But just as Matt Chancey is high on nastiness and low on facts, so is his ardent follower JoshuaC.
He doesn't bring much sense to argument, but he is quick to accuse other debaters of gossiping and devil's work. He talks about chivalry, but has no compunction brow-beating, Cindy Gee, Corrie, Grace and many other Christian women. While these women show Christian forbearance and tolerance for other people's opinion, JoshuaC just bulldozes ahead, sparing no one's feelings
Notice his interactions during the discussions at Dothan Eagle. The first news story was "PSC Candidate's wife says she chose homemaker's job."
JoshuaC says:
Vote for Matt Chancey July 15th!
We need energy independence in our state. We need accountability at the PSC.
www.mattchancey.com
Go Jennie! We need more people standing up for their rights and not the mainstream movement of the US today.
Cindy Gee says:
Uh, no, Jennie. NOBODY is “telling women they shouldn’t even be allowed the choice to be homemakers”, and nobody but you has brought up homosexual marriage, or said that it should be mainstream.
Feminsm has nothing to do with it.
Homemaking is still very much MAINSTREAM, and the concept of “one person, one vote” is likewise MAINSTREAM; conversely, in America today, the idea that suffrage should be limited to male heads of household—like the idea that homosexuals should marry one another or the idea that indentured servitude should be legal—is definitely NOT mainstream.
“Naturally, everyone has the right to choose his or her own path”, but when that path runs contrary to what most Americans consider normal and decent, and when when the person on said path is seeking to serve in a position of governmental authority, one can expect to have normal, decent folks to have questions about it.
Grace says:
I applaud Jennie’s choice to be a homemaker, but her remarks about wives and homemaking on Vision Forum’s (Doug Phillips’ site) is extreme, and I don’t think has ever been “mainstream” thinking.
On the Vision Forum website, Jennie says that the Bible teaches that wives who work outside the home are blaspheming Scripture, according to the Apostle Paul in Titus 2.
That means she thinks working wives go against the Bible. Funny how she can market her book, co-authored with Stacy McDonald, do all kinds of promos for it, in addition to writing it, and that doesn’t count as sin, but if a wife has to commute to a job for pay, that is blaspheming Scripture.
As I said, I applaud Jennie’s choice to be a SAHM. I don’t agree with her view that the Bible necessarily condemns other women’s choices of where they work.
JoshuaC says:
Cynthia Gee and Grace obviously don’t understand everything they read. They try and try to find dirt on Matt and Jennie Chancey, but end up short.
“Is Chancey open to women in the workplace?
He says yes, since he has worked under women, over them and beside them for years.“
Some people have nothing better to do than try to bash people for their personal beliefs.
Cynthia and Grace, this still has nothing to do with the role of the PSC President of Alabama, and that’s what matters most.
I hope the readers of this blog aren’t as ignorant as Cynthia and Grace.
CindyGee says:
Sorry about the double posting, it looked as though my first comment wasn’t going to show up, so I posted it again.
Anyhow, it has occured to me that if the Chanceys ever grow tired of politics and religion, they could always become a husband-and-wife ventriloquist act. I’ve never seen people so adept at speaking out of both sides of their mouths!
Jenny doesn’t believe that women have a historical or biblical right to vote….yet she says that she votes…. and she says that she doesn’t oppose women voting.
The Chanceys have gone on record saying that it is a sin for a woman to work outside the home, yet Matt says that he is open to women in the workplace.
Sheesh!
I have only one question: when the Matt and Jenny Ventriloquist Show finally opens, who are they gonna get to be the PUPPETS?
Actually, Josh, there is quite a lot of dirt to be found on the Chanceys if one knows where to look, but why sling mud when they are doing such an exemplary job of discrediting themselves?
The Chanceys’ bizarre view on suffrage is easily documented through their own online writings, and that, together with their doublespeak concerning what they really believe and their insistance that everyone is picking on them simply because Jennie chooses to be a homemaker is quite enough for the moment.
JoshuaC says:
“Jenny doesn’t believe that women have a historical or biblical right to vote….yet she says that she votes…. and she says that she doesn’t oppose women voting.“
Just because someone believes one thing, doesn’t mean that they believe everyone should believe the same as they do.
Cynthia Gee, you are like a machine that won’t stop spreading false rumors.
What will you do when you keep running out of material? Keep creating false accusations?
Grace says:
Joshua, you are the one who needs to read more carefully. I never said anything about Matt being open to working with women. In truth, he has no choice, because that is the way things are. And what I said about Jennie is on the Vision Forum website for all to read. I don’t agree with her, and that isn’t dishing up dirt, the same as Matt saying he doesn’t agree with Doug Phillips on everything means Matt is dishing up dirt.
This article opened up about Jennie’s views, and it is a fact she said working wives (outside the home, that is) blaspheme Scripture, and one of the reasons she said that is because she said it’s impossible to work outside the home and keep the home, both.
While this may be true if the work keeps a wife away from home all the time, it doesn’t cover all the bases of women who work to supplement income, as Jennie does, on a part-time basis.
Jennie has had to work in order to write a book, which has been marketed, and this of necessity has taken time from being a homemaker.
I was merely pointing out that what she does, and what many, many women do by working some hours away from home is really no different, and clearly I implied there was a double standard.
But note this—THAT IS DISCUSSING HER PUBLIC REMARKS, and stating WHY I DISAGREE with them. This hardly constitutes “digging up dirt” about someone. Claiming my comment was “digging up dirt” is hysterical.
I know she says a woman shouldn’t be under more than her husband’s authority if she is married, but that is an impossibility, because a woman is always under more than one authority, whether she is single or married. Being married doesn’t mean she has to stop being under all authority but her husband. That is absurd. She remains a citizen, perhaps a member of a church, and perhaps more venues where she is under authority, and then there is the authority of Christ and the Scriptures.
Grace says:
Let me be clear. Here are Jennie’s own words, not mine:
www.visionforumministries.org/issues/family/jennie_chancey_responds_to_tit.aspx
Jennie Chancey:
“How does a woman blaspheme the Word of God? This isn’t something we can just brush aside or take lightly as a “cultural thing.” St. Paul evidently believed it would be obvious enough to his readers that he didn’t need to say, “Leaving the home and going out into the workforce is sin,” . . .
A simple glance at the domain which the wife is commanded to oversee and rule — yes, rule — should demonstrate beyond a doubt that it is not possible to be an effective, capable keeper at home while pursuing another (outside) occupation.“
OK, this very article mentioned Jennie pursuing “another (outside) occupation” of co-authoring a book. Granted, it was about housewives, but authoring a book you market on Amazon and elsewhere, do interviews for, etc., does not qualify as homemaking in and of itself. It is an “outside occupation,“ and a money making one at that.
(In between Lady Lydia made a lot of inapproriate, irrelevant, inaccurate comments that can be read here. Meanwhile, back to the dicussion)
CindyGee says:
Well, Mike, it isn’t pretty, that’s for sure!
I’m the Cynthia Gee that “Lady Lydia” has been ranting about. I sort of helped start all this, when I commented on another Dothan Eagle story last week, and pointed out that Alabama voters deserved to know that Matt and Jenny Chancey hold some rather bizarre beliefs regarding women’s suffrage, women in the workplace, etc.
I wasn’t “slinging dirt”, or making up “falsehoods”, I simply described what the Chanceys believe, and provided links to their own sites and those of their close associates, where Matt and Jenny and their close associates described their views at some length. My comment here was truncated for some reason, though since then it has spread in various forms across the internet; here it is in full, for the readers of the Dothan Eagle:
Alabama voters should be made aware that Matt Chancey opposes women’s suffrage on religious grounds. Matt Chancey and his wife Jennie believe that it is a sin (or at the very least, is highly inadvisable) for women to vote, hold political office, attend college, or work outside the home. These views are expounded upon at great length on Jennie Chancey’s website,Ladies Against Feminism.
Apparently, in the Chancey household’s ideal world, fathers would vote for the household, and all daughters would live at home “serving their fathers“ until the time of their arranged courtship and marriage, at which time they would pass from their father’s ownership into their husband’s possession, thus assuring that they would never have the chance to vote; theoretically, any adult sons living at home would be similarly disenfranchised.
Certainly women COULD vote under such a system if they were the heads of their own household, but the only time that this would happen would be when a woman was widowed, and then only until such time as she remarried or moved in with an adult male relative; in Chancey’s world, to ensure that widows remarried promptly, they might even be encouraged to avail themselves of Christian matchmaking/arranged-marriage services, such as this one, run by Jennie Chancey’s parents. (Jenny Chancey’s father is the Reverend Ovid Need; he is a prolific writer, for some samples of his work and his rather amazing views concerning Jews, Catholics, and women, go here and here and here.)
Matt Chancey is also on very intimate terms with Doug Phillips, the president and founder of VisionForum Ministries, a major homeschooling curriculum company. Phillips also teaches that God doesn’t allow women to vote or hold office. Doug Phillips is described by Matt Chancey as being his dear friend and mentor, while Phillips in turn praises as his own intellectual hero one of the most virulent racists of the 19th century, Robert L. Dabney, and has authored a book , Robert Louis Dabney: The Prophet Speaks.
...and Matt is not above a bit of internet sleight of hand, either, when it will aid his political ends, as shown by this article, from the Washington Post.
Head-of-household voting, arranged courtship and marriages, bride-prices…. that’s NOT the American way—in fact, it’s SO unAmerican that most folks would never dream that ANYONE in this day and age (other than fundamentalist Islamics) could hold such views, much less an educated man who is running for political office in the United States of America!
But, Matt Chancey and those close to him DO appear to hold such views, and the voters of Alabama need to know about it.
Cindy also said:
Another thing that’s slightly off-kilter here are Jennie and Matt’s rather transparent attempts to gloss over the controversy surrounding their views on suffrage—they attempt instead to make it appear that people are picking on Jennie because she chooses to be a full-time homemaker, and claim that the question at hand is one of whether or not women should be “allowed” the choice to be homemakers; they also imply that it all boils down to a choice between radical feminists who advocate gay marriage, and “old fashioned” girls who eschew the right to vote.
This is a deliberate attempt at obfuscation—NOBODY is “telling women they shouldn’t even be allowed the choice to be homemakers”, and nobody but Jennie brought up homosexual marriage, or said that it is somehow mainstream.
Homemaking is still very much MAINSTREAM, and the concept of “one person, one vote” is likewise MAINSTREAM; conversely, in America today, the idea that suffrage should be limited to male heads of household — like the idea that homosexuals should marry one another or the idea that indentured servitude should be legal– is definitely NOT mainstream.
“Naturally, everyone has the right to choose his or her own path”, but when that path runs contrary to what most Americans consider normal and decent, and when when the person on said path is seeking to serve in a position of governmental authority, one can expect normal, decent folks to have questions about it.”
Cerebral says:
Only some freaky fundie right wing nut job would even utter that women shouldn’t vote. Or that working is a sin.
I have news for you: you don’t even have to have children if you don’t want them! And you especially shouldn’t be having eight whom you refuse a decent education to. That’s the crux of the whole fndie movement: lack of education, separation of the sexes, unequal rights and religious/superstitious extremism. The rest of the country is laughing at Jennie.
Mike Keevert says:
WOW, thanks for the links Cindy. I went to the LAF site and contrary to Jennie’s assertions I DID read many of her articles. Again…WOW…seems Jennie is perfectly happy “barefoot and pregnant” and wants all other women to do the same. Is this 2008 or 1808?
CindyGee says:
“ The rest of the country is laughing at Jennie.“
And, “Cerebral”, that’s a shame. Everybody should be able to believe as they choose without being laughed at.
My only point was that if people do have views that are “out there”, they ought to be willing to let the voters know about them, should they choose to run for public office, BUT, such scrutiny (and even criticism or denouncement as being cultic) is not the same as ridicule.
That being said however, I’d like to point out that being a fundamentalist does not automatically equate to being an extremist nut or a cult follower. A fundamentalist, strictly speaking, is someone who believes the fundamental, historically orthodox doctrines and truths of his or her religion, without a lot of trendy, man-made innovations (such as the blessing of gay marriages or the idea that the Bible forbids female suffrage or mandates homeschooling), and it is ironic that the churches which are most often described as fundamentalist are usually those unorthodox churches and cults which have gained a reputation for being the nut ward of Christianity. The churches have brought this situation upon themselves, to a large extent, beginning in the 1980’s when the televangelists first started to gain a large following—many “fundamentalist” churches were happy to ride on their coat-tails, gaining new membars (and bigger Sunday collection plate hauls), even if it meant that they began to adopt some ideas that were NOT fundamental to historical Christianity; then in the 1990’s, Gary North and Phil Lancaster and the other bright young things in the Patriarchal/Agrarian/Dominionist movement got the Y2K disaster scare rolling, and many preachers and congregations bought into that, and when the televagelists fell to scandal and Y2K didn’t happen, the churches shared in the pop-preachers’ discreditation and as a consequence wore the resultant portion of egg facial.
But, the churches haven’t learned from the experience.
One look at the writings of Doug Phillips, Ovid Need (Jennie Chancey’s step-father, who calls Pope John Paul II an antichrist), Gary North, or Bruce Ware shows that they are certifiably outside of mainstream, historical Christianity, with their talk of arranged marriages, stoning people to death, letting women die from tubal pregnancies, etc, and yet their books are selling like hotcakes in “fundamentalist churches, especially throughout the South….. and still we who are mainstream, orthodox, fundamental Christians wonder why people outside the church are calling all fundamentalists and even all Christians into question?
I’d say that it’s NO wonder, no wonder at all. If we in the churches do not police our own, and call a cult a cult when we see one, we shouldn’t blame non-Christians for pointing out that the emperor has no clothes.
Grace says:
“Only some freaky fundie right wing nut job would even utter that women shouldn’t vote. Or that working is a sin.“
This isn’t necessary; I agree with Cynthia on that.
Jennie, by and large, thinks women shouldn’t vote, unless they are the head of their household through widowhood, and perhaps even incapacitation of the husband, but I’m not sure on that one. She believes in one household, one vote, and that should go to the man.
In this day and age, to teach that principle to wives is asking for trouble, because Jennie is allowed to vote, and could double her household vote, and if they have children over 18 living with them it could be tripled, quadrupled, etc..
So I have to ask why, if she is permitted by law to vote, that she doesn’t, because this belief played out in huge numbers nowadays means probable loss of elections for them. And the only answer I can come up with is she really believes it would be a sin for her to cast a vote. Even if she does just what her husband tells her to do.
On working, it is working outside the home that is the sin. Jennie believes women should work, but for wives to be employed outside the home means they are blaspheming Scripture, because she is sure all women who do this are neglecting their husbands and children. I disagree.
And she thinks wives can’t be serving two masters, so if a woman works outside the home, it is a sin for her to be under a boss’ authority. Again, I disagree. That concept is just simply not in Scripture. When Jesus said you can’t serve two masters, he was talking about serving God and money. But that goes for men, too. And we have to remember that we are all to be subject to multiple authorities—if in school, our teachers, our bosses, our law enforcement officers, the government, the elders at our churches, so Jesus could not possibly have meant that a person was to never have more than one authority in his life at a time. What He was saying is you can’t have more than one ultimate master, who is the despot, in your life, at a time.
That of course, shut up JoshuaC for a while!
Then there was another article in the Dothan Eagle, called "FAQs about the upcoming primary runoff elections."
Here again JoshuaC displayed his foot-in-the-mouth affliction.
In the comments section you can find:
JoshuaC says:
We need energy independence in our state. We need accountability at the PSC. We need Matt Chancey for PSC President.
The Chancey Five-Point Plan to Improve the Public Service Commission
1. Nuclear Power Expansion
2. Clean Coal and Other Fossil Fuels
3. Hydro-electric Expansion
4. Supporting Economic Development
5. PSC Performance Review
www.mattchancey.com
Cynthia Gee says:
I wonder if Alabama voters are aware that Matt Chancey opposes women’s suffrage on religious grounds?
Matt Chancey and his wife Jennie believe that it is a sin for women to vote, hold political office, attend college, or work outside the home.
These views are expounded upon at great length on Mrs.Chancey’s website, Ladies Against Feminism:
http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/Hot_Button_Issues_2
JoshuaC says:
Cynthia Gee is an example of people hearing what they want to hear regardless of what is actually said. Jennie’s point was that gender should have nothing to do with voting if you have a system where a vote represents a family. In a sense, her position is actually very “progressive” since it would give representation to children, whereas they are completely left out of the suffrage question today.
Keep in mind that people do have personal convictions. Just like Cynthia Gee probably has personal convictions that some people don’t agree with.
People used to vote as a family and also people who owned land used to vote, because their vote affected their land.I wonder if Cynthia Gee knew this? And if so, then she is ashamed of her founding fathers because that’s how they voted!
No comments:
Post a Comment