Tapping one's foot means what?

[quatona]

Noooo...I said it was a red herring because conservative pastors counseling abused wives has nothing to do with tapping feet in a bathroom.

(emphaisis added)
No, that´s not what you said.
You said:

THAT is a red herring, because any pastor that does this isn't presenting the mainstream belief behind wives submitting, nor are they preaching true Christian doctrine.

(emphasis added)
Don´t know why it´s so hard to stand corrected on such a simple mistake.

 

[Belk]

Noooo...I said it was a red herring because conservative pastors counseling abused wives has nothing to do with tapping feet in a bathroom. It has everything to do with people getting to take another pot shot at conservatives.

True, it has nothing to do with tapping feet in the bathroom, but then it was not supposed to I don't think. It was a specific rebuttal to PC_F's argument talking about liberals, thus the mention of conservatives. It was purposefully a bad argument in an attempt to show PC_F the error in his logic.

 

[Zaac]

LOL That's the first thought that came to my mind after reading the OP

The lack of knowledge about this foot tapping thing is strange to me. I remember as a teen, as a college student, etc going into bathrooms and seeing Tap once to give, tap twice to receive and immediately knew what they were referring to.

I bet you could still go to any college campus in the country and still find these bathrooms.

Now I'm in the Bible belt and been out of school almost 20 years. I'm just as surprised now as I was when folks then know about this foot tapping stuff during the Larry Craig ordeal.

Keep your feet on the floor or far enough away so that ain't nobody misconstruing what is taking place.

 

[beechy]

(emphaisis added)
No, that´s not what you said.
You said:

(emphasis added)
Don´t know why it´s so hard to stand corrected on such a simple mistake.

qft.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I did not use the word majority. If you where talking about me, please do not place those words in my mouth. That would be fallacious.

also i think the augment went something like this






do you think 26% is frequent? that's 1/4 of the time.

That's frequent enough to be significant.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

That's frequent enough to be significant.

It's not "frequent". They're not saying that 26% of the time they counsel this way. 26% of 6000 pastors of whatever denomination said in a survey they would counsel a women this way.

This does not equate to the majority of conservative Christian pastors, or the religious right, doing it. If there was ever a pastor in our synod who did it, you can bet your bottom they'd be in trouble and probably let go from the ministry for their gross misunderstanding of what the role of man and woman is.

But again - it still has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Why is that so hard to see?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Here was my original usage of the phrase.

No, because any pastor in his right mind doesn't tell a wife who is being abused to submit to her abusive husband.

That's a fallacious argument and a red herring you've tried to throw in the mix, Lynn.

which was in response to Texas Lynn posting:

Now can you show where any conservative religious right group has ever condemned a member of the clergy of their denomination who has counseled a battered wife to "submit" to her abusive husband?

This is a red herring. I apologize for misusing the term later on, but I got it right the first time and this is what I was referring to. I'll go edit my other post.

 

[clarksided]

I tapped my foot when I saw Bob Dylan at Jazzfest in 07.

AND I DO NOT REGRET IT!

 

[beechy]

It's not "frequent". They're not saying that 26% of the time they counsel this way. 26% of 6000 pastors of whatever denomination said in a survey they would counsel a women this way.

This does not equate to the majority of conservative Christian pastors, or the religious right, doing it. If there was ever a pastor in our synod who did it, you can bet your bottom they'd be in trouble and probably let go from the ministry for their gross misunderstanding of what the role of man and woman is.

But again - it still has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Why is that so hard to see?

You are the only person who has said anything about such counsel having been offered by the majority of conservative pastors. It's like you're setting up and refuting your own argument.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

You are the only person who has said anything about such counsel having been offered by the majority of conservative pastors. It's like you're setting up and refuting your own argument.

I don't even think it's offered by the majority of any pastors. What are you talking about? Lynn brought up conservative and the religious right, not me. Then several people tried to say that 26% was "frequent" and "significant".

It wouldn't even BE an issue if Lynn hadn't brought it up here, which was my initial point.

 

[beechy]

I don't even think it's offered by the majority of any pastors. What are you talking about? Lynn brought up conservative and the religious right, not me. Then several people tried to say that 26% was "frequent" and "significant".

It wouldn't even BE an issue if Lynn hadn't brought it up here, which was my initial point.

Nobody said anything about majorities (except for you). Frequent and significant are not synonyms for majority. Majority has a specific meaning, i.e., 51% or more. Nobody has made such a specific claim.

I understand that Lynn started this branch of the discussion, but you've responded to her posts and it is those responses I've taken issue with. My post which linked to articles about pastors advising women to submit to their abusive husbands was meant to dispel what I read as your statement, implication, and/or belief that no clergy in their right mind would offer this type of advice.

On the contrary, there's at least one survey out there which suggests that up to 26% of pastors surveyed would offer that type of advice. You've countered that 26% is not a majority (I don't dispute that, and neither has anyone else). You'e also countered that no one in your particular synod would do that (I can't dispute that, since I know nothing about your synod or the clergy in it). You've also countered that the survey doesn't distinguish between conservative and liberal pastors (I don't dispute that either -- although we haven't talked about how we would define those terms in the first place).

My point is simply: There are at least 1,560 clergy members who have expressly stated they would advise women to submit to their abusive husbands.

And the only reason I threw that out there is because I read your post to include at least an implication that NO clergy would offer this type of advice. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe you DO believe there are clergy who would offer this type of advice. If you do, then we can stop all this round and round, and chalk it up to a big misunderstanding.

 

[Texas Lynn]

It's not "frequent". They're not saying that 26% of the time they counsel this way. 26% of 6000 pastors of whatever denomination said in a survey they would counsel a women this way.

That's not an infrequent number.

This does not equate to the majority of conservative Christian pastors, or the religious right, doing it.

No one said it was.

If there was ever a pastor in our synod who did it, you can bet your bottom they'd be in trouble and probably let go from the ministry for their gross misunderstanding of what the role of man and woman is.

I would recommend you not be so flip with expressing certainty on such a topic. Most pastors who sexually assualt kids are still serving as pastors. If they can't catch (or choose not to catch) the short eyes in the clergy what makes you think they can catch those whose pastoral counseling consists of spiritual abuse?

 

[Texas Lynn]

I tapped my foot when I saw Bob Dylan at Jazzfest in 07.

AND I DO NOT REGRET IT!

Did he mumble?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I love it. Texas Lynn puts forth the red herring, I call her on it, and suddenly I'm the bad guy here.

Yes, I believe that no pastor in their right mind would counsel women to do any such thing. So one could logically conclude that I don't believe that the 26% who said they would are in their right mind, nor do I think they understand the role of man and woman, nor do I think they should be pastors.

I clearly stated that if the WELS ever heard of any of their pastors saying such things (and trust me, they would hear of it) they would very quickly intervene (although they'd probably not condemn, we leave that to a higher authority) and the man would more than likely lose his job.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I'm saying that pastors who do it are wrong, and I took offense that Lynn suggested that it was only conservatives that do it.

Good grief. Get back to toe tapping already.

 

[beechy]

Yes, I believe that no pastor in their right mind would counsel women to do any such thing. So one could logically conclude that I don't believe that the 26% who said they would are in their right mind, nor do I think they understand the role of man and woman, nor do I think they should be pastors.

Which is a bigger problem altogether, don't you think? 26% of the polled pastors shouldn't be pastors in the first place and aren't in their right minds????

I clearly stated that if the WELS ever heard of any of their pastors saying such things (and trust me, they would hear of it) they would very quickly intervene (although they'd probably not condemn, we leave that to a higher authority) and the man would more than likely lose his job.

Lynn didn't ask you about WELS.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I'm saying that pastors who do it are wrong, and I took offense that Lynn suggested it was only conservatives that do it.

How would you define a "liberal" church vs a "conservative" church?

Good grief. Get back to toe tapping already.

I said a LONG time ago in this thread that I think toe tapping for sexual encounters with children is bad.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Which is a bigger problem altogether, don't you think? 26% of the polled pastors shouldn't be pastors in the first place and aren't in their right minds????

There's probably a lot more than that who shouldn't be in the pulpit.

Lynn didn't ask you about WELS.

She asked about our specific denominations.

How would you define a "liberal" church vs a "conservative" church?

Doctrine.

I said a LONG time ago in this thread that I think toe tapping for sexual encounters with children is bad.

I think toe-tapping in bathrooms ought not to happen at all, but for the sake of argument (heh) it is possible to mistake the foot of a 10, 11 or 12 year old for that of an adult. Like I pointed out, my son wears a size 10 men's shoe and he's 13. There are two boys at his school who are in 5th grade who wear size 12 shoes. So it's possible to make a mistake. However, if people weren't toe-tapping in bathrooms, this wouldn't happen in the first place.

Whatever happened to meeting people at the bar and then going home with each other? Isn't that "anonymous" enough??

 

[beechy]

There's probably a lot more than that who shouldn't be in the pulpit.

As an aside, that diversity of opinion within the Christian faith alone sort of makes its own case for separation of church and state, don't you think?

She asked about our specific denominations.

She asked for an example from a conservative group or denomination. Not just yours.

Doctrine.

What is "liberal" doctrine when it comes to wifely submission? What is "conservative" doctrine when it comes to wifely submission?

I think toe-tapping in bathrooms ought not to happen at all, but for the sake of argument (heh) it is possible to mistake the foot of a 10, 11 or 12 year old for that of an adult. Like I pointed out, my son wears a size 10 men's shoe and he's 13. There are two boys at his school who are in 5th grade who wear size 12 shoes. So it's possible to make a mistake. However, if people weren't toe-tapping in bathrooms, this wouldn't happen in the first place.

Whatever happened to meeting people at the bar and then going home with each other? Isn't that "anonymous" enough??

I agree with everything you've said here (my brother's feet were about a 12 by the time he was 13 or 14), except that bars are co-ed spaces and bathrooms usually aren't ... so I guess it makes sense that if a pick-up routine is going to evolve in a bathroom it won't happen with straight people. And bathrooms are inherently relatively private places, so .... yeah, I dunno.