Doctrine & Practice Gender & Sexuality Government & Politics Leaders & Institutions News Politics The 'Splainer The 'Splainer

The ’Splainer: Why won’t Mike Pence eat alone with a woman who is not his wife?

Vice President Mike Pence, left, and his wife, Karen Pence, acknowledge the audience before he speaks at the Republican Jewish Coalition's annual meeting in Las Vegas on Feb. 24, 2017. Photo courtesy of Reuters/David Becker

The ’Splainer (as in “You’ve got some ’splaining to do”) is an occasional feature in which the RNS staff gives you everything you need to know about current events to hold your own at the water cooler.

(RNS) A recent Washington Post profile of Karen Pence mentioned that her husband, Vice President Mike Pence, never eats alone with another woman or goes without her to events where alcohol is being served.

Twitter erupted with outrage and ridicule.

But the Indiana Republican’s practice is not unusual in many conservative Christian circles. As Emma Green pointed out in The Atlantic, it likely stems from something called “the Billy Graham Rule,” named for the 98-year-old international evangelist. Nor is it that much different in intention from the practices of conservative Jews and Muslims. Let us ’Splain …

What is the Billy Graham Rule?

Justin Taylor traces the historical roots of the Billy Graham Rule for The Gospel Coalition, a evangelical blog. The Billy Graham Rule, he writes, was the result of an informal 1948 gathering between Billy Graham and three of his closest male friends and associates in a motel in Modesto, Calif.

Graham and his friends were all young, married men who spent a lot of time on the road, holding religious revivals in different towns several times a week. Graham, then a 29-year-old at the threshold of his remarkable career, asked his friends to list the problems faced by budding ministries like his.

The second item on the list — after money — was “sexual immorality.” “We all knew of evangelists who had fallen into immorality while separated from their families by travel,” Graham wrote in his biography, “Just As I Am.” ” … From that day on, I did not travel, meet or eat alone with a woman other than my wife.”

He even found a New Testament verse to support his decision: “Flee the evil desires of youth and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.” — 2 Timothy 2:22

How unusual it is that Mike Pence follows the Graham Rule?

Hard to say. It is certainly not unknown among his fellow evangelical Christians — Christian chatrooms are full of personal experiences of life with — and without — the rule. And members of other faiths have rules that guide their relations to other women. Some Orthodox Jewish men won’t be alone in a closed room with a woman who is not their wife. Recently some ultra-Orthodox Jews have refused to sit next to women on airplanes. And some conservative Muslims will not shake hands with women or be alone with women outside their family circles.

Why the outrage?

Some find Pence’s behavior misogynistic. Clara Jeffery of Mother Jones tweeted, “If Pence won’t eat dinner alone with any woman but his wife, that means he won’t hire women in key spots.”

Others find the behavior patriarchal — a suggestion that women can’t be without a chaperone or that it is women who are responsible when men stray. They point out Jesus didn’t adhere to the rule; he met alone with the woman at the well, the adulterous woman and Mary Magdalene.

“What the Billy Graham rule does is reduce women to sexual temptations, objects, things to be avoided, ” Laura Turner, a Christian writer, said on Twitter. “It is dehumanizing, anti-gospel.”

Others see hypocrisy. “So the GOP is up in arms over Sharia law, yet Mike Pence won’t have a business meal with a woman that’s not his wife,” tweeted Philip Sherburne, an editor at Pitchfork. “Sure, that checks out.”

https://twitter.com/PhilipSherburne/status/847180174814842880

Along the same lines, some were incredulous that Pence won’t eat with a woman other than his wife but would campaign for, and defend, a man who admitted to grabbing women by their private parts.

Still others see the logic of the rule. Look at the trouble Bill Clinton, a Baptist, might have avoided had he adhered to the Graham Rule. And the list of Christian pastors floored by “sexual immorality” is a long one — Tullian Tchividjian, David Loveless and Sam Hinn are just three of the most recent. (Not-so-fun fact: Tchividjian is Billy Graham’s grandson.)

Writing at The Federalist, Mollie Hemingway, a Christian, said Mike Pence “sounds like he’s a smart man who understands that infidelity is something that threatens every marriage and must be guarded against.”

About the author

Kimberly Winston

Kimberly Winston is a freelance religion reporter based in the San Francisco Bay Area.

59 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • Mike pence is a Bible believing christian. his wife was married before she married pence. I don’t know if she was divorced for reasons of adultery, but I do know that Jesus said that marriage to a divorced person, divorced for any other reason except adultery, was also adultery.

    So the real question is, is mikepence a Bible believing christian, or just another hypocritical Christian happy to tell other people how to live their lives according to his bible, but not so eager to do so himself.

  • Mike Pence is clearly a man easily tempted and set up rules for himself to keep himself from straying. Bully for him.

    But don’t make this assumption that it’s a Christian belief and that men who do not adhere to these rules are somehow not being faithful to their wives. That’s insulting.

  • We know the answer without having to ask. Pence supports all sorts of quasi-Christian hate groups and efforts, such as so-called “conversion therapy,” the torture and humiliation forced on thousands of LGBT teens and which rakes in millions of dollars for hallelujah hypocrite churches.

  • Call me old school but I like what Mollie Ziegler Hemingway says on this matter with Mike Pence over at The Federalist (I know, I know, they’re conservative, who cares). Anyway it expands on what Kimberly Winston ends her article with: “Writing at The Federalist, Mollie Hemingway, a Christian, said Mike Pence ‘sounds like he’s a smart man who understands that infidelity is something that threatens every marriage and must be guarded against.'” Or maybe I post this because I don’t like all the comments that were already here prior to posting, I don’t know. Anyway, here goes, in defense of Mr. and Mrs. Mike Pence, as they’d say in my old school:

    “Is Mike Pence a monster for not dining privately with women who are not his wife? What about not boozing it up at parties unless his wife is around? Not only is he not a monster, he sounds like he’s a smart man who understands that infidelity is something that threatens every marriage and must be guarded against. … I noticed that many … clergy will leave a door open when women are meeting with them. Not only does that not bother me, I respect the heck out of it. That they do it universally doesn’t make me feel like it’s a comment on our particular relationship, but simply a temptation to guard against at all times. Infidelity destroys intimacy, happiness, and marriages themselves. But it happens because of the strong temptation that exists every day for most healthy people. When marriages end, the associated costs are financial, emotional, and physical. Divorce tends to be hard on men, women, and children. It harms economic and health outcomes for children, and decreases women’s standard of living over the course of their lifetimes. Guarding against it is smart. … Pence’s smart tactics for avoiding the kind of marital failure that could destroy him, his wife, their family, and the lives of those around them is to be commended and celebrated. Yes, men and women are sexually attracted to each other, and alcohol lowers inhibitions. And yes, that’s true even when dealing with friends or workplace relationships, because that’s how sex works. Good on Mike Pence for acknowledging these truths and knowing his limits. All married couples should develop their own guidelines to protect their marriages from the threats that we all face.” (Mollie Ziegler Hemingway, “Don’t Mock Mike Pence For Protecting His Marriage, Commend Him: Liberals were horrified to learn that Mike Pence doesn’t dine alone with women who aren’t his wife and doesn’t drink if she’s not around: They shouldn’t be”, The Federalist, March 30, 2017)

  • I’m not horrified about it at all. it’s their business. But he doesn’t sound particularly trustworthy to me if he is so worried about it.

    One the other hand, a sanctity of marriage guy, a Bible believing Christian guy, a gay -people-shouldn’t-get-married guy, married to a divorced woman……………

  • You have articulated what some believe to be the Biblical standard. However, consider Mt 19:3-9 (Also Mark 10:11-12 and Luke 16:18):

    “And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 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’? So they are no longer two but one. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” He said to them, “For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries a divorced woman, commits adultery.”

    Where some of the disputes start is with the phrase “except for unchastity” which has also been translated “except for sexual immorality”, “except it be for fornication”, “unless the marriage is unlawful”, so, which translation of the phrase should we go with? The Greek word in question after the “except for” or “unless” is porneia. This word means “illicit sexual intercourse” and the bible tells of many sexual things which are illicit, but perhaps the illicit thing being referred to here is sexual intercourse with close relatives as per Leviticus 18 (basically incest). Why? At the time of Jesus, there were two leading rabbinical schools, the house of Shammai and the house of Hillel. Wiki sums their positions on divorce like this: “The House of Shammai held that a man may only divorce his wife for a serious transgression, but the House of Hillel allowed divorce for even trivial offenses, such as burning a meal.” So, it is easy to “get” that Jesus did not agree with Hillel, but it seems that he also did not agree with Shammai, did not agree with divorce for adultery (saying in fact that divorce was a form of adultery). Why? If you go on in Matthew 19:10, the disciples appear shocked because they say: “If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” The biblical standard ends up being pretty high, much higher than that of the rabbinical schools of the day.

    Saint Paul seems to follow Jesus statement in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 “To the married, however, I give this instruction (not I, but the Lord): A wife should not separate from her husband —and if she does separate she must either remain single or become reconciled to her husband—and a husband should not divorce his wife.” If you continue reading in chapter 7, St. Paul gives an exception in verse 15 “But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound.”, although earlier in verses 12-14 St. Paul counsels that if an unbeliever chooses to stay with a believer, the believer may not divorce.

    The Bible does not cover all marriage situations and God does forgive sins for those who repent (remember King David?).

  • Sorry. all you are telling me is that whenever the bible says something inconvenient, you can just magic it away with the miracle of hermeneutics. Too many people on these very pages tell me that what the bible says it means. My response has been consistent: convenience seems to dominate.

    Jesus was a first century Jew. What is absolutely certain is that he spoke 1st century Aramaic. He might have been familiar with greek– who knows? He certainly never said so, one way or the other. Therefore, the use of the word porneia is putting words into Jesus’s mouth.

    Here are the first four googles for “porneia”:

    Wikipedia: The Greek term porneia (πορνεία), meaning “illicit sexual intercourse”, was translated as “fornication” in the 1611 King James Version of the bible and has also been translated as whoredom, sexual immorality or simply immorality.

    eternal perspectives ministry: The Greek word for “fornication” is “porneia”, which means harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively, idolatry: The NKJ renders “fornication” as “sexual immorality.” The NIV renders it as “marital unfaithfulness/infidelity.” As you can see Christianity has made up its own meaning of fornication to mean sex before marriage. Christianity continues to define and redefine itself. I continue to question Christians in these matters.

    Strong’s concordance: 4202 porneía (the root of the English terms “pornography, pornographic”; cf. 4205 /pórnos) which is derived from pernaō, “to sell off”) – properly, a selling off (surrendering) of sexual purity; promiscuity of any (every) type.

    Bible study Tools: illicit sexual intercourse, adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18 sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11, metaph. the worship of idols, of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols.

    As for Paul, he rarely found anything that Jesus had to say that he didn’t feel free to ignore, the Pauline Exception, which you cited, being a quite glaring example. Given that the Gospels were written AFTER Paul, one has to wonder exactly what source Paul was using for his declarations. Maybe it wasn’t actually Jesus?

    In short, the bible is in Wonderland, ruled over by a religious humpty dumpty. “Words mean what I say they mean, nothing more and nothing less.” All you are really arguing for is that all of the translations, all of the time, are not god breathed, god inspired, or anything but human. They have an agenda behind them– political, religious, social, personal.

  • Jesus, being God knew all languages. OK, maybe you don’t accept this, so I’ll point you to a site which makes arguments why Jesus likely also spoke Greek (and Hebrew) in addition to Aramaic : http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/markdroberts/2010/07/did-jesus-speak-greek.html Regardless, the manuscripts of the Gospels which have survived are in Greek (although there is some argument that Matthew may have originally been written in Hebrew or Aramaic).

    Additionally, another argument for Jesus knowing Greek is on account of similarities of some of Jesus’ statements with things written in the books which were taken out of the canon in Protestant bibles (apocrypha or, as Catholics call them, the deuterocanonical books). Protestants took these books out of the Bible because they were supposedly not available in Hebrew, only Greek (although fragments of some of these books would later be found in Hebrew in the Dead Sea Scrolls). But, here is a link which points to some parallels if you care to verify or peruse: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html (If you want to see these books, you could check Bible Gateway for RSVCE or NABRE translations.)

    I’m not sure why you think I was making an exception because I was actually trying to make an argument supporting why Jesus made no exceptions for divorce (with the provision that an unlawful incestuous marriage wasn’t really a marriage to begin with).

  • It doesn’t pass a “reasonable person” test. If people conduct business for the purpose of conducting business, it doesn’t matter what gender they are. Of course, in the far right circles in which Pence travels, women are considered inferior, so, there ya go.

  • I can’t help but share my barely? revised post to http://religionnews.com/2016/10/12/mike-pence-defends-trump-at-liberty-university-amid-evangelical-debate/ :

    Sing a song of sex, Pence
    Covering your eyes
    Trump and plenty women
    “P***y” surprise!

    When The Donald’s groping
    You grab The Mike and sing
    Isn’t that a manly way
    To kneel before your King?

    Speaking of (anything but) self-restraint, WaPo has a less restrained article on this subject, entitled “Mike Pence and the Temptresses”:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2017/03/30/mike-pence-and-the-temptresses/?utm_term=.5497081daf8b

    No wonder he’s so concerned about the sex lives of strangers.

  • Please. You’re just proving the point. Now, you are magicking hermeneutically again– that Jesus spoke all languages. Nowhere in the Bible I know of. So Maybe. Maybe not. But that’s decidedly not my point.

    So you are saying that maybe he did speak in Greek, and people who knew Greek just happened to write it all down, as he was saying it, in Greek, thus making the use of the word porneia, WHICH STILL HAS A HOST OF MEANINGS ATTACHED TO IT, the exact word which Jesus used to the Pharisees, who alSo most likely were speaking Aramaic, and not Greek.

    You seek to take a great deal of highly circumstantial “evidence” to make a case that your magicking is biblically correct, just like everyone else does.

    Let me repeat: In short, the bible is in Wonderland, ruled over by a religious humpty dumpty. “Words mean what I say they mean, nothing more and nothing less.” All you are really arguing for is that all of the translations, all of the time, are not god breathed, god inspired, or anything but human. They have an agenda behind them– political, religious, social, personal. Possibly even linguistic and cultural, for all I know.

  • fixthisnation.com
    “I did try and [email protected]@k her. She was married.

    I moved on her like a female dog,

    But I couldn’t get there.

    And she was married.

    You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful.

    I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss.

    I don’t even wait.

    You can do anything…

    Grab them by the pu$$y.

    You can do anything.”

    The President of the United States of America Donald J Trump

  • It really is a creepy Administration, as far as how people treat each other is concerned, and especially how their — our — “leader” leads by example.

  • I won’t be praying to Vladimir Putin, like all of the Alt-Right traitors who go to goose-stepping school in St. Petersburg on Russian mob “donations.” If you voted for Trump, you are now either one of the redneck rubes (sheeple) or one of the ruble-robbing traitors (wolves).

  • While Ace and Ben are having a very deep theological argument below about divorce, and a worthy one, the story here is that the VP and his wife have had a successful marriage for 32 years, even against the fact that she was previously married. Why or how that marriage ended is not given in the article. However, for the left to become unglued, because a man sets a personal standard for his own conduct recognizing the frailty and carnality of human flesh, is typical of the juvenile, shallow, and guilt ridden mindset of people who would not wait for the drop of a hat to put themselves in a compromising position because they fail to recognize their own human weakness.
    He is not imposing his practice on anyone else, he is merely being prudent in his actions both with reference to his marriage and the risks of alcohol in certain social situations. Romans Chapter 1: vss. 28-32 speaks to those who not only behave immorally, in a host of ways, but expect and encourage others to do so.
    Such encouragement is merely a cover for their own actions, urging others as an excuse to justify their own error. A man makes a moral judgment for himself and no one else, so the left gets its knickers in a twist. A classic case of projection. It sickens me. A final thought. Laura Turner, as a commentator, with no reference to her status as a female, is obtuse as usual.

  • While I see your overall point, Ace, incest is only one kind of porneia. I would think what Jesus had in mind, in general, was probably the same kind of “porneia” for which Joseph, who was called a righteous man, almost divorced His own mother before a special revelation stopped him.

  • Indeed, Edward. Microscopically small and petty.

    But, being old enough to remember the sleaze-fest of the Clinton era quite clearly, unlike most of the tweeters quoted above, I never take any liberal pearl-clutching about sexual morality or indiscretion seriously anyway. Nothing to see here.

  • “Mommy” is the ONLY woman that little Mikey has ever learned to TRUST. And this wretched closet case might one day become OUR president.

  • I agree. The Left is doing the same thing the Right did when Obama was in power. The conservative media (Fox, Breitbart, Daily Wire) hammered on every little thing the Democrats did, including personal attacks. Now the situation is reversed. Both sides hypocritically protest. In this cycle the far Left has gone bonkers. In their defense, Trump and his crew are far worse than any Republican administration that I recall and deserve intense scrutiny. Any semblance of media objectivity – on either side – is long gone.

  • The entire gospel is about putting words in Jesus’s mouth with no idea of what was actually said, especially to argue finer points. Paul also decided himself what Jesus meant and wanted in his writings. That and the various inconsistencies means very few things can be determined with certainty. This is why there are so many denominations.

  • If you voted for Trump, you are now either one of the redneck rubes (sheeple) or one of the ruble-robbing traitors (wolves).

    You sound as black and white as Conservatives. All you hear or read about are the folks making the loudest noises. Many Trump supporters fall into neither category. That’s why Trump’s victory was a shock.

  • I can understand the meal thing. I would be wary of situations where I am alone with a woman not my wife. All the more so for a politician, because the media can always use it against you. I certainly wouldn’t make it a hard and fast rule, however. Rachel Held Evans’s view sums up my outlook on it. There’s a difference between a professional business meal and something more intimate. If you feel that you want to avoid late-night work meals where it’s truly just you and the other person, it’s a reasonable course of action.

  • Nope. The “ordinary” people who came out to vote for Trump as brand new voters all got conned. They were sheeple before the election and they are still sheeple. Only now it’s Trump that’s going to sheer them.

  • “What the Billy Graham rule does is reduce women to sexual temptations,
    objects, things to be avoided, ” Laura Turner, a Christian writer.

    This rule by Billy Graham many years ago that is still adhered to by evangelical leaders and V.P. Pence, represents some really bad theology! Equality before God is not anything new; it’s been around for a long, long time! Christ died to bring about equal transformation in both sexes. This awful theology still blames women for being the main reason that men sin! The more accurate view recogizes the need for both males and females to take responsibility for their own wrong doings.

    Christ was alone with Mary immediately after he left the tomb! St. Paul summed it up best when he said, “In Christ there is neither Jew or Greek, neither slave or free, neither male or female.”

    The only reason for V.P. Pence to not be seen alone with a woman is a very practical one: he needs to avoid political scandal, brought about by gossip that he’s cheating on his wufe!

  • Simple explanation/hypothesis.

    Like the president, Mike Pence is a sexual predator with control issues. If he is too close to either alcohol and other women he will do something stupid.

    Like many sexual predators, he chose to find excuses for strange behavior through quoting scripture.

  • You are saying Mike Pence is a barely restrained sociopath and miscreant. That he has kept himself in check is not cause to celebrate, but simply cause for concern should he snap.

  • “The only reason for V.P. Pence to not be seen alone with a woman is a very practical one: he needs to avoid political scandal, brought about by gossip that he’s cheating on his wife!”

    That is the most plausible and mundane reason out there. Which means it’s probably true.

  • Ah, 19th century Mike in the 21st century. Sing her a song like the piano man Mike, how about “back to the 50’s tonight”. No wonder this chauvinist misogynist Republican outfit have a war on women, it’s not just Donny that’s manically insecure they all are. But it doesn’t seem to keep a lot of them from serial cheating, huh Newt, Rudy, Rush, and oh Donny? But for some reason it’s O K with the adoring hypocritical bible thumpers, I guess being a restrictive misogynist chauvinist washes away their cheating sins.

  • Yes the working and middle class whites in the Rust belt who had been let down by the Democrats – not sheep or rednecks or bad people. Most of my religious neighbours voted for Trump and many of them don’t fit the arrogant designations assigned to them by the Left. That’s my point. Obviously a bad idea but it came out of desperation for many and the out-of-touch Democrats. If not for Trump, I might have voted Republican.

  • Maybe Mikey is afraid that if he is with a woman alone he might feel like grabbing her the way Trump would.

  • Quite a logic you’ve got there, Ben in Oakland, let’s see:

    (1) “I’m not horrified about it at all. it’s their business”, to quote you, that “Vice President Mike Pence, never eats alone with another woman or goes without her to events where alcohol is being served”, to quote Kimberly Winston. Good on you; we agree.

    (2) “I’m … horrified”, however, that “Vice President Mike Pence” – “a sanctity of marriage guy” – “never eats alone with another woman or goes without her to events where alcohol is being served”. Hello? – what part of “sanctity of marriage” you don’t get? I guess you don’t know, but isn’t this just one practical application of that?

    (3) “I’m … horrified”, however, that “Vice President Mike Pence” – “a Bible believing Christian guy” – “never eats alone with another woman or goes without her to events where alcohol is being served”. Hello again? – what part of “Bible believing” you don’t get? I guess you don’t know, but isn’t this just one practical application of that?

    (4) “I’m … horrified”, however, that “Vice President Mike Pence” – “a gay-people-shouldn’t-get-married guy” – “never eats alone with another woman or goes without her to events where alcohol is being served”. So, to be fair, Mike Pence “shouldn’t-get-married” to Karen in the first place so that he wouldn’t bother himself with “eat[ing] alone with another woman or go[ing] without her to events where alcohol is being served”? Profound and compelling. Simply, and utterly, profound and compelling, this argument.

    (5) “I’m … horrified”, however, that “Vice President Mike Pence” – “married to a divorced woman” – “never eats alone with another woman or goes without her to events where alcohol is being served”. Unless that other woman isn’t “divorced”?! Which, then, would be OK for Pence to eat alone with and goes to binge parties with?!

    Ben in Oakland, sir, you make perfect sense. Let’s impeach Vice President Mike Pence, too, then, what do you say?

  • I say you just put a whole bunch or words into my mouth that I didn’t say, didn’t intend, and couldn’t be logically construed from what I did say.

    Have a nice day.

  • Calling Kimberly Winston, calling Kimberly Winston. You’ve got your article’s title all wrong there, as David Harrington’s now pointing out. It shouldn’t be “Why won’t Mike Pence eat alone with a woman who is not his wife?”. You see Harrington’s comment, it’s all about Donald Trump, not Mike Pence. Because, as you can see, twice this phrase was highlighted, “she was married.” That makes it all very, very relevant here. So please update the title to be “Why won’t Donald Trump eat alone with a woman who is not his wife?” ASAP. I know, I know, it’s so hard to stay on-topic around here, being anti-Trump and all.

  • No, I said he was easily tempted. Not the same thing at all. Temptation is the reason alcoholics and dieters purge their homes and binge shoppers cut up credit cards. They know themselves and take steps to control their weaknesses. That makes them self-knowing, not sociopaths or miscreants.

  • Sexually predatory behavior is not like alcoholism or overeating. There is a clear victim and a basic disregard for other people involved. In this case the weakness involves harm to others. We should be thankful he is so restrained?

    Mike Pence was reprehensible scum before becoming vice president. I already can’t think of him any lower if he turns out to be “easily tempted”.

  • A perfectly cogent viewpoint. I’m afraid this case touched a nerve in me. To criticize someone who takes his marriage seriously and is honest enough to know the things that risk it, just boggles my mind. I’ve seen too many people who treat both marriage and sex with a cavalier indifference that insults my sense of the holy.

  • Matt. 12:36 But I tell you that men will give an account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. 37 For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.”

  • RE: Bill Clinton AND Donald Trump: money and power are the ultimate Viagra / aphrodesiac pheromones.

  • No, I’m not. Heaven’s to Betsy, you sound bros on a gaming forum who, whenever I complain about a female character’s inappropriate attire, spout, “well, I suppose you want to dress them all in burqas then!”

    Right. The only two options for women’s dress are thong armor and burqas, and the only two options for male behavior are asexual and “barely restrained sociopath and miscreant.”

    No, there’s a whole host of behavior in between and quite a bit of it doesn’t involve physical adultery. In fact, according to Jesus, looking on a woman with lust is the equivalent, so maybe that’s what Pence is so worried about. Sheesh.

  • Three things:
    1. I am mostly trolling you here.

    2. I loathe Mike Pence as a politician and person. So I wouldn’t cut him slack as a matter of course.

    3. Christians are generally full of excuses and forgiveness for atrocious behavior of one of their own and extremely judgmental over minor foibles of those outside their circle.

  • We knew that from the election campaign. The presidents twitter feed is a perfect example of that.

  • Read another article critical of this – which is alluded to in some of the above twitter screen shots. First, it was argued that the BG rule diminishes moral agency for the male gender (by casting blame on women as noted). Second, it diminishes capacity for discernment by living according to rules rather than assuming responsibility to differentiate when and where one can behave safely otherwise. These two points then suggest the consequence of reducing the potential for deepening one’s moral character. It also acts against women by prevent access to high-level meetings and reducing opportunities for building professional connections.

    On a more practical note, I wonder if this is fuelled by personal religious dictates or is underscored by political aspirations and ambitions.

  • Pence and all who observe the Billy Graham rule simply are applying I Thess.5:22 “Abstain from all appearance of evil.” Those who have a problem with it should get a life and mind their own business.

  • Damned if he does; damned if he doesn’t. If he does have a meal with a woman not his wife the left will “suggest” he is having an affair; if he won’t eat a meal with a woman not his wife unless his wife is with him the left accuse him of misogyny. Americans see what the left is doing and are not amused.

  • You’ve not explained much! It seems Pence can’t tell the difference between a potentially vulnerable parishioner for a pastor, and a respected colleague with whom one might have lunch at work.

  • Mike Pence is an apostate and God will burn him in hell for his treason against these United States. You cannot escape the wrath of God. Republicans in the Administration and in Congress are acting against the will of God and will burn in hell for eternity. And if you support them, you will also burn in hell.

ADVERTISEMENTs