Menu
header photo

Ecumenics.org

The Scientific Proof Of God

Scriptural Response

Ecumenics advocate a Scriptural response regarding the male role and societies response to low level behavioural issues; that is sub-legal behavioural issues

Ecumenics hold to a conservative and Christian attitude regarding mans place in society. We believe man is the head of the home, head of the church and is not out of place or depth heading up the state or other institutions. We believe male gender is identical to the male sex.

Ecumenics believe sexuality is an emotionally charged issue better handled at the grassroots level, the level of the community organization, the church or Ecumenic. 

Sexuality

This is too diverse and emotionally loaded issue to be dealt with in anything but a summary fashion however a few points need to be made. 

Male sexuality is not just being questioned; it is under a concerted and often violent attack. The concept of maleness is being displaced by gender neutrality. There was never any question of identity fluidity for females. It was always more acceptable for a female to pose as a male or to even form a lesbian relationship than it ever was for males to cross over into what was seen as female territory. From Ritalin, to Bullyism, to manspaning, discipline, and the injustice of female pregnancy the role and importance of men and even the validity of maleness is questioned and even disputed.

The media is almost universally adverse to maleness. Males are ridiculed and woman portrayed as the ones in control. Men, it is fair to say, are losing the right to be men.

Modern males are increasingly expected to be more female. As the line between right and left blurs so to does the line between male and female merge but it is the male who moves to the effeminate side of the scale. The man who opposes homosexuality, effeminacy, cross dressing, gender fluidity is viewed as barbaric and a potential brutalizer of women. The woman who hates men and the male role is viewed as progressive and a feminist, as is the man who similarly adopts an anti-male position.

The man who hunts, the boy who rough-houses, the male who exerts dominance in his relationships is the enemy of the left. He will be drugged, counselled, disciplined, mocked, abused and isolated. This is part of the problem male politicians face. Either they betray their own natures or become the targets of incessent attacks by the leftist media.

In ever other situation society imposes a level of expectation on its citizen. Robbery was always illegal but those who choose to leave their wealth in the open were not treated as victims in the way someone was who was held up at gun point. The person who leaves his vehicle running in front of a store is apt to be viewed as an accomplice in the theft of the vehicle. But we are told woman can dress as they wish, act as they wish, put themselves in any situation they wish and are not to be held responsible or even a contributor to the offence.

A male and female of the same age and degree of intoxicity are deemed to be into totally different categories of responsibility if the female deems her rights violated the next morning. There are no extenuating circumstances. Females cannot contribute to any criminal act performed by the male as the female is always considered absolutely and categorically the victim.

Men cannot excuse their actions by blaming someone else. They are always culpable. At the same time the law ought not to hold two persons to different standards or hold the same person to two different standards according to the circumstances. 

The lady in dress suit coming out of church is not to be seen as somehow more worthy of legal validation or assumption of innocence so liberals tell us, than the mostly naked, alcoholic teen who passes out in a hotel room  surrounded by a dozen similarly drunk young males. Bother are deemed equally deserving of protection, respect and assumptions of innocence.

Why do we have no expectation of culpability when it comes to woman? Why is the concern for violence against woman an issue but violence against men rarely considered? Is this is a totally separate issue?

If we are equal why are woman given the preference when it comes to assigning victim status to them?​

Can a millionaire walk down the street with a wad of money in his hands and be legally protected against theft to the same level a pensioner is?

The law must be blind to sex and culpability must be evenly distributed. If we become an assessory for putting our possessions in a place where they serve as an enticement what of scantily dressed inebriated woman walking through dark allies or agreeing to enter mens hotel rooms in the early hours of the morning? Is there no level of expectation to be put on females when it comes to morality? In what other situation is the victim guaranteed innocence regardless of the circumstances surrounding the event? 

The male who threatens and abuses his spouse all but loses his legal protections by viture of his actions. On the other hand female assailents are treated far differently than their male counterparts. The male victim of female abuse has a difficult time finding justice or even a sympathetic ear.

Violence against woman is viewed as a kind of separate and more deserving category of violence than other forms. The law must cease this excursion into divisive legal formulations. We need more social intervention at the local level. Behaviours need to be moderated before then lead to more serious things. The church was to serve as an advisory and counselling office; a place where behaviour can be brought to the peoples attention before it erupt into legal charges. Society needs to learn how to intervene earlier and more compassionately than the justice system is able to do.

While the justice system can and ought to be operated by those in the justice system as Justice Ecumenics at the lowest level these organization can serve as informal inquiries into anti-social behaviour at the grassroots level. We need, especially in cases in which a persons sexual behaviour is coming under scrutiny, to be able to deal with the problem earlier on an in a more informal and less legalistic way. This is especially true where sexual patterns are being established in the young. Society needs to create social responses based on the Ecumenic structure to respond to these kinds of situations. 

If it takes a community to raise a child then it takes a Grassroots ecumenic to administrate this kind of cooperative concern.