4 ms·
This isn't new - the "Billy Graham rule" has been around since around 1948. My parents taught it to me. It's received some recent news as Mike Pence adopted it.
by geofft 8y ago
This isn't new - the "Billy Graham rule" has been around since around 1948. My parents taught it to me. It's received some recent news as Mike Pence adopted it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Graham_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Graham_rule
The question is whether you think that the self-protection from scandal is worth the systemic discrimination the rule requires you to do.
- ravitation 8y agoThis would be systematic discrimination, not systemic.
- geofft 8y agoIf an entire denomination has historically male clergy and believes in following the Billy Graham rule, is it not systemic, too? (But yeah, if it's just me by myself in an otherwise-equitable industry, yes. I'm not convinced I'm in an otherwise-equitable industry though.)
- ravitation 8y agoYou are talking about a type of discrimination that you explicitly say "you" (i.e. one) choose to do, not about the nature of the evangelical clergy. Unless the "you" in your statement is only supposed to be a stand-in for the evangelical clergy reading your comment... Which I took it to not be.
- jdc 8y agoSee also the Aniyata rules from the Theravada Buddhist monastic code, dating back to the early part of the first millenium (BC). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patimokkha#Aniyata https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patimokkha#Aniyata
- loco5niner 8y ago>The question is whether you think that the self-protection from scandal is worth the systemic discrimination the rule requires you to do. From a Christian perspective(both Billy Graham and Mike Pence are Christians) it's honestly more about being true to your wife than avoiding scandal (though it is both). It's the same reason many Christian men put internet filters on their phones and computers, to protect themselves (and their relationships) from themselves.