Sign-up to receive our free newsletter.
By Deanna Murray
In Thursday’s FOX News GOP Presidential Debate, a resounding roar of ‘boos’ filled the auditorium when debate moderator Washington Examiner Columnist Byron York asked Congresswoman Michele Bachmann whether she would be “submissive to her husband” if she were elected president.
This question was framed after a comment Bachmann had made a few years back about how she didn’t want to do something her husband had asked her to do (return to school to become a tax attorney), but she buckled down and did it because he asked. She said she was ‘submissive’ to his wishes.
“Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”
The writer of Ephesians, Paul (formerly a soldier known as Saul who persecuted Christians in Rome), was writing letters to churches he supported while he was in prison and during his vast travels to support Christians in the region. He was outlining instructions/guidance to keep the people of the church focused on God in a society not all-together friendly to the Christian faith.
Let’s not forget Christians were being herded up and thrown into arenas and into Lion’s Dens. His words were those of comfort and of unity and were spoken out of a desire to allow Christians a support system. In the social class present back in the day, men were revered as the leader of the home and of the society in which they lived. Therefore, Paul instructed women to listen to their husbands (who were often more educated and world wise than they were) and then in turn, for husbands to support the church as Christ had.
There is still a place for this, but it is different now as times are different and a woman’s role in this society has astoundingly changed.
In our culture, meanings change through the years based on the times and the interpretation. If they didn’t, “gay” would still mean “happy”; “cool” would only mean a temperature and a rainbow would still represent God’s promise to Noah.
Times have indeed changed. Women have more of a role in this world and in running it and their opinions are respected, acted upon, and continue to make dynamic changes daily.
For someone like me, who actually can’t stand to be told what to do, the word ‘submission’ is pretty much as evil as they come – if a person were to only look at the negative connotation of the word.
Those who want to make Bachmann appear weak because she values her husband’s opinion consider the phrase ‘wives, submit to your husbands’ to mean a woman shouldn’t ever do anything her husband doesn’t sanction, approve of or agree with. She is only as smart as her man says she is; only able to do what her husband says she is capable of and can only make a decision when HE is available to be the deciding party.
The idea of a woman not being able to have her own thoughts or control what she wants to do just because she is in a ‘submissive’ state to her husband is a horrid prison indeed. And what a terrible place this world would be if submission in this sense were the rule of the day for those married.
Leftists want us to believe her commitment to her religion and husband would make her a woman controlled by another – that, instead of Michele Bachmann, President of the United States, all of a sudden we’d have the first co-presidents, Mr. and Mrs. Bachmann, Presidents of the United States.
This simply isn’t true. I applaud Bachmann in the way she explained what submission means to her. She was graceful, dignified and absolutely undaunted by the question.
She spoke of the partnership she shares with her husband, based on mutual respect and collaboration. She further explained, on the Sunday morning talk shows, she doesn’t believe the role of a submissive wife is that of a subservient.
Would she ask her husband for his opinion in matters concerning this country? Of course there would be discussions. But do we really believe former presidents of this country have not discussed national dilemmas with their wives? Collaboration is what we expect. This is why we have a president and not a dictator. It’s why our president has advisors who give him the advice needed – the view of an issue from all angles – in order to make the right decision. And in any strong marriage, a husband or wife will turn to their spouse to get a much-needed, respected perspective.
I might be more hesitant to throw stones at the asking of this question to someone like Hilary Clinton – of course, knowing what we know of Hilary and the relationship she and Bill have now (as well as what they shared in the White House), our country might be slightly better off if the two of them had talked more and kept each other happy … but hey, that’s not how the left sees it.
Dems are still in love with a former president who cheated on his wife, had ‘sex’ with an intern in the Oval office and lied time and time again about it to Congress. But they will throw the fact that a woman, who has consistently achieved national and state-side results and is smart as hell, has a strong, loving, respectful relationship with her husband AND values his opinion? Are we really that gone from understanding the importance of a working, happy relationship?
Does her admission to being a submissive wife make her incapable of running this country? Of course it doesn’t. Her religious beliefs, albeit not for everyone, show she has conviction, moral strength, and most of all guidance from a higher power the founding fathers themselves believed in and trusted. Our country was founded on the faith Bachmann holds true to her heart.
If Bachmann was president, this would be her job. Christian women who believe in the submission to one’s husband make decisions on a constant basis without calling their husbands every five minutes to ask direction. Bachmann would be no exception. Based on the way she has approached her job in Congress, we can assume she would hold true to what she knows to be good, right and constitutional.
Just as they vilified a Bachmann migraine, now the Democrats are trying to demonize the possibility of a female president just because she’s a wife in a happy marriage who happens to respect and value the opinion of the person she’s spent the majority of her life with.
The people of Iowa rebuked this latest attempt at disparagement with Bachmann’s Straw Poll win, but who knows what else the Dems will come up with to throw at Bachmann.
Can we talk about why she prefers a FRENCH Manicure over an AMERICAN Manicure (is it unpatriotic?)? Solid journalism requires asking tough questions of candidates, but when it comes to Bachmann, those left-wing activists parading as journalists will apply every double standard to squeeze her into their template.