Lori Alexander, 11: No Junk in Her Trunk Because She's Godly

[kpmom]

5 hours ago, Hisey said:

Did anyone notice that Lori's Aiunt Roselyn took her to task in yesterday's comments? Ken rode in on his white horse and mansplained away Aunt Roselyn's concerns.

Was that on FB, @Hisey?  I didn't see it on her blog. 

Is Aunt Roselyn her mom's sister?  If so, I can't imagine she's very happy with Lori's seemingly cold attitude towards her mother's illness.

[Koala]

33 minutes ago, kpmom said:

Was that on FB, @Hisey?  I didn't see it on her blog. 

Is Aunt Roselyn her mom's sister?  If so, I can't imagine she's very happy with Lori's seemingly cold attitude towards her mother's illness.

It was in the comments of this post:

http://lorialexander.blogspot.com/2016/09/comparing-those-on-left-and-on-right.html

[usedtobenice]

Good to know that Ken still loves his walls of text, that say exactly, well, I'm not sure what they say

I really like Lori's aunts, Rosslyn and Ginger. They sound kind, compassionate and levelheaded. Too bad Lori didn't turn out more like them. She might have ended up a much happier person. 

[TeddyBonkers]

It's so nice to know that Lori can not only make sweeping generalizations about gender, she can make them about political parties, too!

And here I thought she was just a one-note wonder. 

[2xx1xy1JD]

12 hours ago, usedtobenice said:

Good to know that Ken still loves his walls of text, that say exactly, well, I'm not sure what they say

I really like Lori's aunts, Rosslyn and Ginger. They sound kind, compassionate and levelheaded. Too bad Lori didn't turn out more like them. She might have ended up a much happier person. 

They serve as a useful reminder that Lori and Ken speak for nobody but themselves.

Lori may use other family members for photo ops, but they are individuals with their own POVs.  Emily, for example, had a Facebook post showing that she was not ready to support Trump.

 

[JDuggs]

On September 24, 2016 at 4:31 PM, feministxtian said:

 

There's a situation that I know of where a child suffered a massive brain injury. Parents insisted that everything possible be done for the child. The child is alive. Has endured multiple surgeries since the initial injury, is blind, non-verbal, will never get better. I feel it's a disservice to the child to want them alive so badly that they are willing to do anything to keep them alive. That isn't living, that isn't alive...

But that's just me...maybe I am a cold, heartless bitch...

 

I think I know of the child you're referring to (tree branch?) Do you really fault the parents for wanting to save his life when the accident happened? 99% of parents are going to hope that their child will be the miracle. They didn't know that he was going to be blind and non-verbal at the time of the injury. Have you read Gabby Giffords' book about her TBI? Not being able to fully articulate your thoughts and feelings doesn't mean that they don't possibly exist.

 

[feministxtian]

No, that's not the one...this is in my personal life. 

I can't fault the parents...to a point. HOWEVER...I think sometimes that parents get selfish. I get it. I really get it. I once hoped my son Michael would be the one in a million that would survive his brain injury. However, after almost 2 weeks I realized it was an exercise in futility and asked for comfort care only. He'd be 31 now. 

[desertvixen]

Quote

jellybean:

I think everyone should think about what would happen if they were to die suddenly, or if they were to become seriously ill. It's uncomfortable (my friends who, like me, are mostly in their mid-30s, are determined not to consider it until they are elderly enough for it to feel necessary), especially in our culture, in which it's seen as morbid to talk about death, but it's so, so necessary.

Dear God yes.  We went through a very ugly fight in my family between my mom and her father over her mother/his wife - my grandmother didn't want to be on life support, and my grandfather (from whom she was estranged but not divorced) wanted her left on.  My mother "won".  But since I was 12, I've known what my mother wanted - and really, what I wanted. 

[Jellybean]

Oh @feministxtian your poor heart. I'm so sorry about your son, Michael. It's natural, as you say, to want that perfect,  one-in-a-million outcome, and to fight for that possibility. I can only imagine how difficult it is to balance hope for recovery and the desire to keep your precious Michael with you at any cost, with the understanding of the severity of his TBI and the possibility that keeping him alive by aggressive medical intervention would cause him to suffer. 

In situations like this I don't think there can be a single right answer. No-one knows who will recover with time and intensive therapy, and who won't. There is pain and distress and loss down all of these paths, and I hope that anyone going through such an experience has loving people around them, who are prepared to love and support without judgement.

I'm sorry for talking about myself such a lot, but in my own situation, I have set out my current wishes in an Advance Decision, but have also granted Power of Attorney to my husband. Legally, the PoA overrides an Advance Decision, for which I am glad, as I'm sure that when it comes down to it, things are unlikely to be as straightforward and clear cut as they seemed when I was writing the Advance Decision. I hope that Mr Jellybean will find it helpful to have the reminder my (current) thoughts while also having the freedom to choose a different option.

[molecule]

Lori is back to her Duggar worship with a post about Josh and Anna's anniversary.

She says . . .

Quote

The Duggars are consistently being mocked for their faith because they are willing to put it on display for all to see.

Um, no, they are not mocked because they put their faith on display. They are mocked because of their hypocrisy and self-righteousness.

[Fascinated]

A commenter from yesterday's post:

Quote

Further, I suggest that scripture is sufficiently clear that Adam was not with Eve when she was with the serpent and took the fruit from the tree. Gen 3:6b“She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.” There is no evidence that Adam was there during the discussion with the serpent - no recorded anything about Adam until Eve gave the fruit to him. If he was physically nearby when Eve and the serpent were talking why wouldn’t the author say so in some form?

A long-winded and reasoned argument as to why Adam had NOTHING to do with the fruit, ok?  Besides, if Adam were even nearby, and that's a mighty big if, why wouldn't the author include that fact, while relating the facts regarding the hapless Eve talking to a fucking snake? I mean, seriously.  

[Red Hair, Black Dress]

I notice that Josh and Anna have not celebrated by Anna getting pregnant again.  

Perhaps she's "forgiven" him, although I think it's more a case of she thinks she has no choice but to stay.  But I cannot think that Anna has resumed intimacy with Joshly.  The man was unfaithful with who knows how many women.  Lord only knows what he caught and might bring home.

And is it just me, or does Joshly have one of the most punchable faces in the universe?

[IntrinsicallyDisordered]

21 minutes ago, Fascinated said:

A commenter from yesterday's post:

A long-winded and reasoned argument as to why Adam had NOTHING to do with the fruit, ok?  Besides, if Adam were even nearby, and that's a mighty big if, why wouldn't the author include that fact, while relating the facts regarding the hapless Eve talking to a fucking snake? I mean, seriously.  

I remember getting in trouble in CCD for wondering what was wrong with Adam, I asked my teacher why men were the head of the family and church if it took the most cunning, devious creature in existence, a supernatural one at that, what seemed like ages to convince Eve.  And then she just goes "here" to Adam and he eats it.  I couldn't get over how dumb he was, and why this was supposed to show why men should be in charge when it seemed clear to me that the opposite should be true, if we needed one "in charge".  As with everything else I questioned in the church I needed to pray harder and it would all make sense.  30 years and soooooo much praying later and it still doesn't, it just has a lot more company on my WTF Bible list.

I want to post on Lori's page so badly, even if it never sees the light of day.  But she probably isn't worth the effort or rise in blood pressure.

[Pammy]

2 hours ago, Red Hair, Black Dress said:

I notice that Josh and Anna have not celebrated by Anna getting pregnant again.  

Perhaps she's "forgiven" him, although I think it's more a case of she thinks she has no choice but to stay.  But I cannot think that Anna has resumed intimacy with Joshly.  The man was unfaithful with who knows how many women.  Lord only knows what he caught and might bring home.

And is it just me, or does Joshly have one of the most punchable faces in the universe?

By the standard fundie misreading of the bible, if she has refused to have sex with him at any time (without his agreement to a hiatus) or for a non-brief period of time (even with an agrement) she would be sinning against him. In fundie eyes all sins are equal: but an ongoing repetitive sin like sexual denial woukd be considered more serious than the ones Josh has 'repented of'.

Therefore I'm not thinking a woman who has stayed with him and 'forgiven' him for fundie pseudo-bible reasons is likely to be ignoring what she 'knows' about the duties of resuming marriage. If they are living as man and wife, I think they are probably having sex even if it isn't something she (or he!) really wants.

[Red Hair, Black Dress]

SMH    Fundies really do live in an alternate reality.  This is just completely effed up --  "an ongoing repetitive sin like sexual denial would be considered more serious than the ones Josh has 'repented of'."

I'll never believe Joshly is sorry for what he did.  He's just sorry he got caught. I firmly expect another cheating scandal involving him within a year -- at most

[RosyDaisy]

I firmly expect another cheating scandal involving him within a year -- at most

I agree. This is probably just the tip of the iceberg.

[Koala]

Quote

They consistently ridicule the Duggar family’s values and of course they do. The Duggar family lives for the Lord and His glory, not the world’s. Yes, Josh committed terrible sins against his wife but she was determined to show him the grace and forgiveness the Lord shows us.

Family values, she says?  Since when is molesting your sisters a "family value"?  Since when is covering up said molestation a "family value"?  Since when does hiring prostitutes to cheat on your pregnant wife a "family value"?  Since when is ANY of that considered living your life for "the Lord and His glory"?  

"The World" doesn't understand the Duggars because their "values" are fucked up beyond belief.  

And just for the record, Josh Duggar didn't just sin against his wife.  No, he molested his sisters, and Lori and Ken Alexander are vile for downplaying it like it's no big deal.  

Quote

 Eternity in hell is a long, long, time. 

Yeah, well so is a life in a house where your brother molests you.  How do you think Josh Duggar's sisters felt when they had to lock their doors at night, and weren't able to be out of their parents' sight for fear that he would hurt them again?  What about that, Lori?

Quote

The Duggars are consistently being mocked for their faith because they are willing to put it on display for all to see. I have learned from them and I am sure many others have. 

  The Duggars have made a mockery of their faith.  The fact that you, Lori, have learned from them is clear- why else would you and Ken be so willing to downplay molestation.  I notice you don't even mention it in your post...guess you don't think it's even worth bringing up.

Lori loves to point out how easily women are deceived, so perhaps she should consider that her blind Duggar worship is the product of her feeble brain being deceived.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Is the brain tumor growing again?  That's the only possible explanation that can rationally explain her post on Josh and Anna.

Compare and contrast:  http://lorialexander.blogspot.ca/2015/08/the-josh-duggar-affair-continuing-in-sin.html

My head's hurting from trying to follow any logic in this, but let's try:

1.  Jesus can totally save sinners.  Hooray!

2.  Oh, but if you still sin, maybe you weren't really saved and were just faking it.  Bad.

3.  But Christians are wonderfully trusting people, and will patiently wait for you to get saved for real and won't doubt your salvation!

4.  But women are emotional fools who lack critical thinking skills.  So, maybe, getting attached to celebrities - even ones who call themselves Christian - isn't a good idea after all.  Or maybe Ken, the rational man, thinks that Lori shouldn't worship the Duggars, and Lori, who writes about the dangers of celebrity culture and being emotional and naive, lacks any sort of insight and goes right back to worshipping the Duggars and declaring that all criticism is from Satan.

5.  Dressing modestly and keeping pure until your wedding are good, and isn't it awesome that the Duggars show us a great example!

6.  Let's not discuss the fact that dressing modestly and keeping the kids at home did nothing to protect Josh's victims, let's not discuss the fact that while Josh may have saved his first kiss, he had actually molested 5 girls, and let's also ignore that all that virtue and modesty didn't protect Anna.
7.  Or maybe, we will talk about it, and remember that fake Christian hypocrites exist and should be called out.

8.  Or maybe, we will talk about it, and praise Anna for standing by her man and assume that Josh is all better now.

9.  In any case, Satan just wants to attack good Christian role models.  Yes indeed, they can be just innocently walking along, and Satan jumps out of nowhere.  Or something like that.  It's Satan that causes sin.  We can't talk about sin like it's something that people with free will may choose to do.

10.  The World lack moral clarity.

11.  The World condemns the Duggars, esp. Josh and his parents, when they learn that he molested 5 younger girls on at least 3 separate occasions, and subsequently pretended to be a Good Christian Husband and spokesman while actively cheating on his wife.

12.  Christians need to call out sin and provide a rebuke.  Somehow, that's different than whatever the World is doing to the Duggars, which is called "persecution".

 

 

[AmazonGrace]

6 hours ago, Fascinated said:

A commenter from yesterday's post:

A long-winded and reasoned argument as to why Adam had NOTHING to do with the fruit, ok?  Besides, if Adam were even nearby, and that's a mighty big if, why wouldn't the author include that fact, while relating the facts regarding the hapless Eve talking to a fucking snake? I mean, seriously.  

Where the heck could Adam go there and why wasn't he there to supervise the stupid old lady? Isn't it the godly man's duty to guard and protect the wifey?

Does Lori know Anna personally? If not, what does she know about how their home life is like?

 

Quote

The children wait patiently for the one they are going to marry and stay pure during the courtship and engagement, then go on to have strong marriages, except the precious one who forgave her husband who sinned greatly against her.

Does she actually think that Anna is a Duggar child? Amd is she saying that , after all the praise she's heaping on them, Anna and Josh do not have a strong marriage? How could it go wrong if the woman is a godly doormat?

[Koala]

Someone on Facebook asked her if she would have felt comfortable leaving her children around him.  

Wonder why The Godly Mentor felt the need to delete that?

Go ahead and tell her the truth Lori.

Either:

A. You're such a Duggar fangirl that you would have happily allowed it, and damn the consequences.

or

B. You would have never considered it, but don't really give a damn about the safety of Anna Duggar's 4 children.

You're The Godly Mentor...go ahead and mentor her.

[lawfulevil]

Why wouldn't Lori leave her kids around Josh? She left them around Ken and he's clearly got some pretty creepy attitudes on the subject, if he isn't out and out guilty himself.

[Granwych]

On 9/26/2016 at 5:23 PM, feministxtian said:

No, that's not the one...this is in my personal life. 

I can't fault the parents...to a point. HOWEVER...I think sometimes that parents get selfish. I get it. I really get it. I once hoped my son Michael would be the one in a million that would survive his brain injury. However, after almost 2 weeks I realized it was an exercise in futility and asked for comfort care only. He'd be 31 now. 

Bless you for thinking of your son.  

[lilwriter85]

One of the thing that still pisses me off about Lori's defense of Josh Duggar is that prior to the molestation revelation, she blogged twice about being against sleepovers because of molestation incidents that occurred at sleepovers. Yet, she still defended Josh and one of his victims was a babysitter who had slept over.

[slickcat79]

23 hours ago, Red Hair, Black Dress said:

I notice that Josh and Anna have not celebrated by Anna getting pregnant again.  

Perhaps she's "forgiven" him, although I think it's more a case of she thinks she has no choice but to stay.  But I cannot think that Anna has resumed intimacy with Joshly.  The man was unfaithful with who knows how many women.  Lord only knows what he caught and might bring home.

And is it just me, or does Joshly have one of the most punchable faces in the universe?

That we know of. Even if they'd been together the whole time, she probably wouldn't be to the point of announcing a new pregnancy yet. The last 3 kids were all born right around 2 years apart with gaps expanding each time, and Meredith was only 1 in July. Nothing improves the image of a "sinner" like a Redemption Baby. 

And he really does have a highly punchable face.

[Fascinated]

Today we find Lori pissed that younger women are encroaching on her blogging and godly mentoring territory. 

Quote

When God speaks about older women in the Bible, He is speaking about those who have raised children. “Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work” (1 Timothy 5:10). Older women should be those who have spent the “unknown and seemingly ordinary” days being “faithful in the mundane” of raising and disciplining children, being a help meet to their husband, and staying busy in the home. Younger women haven’t done this long enough and are still in the process of doing it.

Do we think Lori has washed saints' feet?  Surely Ken is not sanctified?