How can "Christians" still take Amy Grant seriously?
Particle Man
Grant fan as anyone, and have every right to state a heartfelt opinion.
I'll boil this argument down to its essence:
- Amy makes big money off of the Christian audience with songs proclaiming
things about faith, eternal love, how we can all work through our problems.
Role model to many people. (Good)
- Amy 'crosses over' to the mainstream, uses a little sex appeal on the
albums (no problem), retains her messages of how we can work through all
problems with love and patience etc. It's like, the central theme of her
music.
- Amy cheats on her husband
- Amy divorces her husband
- Amy rationalizes it, and continues to proclaim to be a "Christian" artist,
and sing these songs about reconciliation, eternal love etc.
(BAD!!!!!!)
I thought about peoples arguments about judging others etc, and agree that
many people are too judgmental. But there's some key things that cannot be
justified here. You see, it's not just that she made a mistake and everyone
is human and let's all just forgive and move on. Because not only did she
make an entire living singing songs about EXACTLY WHAT SHE SAID NOT TO DO,
she tries to RATIONALIZE her MASSIVE HYPOCRISY, and refuses to reconcile
with her first (real) husband! (And now with kids by another father that's
impossible) but the point is. When you make millions of dollars singing
songs about how everyone can work out their problems, and then you cheat on
your husband and leave him, you are betraying and nullifying every breath of
word you ever sang about reconciliation and love.
So you cheated on your husband Amy. That's OK, everyone is human.
But according to every word you sang to us for 20 years, you had the
responsibility to make it right, with your husband you claimed to join with
in front of God, and by all accounts he was willing to take you back and
make it right. I can forgive anyone for cheating, and for being human. But
when they continue to make conscious life choices that are 100%
hypocritical, while making money off of people they are betraying, that's
about the sickest thing I can imagine. (Except for the people that continue
to defend her...)
Covenant
"Particle Man" <partic...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ecudnad-7vE...@comcast.com...
> Go ahead and call this trolling,
Why? No one uses the group.
;' )
> I'll boil this argument down to its essence:
I'll boil it down to one sentence...
> - Amy cheats on her husband
And your Proof of that is?
--
Covenant
A Man Who Thought He Had Deleted This Group !!!
Particle Man
news:cvft2o$amo$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> > - Amy cheats on her husband
>
> And your Proof of that is?
UHHHHH the fact she was dating Vince Gill for a year before she got her
divorce? You're living in a universe of denial.
Maybe the title of my thread should have been "How can anyone take
Christians seriously?"
Covenant
> "Covenant" <cove...@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:cvft2o$amo$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > > - Amy cheats on her husband
> >
> > And your Proof of that is?
> UHHHHH the fact she was dating Vince Gill for a year before she got her
> divorce? You're living in a universe of denial.
Not even remotely.
To my mind if one is separated then it's pretty much a done deal.
But, I guess you *do* have a point that looking at it from a purely
sophistic level, then that might well be the case...
However... it also comes down to what one defiones as *cheating*.
Going out with someone, or sleeping with them?
If sleeping with them... Well, I am fairly sure it has been stated that this
was something they did NOT do until after they were married.
If you define it as going out with someone while separated but before
divorce then... it's not a definition I agree with.
However, that definition also means that Gary was cheating on *her*.
So why focus on Amy? ;' )))
> Maybe the title of my thread should have been "How can anyone take
> Christians seriously?"
Maybe it should... but then there are christians, Christians and CHRISTIANS.
(And people *called* Christian.. but that's another debate altogether.)
And, as we're alone in here....
You hafta admit.. you *are* trolling the Amy group. ;' )))
In here, it doesn't matter!
--
Covenant
A Man With Far Too Much Time On His Hands
Particle Man
>
> To my mind if one is separated then it's pretty much a done deal.
> But, I guess you *do* have a point that looking at it from a purely
> sophistic level, then that might well be the case...
Check out the Bible sometime and what it says about sinning in your heart
etc. Was way beyond that. And I couldn't imagine having any faith that she
would have waited to have sex with Vince until marriage with him. She even
said publicly she believes in sex before marriage. She can justify just
about anything it seems. I am certain they had lots and lots of sex before
they were married, I'd bet almost anything on it, but of course no way to
prove it.
> However... it also comes down to what one defiones as *cheating*.
> Going out with someone, or sleeping with them?
> If sleeping with them... Well, I am fairly sure it has been stated that
this
> was something they did NOT do until after they were married.
I'm sure they did state that over and over, so she could continue to retain
as much of her Christian base as she could: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!
> However, that definition also means that Gary was cheating on *her*.
>
> So why focus on Amy? ;' )))
Cause Gary wanted to save the marriage and make it work, Amy threw it away.
That's why.
> You hafta admit.. you *are* trolling the Amy group. ;' )))
Yep now I am. It's unavoidable when you take such an unpopular stance to a
group, no matter how well intentioned at the beginning, once you get flamed
a few dozen times there is no more room for reasoned debate, only the cold
hard facts. Of course I don't really feel that trolling with facts is pure
trolling, but people enjoy conveniently labelling people to try to
invalidate everything they say..
Covenant
> I am certain they had lots and lots of sex before
> they were married, I'd bet almost anything on it, but of course no way to
> prove it.
And *that* is why making the comments you did is hypocritical.
How can one claim that Amy (indeed, why just opick on her, but hey, you're
trolling so...) breached biblical tenets when you yourself are breaking
commandments yourself?
Logs/motes etc etc...
Particle Man
>
> > I am certain they had lots and lots of sex before
> > they were married, I'd bet almost anything on it, but of course no way
to
> > prove it.
>
> And *that* is why making the comments you did is hypocritical.
No, it's not.
> How can one claim that Amy (indeed, why just opick on her, but hey, you're
> trolling so...) breached biblical tenets when you yourself are breaking
> commandments yourself?
I'm not a christian. Not anymore. And I didn't make millions writing songs
about some noble idea and then go shit all over it. Wake up.
Covenant
> I'm not a christian. Not anymore.
So what's bugging you?
Covenant
> "Covenant" <cove...@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:d0fhlf$roi$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > > I am certain they had lots and lots of sex before
> > > they were married, I'd bet almost anything on it, but of course no way
> to
> > > prove it.
> >
> > And *that* is why making the comments you did is hypocritical.
>
> No, it's not.
Why not?
"I'd bet almost anything on it, but of course no way to prove it."
Yet you still state it as fact?
That's hypocrisy.
(Or base lying??)
mark krawczuk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShLloNCQ1UI
she gives the hand symbol for the devil !!! NO IFS OR BUTS OR MAYBE`S ,
SHE IS A DEVIL WORSHIPER , WHY WOULD ANY CHRISTAIN DO THAT ?
"Particle Man" <partic...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ecudnad-7vE...@comcast.com...
Sam
sign for I Love You!! It's the combination of making the a, l and y signs.
Sam
"mark krawczuk" <kraw...@adam.com.au> wrote in message
news:k9-dnaw1MtrFYe_V...@adnap.net.au...
: look at the film clip live on stage ,
: >
: >
: >
:
: