader is for our country. As I’m sure you will also participate in the “them over there” attacks. But if I ever go into a long rant about what is wrong with literally the world, with biblical references, it will be broader than “it’s all their fault”, or it’s all trump and his cult-like following.
Although again, I’m honestly not sure of the primary theme of your post.

btw, I recommend lacunas posts. She is well- measured with a strong biblical background. if she made a post about the worlds problems many would pay attention. I sure would. And she agreed with butker’s key points (and some she didn’t). if she ever admonished me for anything, it would have credence and resonate with me.

 

I'm surprised his comment about the people who killed Jesus hasn't gotten more attention. With respect to the emasculation of men, how is that a libbie issue when a tough alpha male like Justice Alito has no say over the American flag flying at his house?

 

Thank you 92, for taking time to read and comment on the portion of the declaration I quoted. When I looked it up I was surprised to find Francis had not authored it and how it carefully addressed the issue of blessing the people in "irregular" relationships, while not approving or endorsing same.

I think this is addressed by what Jesus is recorded as saying in Matthew 19, that section Q kept mentioning but avoided directly discussing earlier in the thread.

19:3 - The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”

4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

7 They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”
8 He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

10 His disciples said to Him, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.”

11 But He said to them, “All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: 12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”

My question was 'why is it labeled or considered a sin? No one was hurt or injured. No theft, no murder, no reason to lie about it other than to avoid prosecution and punishment after the fact.

The answer I think, is found in Genesis 1:26 and 28, the two verses that bracket mankind being made in the image of God. Verse 26 indicates why they (God) made man, and in verse 28 the newly minted pair are given the instruction to reproduce, increase in numbers to rule over the earth and all creatures on it. Same sex couples are unable to do that. Same sex couplings have no chance to produce children, existing only for the physical pleasure the couple attains in the act.

It's said Jesus never mentioned homosexuality but I think he did just that when he spoke of eunuchs in Matthew 19, verse 11 - "there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb- ". There are in existence ancient copies of Roman legal documents dating to that era that refer to homosexual men as eunuchs. Being that the purpose of marriage as stated in Genesis is to unite a man and woman to reproduce themselves to rule over the world and all creatures in it, a homosexual coupling would be pointless and miss the mark in fulfilling the instructions given in verse 28. My take for your consideration.

I refer you back to the Roman centurions 'special servant' who would have died without Jesus healing him at the request of the centurion, who had faith Jesus marveled. It could rightfully be said Jesus blessed them, but did not endorse or approve their relationship. The event is recorded in Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10

Thanks, 92.

 

Thank you PITBOSS, but Contra giving me any credence is unlikely to happen. We have a long time theological adversarial acquaintance reaching back several usernames.

 

Curious...which countries do you think have the most masculine men that we should be emulating?

 

Wow - did you actually type this at 3am? And with 3 pearl-clutch refs in a single post . . .

 

ugh. I honestly was unaware you guys have a history. I wasn’t attempting to take sides or use that reference to antagonize.

But keep up the good posts. Your overall basis of good intention is influential. Which is much needed in our society.

 

4, not 3. I over slept, and balked at going in to office, only to have to be back in a little over an hour, to help with morning routine, get kids ready and to school n such...

So I hopped on here.

(not a bad sub for coffee).