From The “When Ethics Alarm Don’t Ring” File, Presidents Of Evangelical Christian Universities Division.

Yes, that really is Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr. smiling, with his pants unzipped, as he poses with an arm around a scantily dressed young woman who is not his wife. And get this: Falwell posted the photo to social media himself. He really did. No, seriously.

I’m getting frightened, because this episode suggest that The Great Stupid is extending beyond the boundaries of the George Floyd Freakout and the 2016 Post Election Ethics Train Wreck, and infecting people that have nothing to do with either. This means, if true, that The Great Stupid can strike any of us without warning. One minute you are arguing about the perils of the National Debt heading into the Red Zone, and suddenly Rep. Ocasio-Cortez starts making sense to you, and you’re sticking shrimp up your nose.

What in the world was Falwell thinking? This would be crazy for the President of Berkeley, and his university is one of the most conservative institutions in the nation,  prohibits students from having sexual relations outside of marriage,  listening to music with lewd lyrics, or watching films with sexual content, and nudity. Students are also required to dress modestly. Great role model, there, Jerry!

Falwell took down the post fairly quickly, but it was still too late. He also apologized, but an apology for showing your students and the world that you have no judgment  at all isn’t really a remedy, and his explanation was ridiculous.

Falwell said that the woman in the photo is his wife’s assistant. and  that she had her pants unzipped because she is pregnant. Soooo…

“She’s pregnant so she couldn’t get her — she couldn’t get her pants up,” Falwell said. “And I was like, trying to like — my — I had on pair of jeans that I hadn’t worn in a long time so I couldn’t get mine zipped either. And so — and so — I just put my belly — I just put my belly out like hers….It was a costume party on a — we were on vacation,” Falwell said. “And, anyway, long story short it was just in good fun. That’s it.”

That’s it, all right.

Liberty University’s Board of Trustees announced today that they requested  Falwell to  take an “indefinite leave of absence” from his roles at the university, which include serving as president and chancellor, effective immediately. Falwell agreed.

And then stuffed some shrimp up his nose.

7 thoughts on “From The “When Ethics Alarm Don’t Ring” File, Presidents Of Evangelical Christian Universities Division.

  1. And he posted no caption to provide context? The photo is tacky to be sure, but I can’t believe he’d be dumb enough to post a photo without a quick, “My wife’s poor assistant is having a hard time fitting into her clothes because of her pregnancy so I thought I’d show solidarity by trying on an old pair of jeans” or something to explain what this photo was about.

    And then his explanation is just a big hot mess of homina, homina, homina about vacation and costume parties and makes me want to cringe that he can’t provide a better statement than that.

  2. ” This means, if true, that The Great Stupid can strike any of us without warning. ”

    It would be prudent to assume it’s true, and be on the guard for the symptoms within one’s self. I intend to be prudent. Others may differ.

  3. There is an article in today’s Times on the topic of his ‘stepping down’ which is worth reading.

    The photo, the situation, the lack of concern for how the photo would be seen, indicates tremendous thoughtlessness. However, the Times article can be read, should be read, to show critical activism at work. The very existence of a Christian and conservative-oriented university, and one so focused on ‘the culture wars’ is anathema to the Times and its progressive readership. The entire notion of ‘social conservatism’ of any sort does not fit with their outlook and general activism. So, a faux pas like this one is presented largely, and perhaps only, to discredit Falwell Jr and Liberty University. And one must consider that since Falwell is an advocate of Donald Trump that a critical attack on Falwell is important in the general condemnation of Trump. The purpose, therefore, is to propagandize against Trump’s reelection.

    So, it seems to me wise to identity what is now being called the ‘cultural Marxist’ tactics and the ‘praxis’ of operational Marxism here. My understanding is that this is what, in essence, the NYTs has become. But it is important when one says such a thing to back it up with reasoned discourse, not merely to use the term ‘Marxist’ or ‘Cultural Marxist’.

    [Medieval Latin prāxis, from Greek, from prāssein, prāg-, to do.]

    There is nothing passive about Marxist activism. To embrace its doctrines is to become an activist of them. It defines itself as a philosophy and a life-practice whose purpose is to attack and break-apart those structures which it defines as oppressive or ‘mystifying’. It defines itself as *the good* battling *the bad*. In the context of Europe Christianity was unquestionably associated with mystifying ideology and therefore it was a given that it had to be demolished — according to Marx and Engels. The metaphysics of Christianity, according to Marxist materialist doctrine, is flatly absurd: unreal. Therefore the ‘real’ must attack and replace what is unreal. And a Marxist activist is an agent of the imposition of the ‘real’ as-against the ‘unreal’.

    Technically, there could never appear any defense of Christianity of a traditional sort in any Marxist activist presentation. And I have seen no forthright defense of traditional Christian doctrine in any article I have ever read in the Times. When Christianity is represented, therefore, it can only be presented and appreciated if it shows itself as becoming non-Christian or post-Christian. If it serves Marxist analysis’s purpose some Christian forms might be presented favorably, but only if they are seen and understood as counter-purposed to traditionalism.

    Saying that the New York Times is a Marxist publication in essence may sound exaggerated and just part of the general exaggeration going on in our polarized present. But I honestly think that the Times is best understood in three different senses. One as a Marxist *organ* in essence. Two as a Maoist cultural engineering vehicle. This is most relevant to our time and day because it is becoming possible, and even desirable, that major corporate interests and other powerful interests, and government of course, ally themselves with cultural Marxism and Marxist social engineering to bring to birth the New America that is envisioned. The third sense is that the NYTs is situated within the NY Intellectual Establishment which has had, and has still, an activist-Jewish center. This is a very confused center in so many ways because Jewry is in a confused state generally. But I submit that one cannot understand the anti-Trump movement unless one understands Jewish reaction.

    If I put it in this way it will be quite clear: to the degree that Trump activates, consciously, intentionally or unconsciously and unintentionally, the specific white demographic of Christian America, and to the degree that that white Christian demographic becomes ideationally capable, is the degree that it is a direct threat to Jewry in America (and in Europe and elsewhere). This is something understood quite well by all Jews. And this is why, essentially, Trump is hated and feared. Although — and this is a contradiction and a problem — Trump has shown himself, quite definitely, as an ally of Zionism in the most direct sense. But here one notices the division and conflict within Jewry itself which is often quite violent and acrimonious.

    One must also understand that to the degree that Christianity or Christendom is strong and self-actualized, is the degree that Jewish interests are weakened. Jewish interests advance in direct proportion as Christian influence wanes. In this sense Judaism (Jewish interests is a better term) must weaken Christian fundamentalism be it Evangelical or Catholic. One of its tools is the Marxian acid. However, there is a point of intersection between Jewish interests and Evangelical Christianity: in Christian Zionism. The more one looks into it, the stranger and weirder it all gets.

    To notice these things and to talk about them is not anti-Semitic though I fully understand that it is seem like this. But even the term ‘anti-Semitic’ is in fact suspect since, theoretically, it could be simply ‘anti-Jewishness’ or perhaps ‘counter-Jewish’ insofar as Jewishness often is anti-Christian and certainly Christian-critical. One has to face the fact that there is a wide and deep movement, worldwide but also in America, that is Jewish critical. But this exists along-side a movement that is highly Judeophilic and as I say Christian Zionism is largely just that.

    So, and again, to understand Our Present more fully requires an analysis that looks ‘behind appearances’ and behind the appearances presented. Very much larger issues are being played-out. What is happening in limited spheres — what I call ‘the superficial’ — is actually tied to far larger issues on a macro-plane. For this reason the term ‘meta-political’ and ‘meta-social’ has meaning and relevancy.


    But here is an interesting contrast: there is another article titled Christianity Will Have The Power which seemed a genuine work of journalism: the kind of journalism I remember, and appreciated, when I first started to read the Times (6-7 years ago). The article provides a genuine insight into the political and cultural thinking of Christian families in rural America.

    Make no mistake: the article is not pro-Christian because it must be anti-Trump! Yet it has favorably aspects and really seems to embody aspects of decent and good journalism.

    • A quote from the above-mentioned article:

      Evangelicals did not support Mr. Trump in spite of who he is. They supported him because of who he is, and because of who they are. He is their protector, the bully who is on their side, the one who offered safety amid their fears that their country as they know it, and their place in it, is changing, and changing quickly. White straight married couples with children who go to church regularly are no longer the American mainstream. An entire way of life, one in which their values were dominant, could be headed for extinction. And Mr. Trump offered to restore them to power, as though they have not been in power all along.

      This describes, as I often say, the essence that operates here. When one asks:

      “Who is the writer here? I want to know what position the writer comes from and also: What is the writer trying to say to me, and why?”

      All sorts of different answers must come to the fore. The writer must be identified as part of an operational system. This is not just an *opinion*. It is an operative and active structure of doctrine and an ideology.

      But also, just consider the declarative nature of the phrasing. You did not conclude this yourself after reading the article — no no — you were told how to interpret. This is why I say that this is Maoist. It implies ‘social shaming’. It implies a ‘cultural revolution’ and the creation of a New Paradigm. And that requires a New Person who sees clearly, not through muddled mystifications.

      Here is another interesting aspect within the phrasing. Who among the ‘righteous’ would wish to preserve those once-dominant values on their way to extinction? Definitely not the writer, not the *voice* that is providing the perspective. America is ‘changing and changing quickly. Who can oppose this? Who should oppose it? Only a ‘white supremacist’ and only a Nazi. This is all implied and it does not have to be stated.

      Straight white couples going to church?1 No no, this is destined to extinction.

      This paragraph contains crucial information and perspective. I think it should be obvious to all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.