Joanne from "Narrow Is The Way" totally flips her shit

[alaeangelorum]

This is what makes fundie-watching so fascinating. For me, it's trying to read between the lines to figure out whether these people are consciously lying or whether they're truly incognizant of their own motivations.

Now Joanne has written a great deal about atheists, but it is clear that she can't engage with them - in fact she has to ask whether someone is an atheist before committing to to a public exchange. Talk to her about the Bible and she's fine: she'll argue points of doctrine quite happily (unless there are some big words involved). But try to get her to account for the claims she made about atheists that can actually be proven or falsified, and watch the hasty retreat! Does she have data that supports her assertion that "all" non-believers "get educations and high paying office jobs/ So we can take vacations and spend it all like snobs." Does she have a source for her claim that evolutionary biologists believe that gender identity crises are "part of the process to evolve"?

I was thinking - in secular professions, particularly in academia, you aren't allowed to make unsupported claims. This is intellectually dishonest and people consider it to be lying. Professionals are bound by ethics laws and guidelines like the Hippocratic oath. A medical doctor cannot tell Joanne that prayer alone will cure her child's cancer. An anthropologist cannot make an unfounded assertion on a blog like "All anabaptists like Joanne believe in the absolute supremacy of the Pope" without compromising their professional integrity - try getting published after that unless you made it clear that it was some kind of joke. Yet fundies can do both, and I think it strange that no one can point to the strawman version of evolution that she sets up as a record of her dishonesty.

So I put it to FJ: is this intellectual dishonesty or is Joanne oblivious to her own failures in reasoning? Is she reading off a script ("whatever your do, don't ever respond to atheists on a public forum directly!") or is she just parroting the style of her teachers/ pastors, or what?

I don't think it is just a fundie or even exclusively religious thing to make assertions without support - I've seen it on the internet frequently, people who say things like 'everyone does [xyz]' or 'no-one believes [abc]' when what they really mean is 'none of my friends who are all very like me believe [whatever]', but they don't really appreciate that their sample size is quite limited and that it isn't 'proof'. My feeling on that side of things is that if you're not that academic and no-one bothers to sit you down and show you what a good argument is then you won't necessarily realise that your reasoning is flawed or your evidence is sub-standard. I wish this was taught better in schools (it doesn't really seem to be here in the UK - or at least it wasn't in my sample of one school!!).

On the other hand, this absolute certainty about belief that some fundies like Joanne seem to have - sometimes I wonder if they are just trying to hide their doubts and convince themselves. Or maybe they really do believe that they (or their pastors) have all the answers.

[clarinetpower]

I am a christian myself, and a recovering fundamentalist who has learned a lot these last few years. I have laughed at myself as I see my past hypocrisy and self-righteousness (also cried quite a bit too). I used to wear dresses for years and made my daughters do the same. My children were home schooled their whole lives and we really isolated the oldest ones from having friends, as friend were kind of looked at as the enemy, they would draw your children away from God and to the world. We home churched as well with like minded families, but no friendships budded form there for my children.

I'm a totally different mother now and I think my younger children are much better off for it. They are beautiful girls who have been allowed to make decisions, make mistakes, plan for an education, etc. I used to believe girls shouldn't go to college either. Now in my older age, how I wish I would have. I'm doing menial low paying jobs just to make ends meet as my husbands health declined in the past few years and isn't able to work as much anymore. It's not fun thinking about being in my upper 60's working at Walmart.

Welcome to FJ, Theresa! :) I second the idea of continuing education. There are many things you can study that will give you a more comfortable life. You can read and write (and spell!!!) so I think you'd do just fine. ;) Many careers don't require a 4-year degree, but still give you a nice place to work and a decent living. Please look into it-- you deserve it!

[FaustianSlip]

It's just so terrible that my children contribute to the family income. But I'm sure it would be acceptable if they were sitting around playing video games or watching tv, right? Or going out on dates? That would be acceptable, but contributing to the family income is not.

"Contribute to the family income"? Lady, from what I can tell, your children's earnings are the family income. Put on your big girl panties and get a job, already. Sheez.

[dairyfreelife]

Welcome to FJ, Theresa! :) I second the idea of continuing education. There are many things you can study that will give you a more comfortable life. You can read and write (and spell!!!) so I think you'd do just fine. ;) Many careers don't require a 4-year degree, but still give you a nice place to work and a decent living. Please look into it-- you deserve it!

Definitely. There are wonderful two year degrees as well would help provide a decent living. As others have said, welcome to FreeJinger. Unlike my welcome to Joanne, I actually mean it for you. ;) Much luck to you in your journey out.

[thoughtful]

There should be a lol made with this....it's really a crime if there isn't.

Sorry, I'm a month and a half late. But I hadn't seen most of this thread, and the recent re-emergence led to a search, which led to this:

[treemom]

So atheist take more vacations? Am I getting that right? And is there any solid proof for that statement?

How do I become an atheist so I can get the vacation packages?

Well everyone knows I take sweet vacations...but I am not sure I qualify as an atheist. But my hubs and kid probably do. Maybe I am coasting on their atheism to get the vacations?

[MonkeyMomma]

Well everyone knows I take sweet vacations...but I am not sure I qualify as an atheist. But my hubs and kid probably do. Maybe I am coasting on their atheism to get the vacations?

This explains why I'm going to Vegas in June! Thanks, agnostic husband! My churchiness almost kept us from Sin City!

[joannesmith]

Sorry, I'm a month and a half late. But I hadn't seen most of this thread, and the recent re-emergence led to a search, which led to this:

Ok, that was just too funny. Thanks for the laugh.

[Deleted03]

Mod edit on behalf of spammer: My name is ErnestoMM and I am a sad spammer with a small penis. The mods are on to me and I shall shortly be getting the boot from here.

SPAM (I thought there was a button for that, maybe on the old board?

[Burris]

On the other hand, I do not believe that the marriage itself is adultery if the first divorce was for a biblical reason (an unbelieving spouse refusing to live peaceably with the other [abandonment or abuse] or sexual immorality). I do believe that a divorce would be a sin in that case if there was no biblical ground, and I think that couples should try to reconcile in most cases rather than divorce even in cases when it may be "allowable".

Your first husband abandoned you, and didn't even show up for the divorce hearing (if I remember your story right). Spousal abandonment is grounds for remarriage without the taint of adultery. So what do you do? You church hop for years, dragging your kids with you; ignoring teachings that didn't sit right with your conscience, whether they are theologically sound or not.

You read that God hates divorce so you...divorce the husband to whom you're legally bound, because the first guy you married, who abandoned you, is still alive.

You only stopped the hopping when you found a church that agreed with you – and then you have the unmitigated gall to write...

Theology confuses me. I just try to follow Christ. All those big words you used ... I have no idea what most of them mean and I don't care.

So, this has all been about you – what you believe, what you feel, what you read (without bothering to read deeper because YOU don't care). You changed churches like another person changes garments because you did not agree with the pastor, who may have actually spent a lot more time studying the matter than you ever have.

You plucked your house down with your own hands. I guess I should pity you.

[Witsec7]

I was just perusing some FB pages of friends of Joannes and I noticed that she was posting comments to the pages from her cell phone. Does anyone find it a contradiction in cultures that Joanne eschews a lot of contemporary society but is dependent on her computer and cell phone? Those Monetians are a barrel of laughs though.

[Katydid]

Because having a coffee with a member of the opposite gender, even if neither of you touch, is SENDING YOU ALL STRAIGHT TO HELL and will lead to sex IMMEDIATELY.

--I just realized that I responded to the OP in a 14 page long thread. *doh*!!

[Claddagh]

Wow.

I confess I must laugh at how she says boys and girls being together will "taint" them. Growing up I played with boys so by her reasoning I'm pretty much doomed to go to hell... Dibs on the condo by the lake of fire!

[ChickeyMonkey]

This is a comment from a reader, but I had to share. Someone needs an extra math class!

"I have seven friends on campus. four of them are girls and two of them are boys. "

[Koala]

This is a comment from a reader, but I had to share. Someone needs an extra math class!

"I have seven friends on campus. four of them are girls and two of them are boys. "

SOTDRT math. :lol: I can't believe Joanne hasn't said anything about her having friends that are boys. :o

[Emme]

It's funny, I was just reading a post about dating from another super christian mom, and I actually liked how she approached it. Especially after I read Joanne's post!!!

Context: Their kid went on a mission trip and befriended an australian boy who came to visit with his brother. Not sure what their relationship is like, but the mom said that "Our philosophy on dating is really pretty simple: the point of dating is to find a future spouse. Given that, it seems more than a bit silly to us to consider dating years before marriage is even a possibility. Having said that, we are strong believers in the idea of kids/teens of the opposite sex getting to know each other. The best way to do that, in our opinion, is group activities. Hikes, bonfires, game nights, church activities. All healthy, wonderful ways to learn about the opposite sex and to build relationships. We made it clear that because of A’s age (16) there would be no “datingâ€. If they wanted to go to Starbucks for coffee or out for breakfast (which they did) someone would have to go along. Not that they had to be sitting right next to them the whole time, but just along."

Can I tell you how HAPPY it makes me to see someone who considers 16 years away from marriage? You know there are some fundies that see 16 as "almost ready for marriage"!!! Granted, I disagree with this lady on a lot of stuff (she thinks the girl scouts are too liberal... heh) but I liked how she approached this thing with her daughter. I'd link to her blog but it won't load on my computer right now, so I'm reading them in reader..