Dating Tips for Churchgoers

1. TwoDragons
   September 10th, 2008 at 6:07 am

   I just have to speak up here.

   You don't combat dwindling congregations by turning the Church into a bar with pews. You don't turn a House of God into some shallow dating venue.

   How to combat dwindling crowds? Combat it by not packaging the Word as some fluffy, music-heavy, nicey-nicey-feel-good bunch of quasi-Gospel. You don't dress it up in a $1000 suit and rhinestones and parade it around asking for money. It doesn't have an effervescent smile on the jacket cover and a great review in the New York Times.

   And it especially doesn't encourage its parishoners to treat love and marital fidelity as some sort of joke, like Peter Spalton is apparently doing.

   It's not an easy thing to do, but it's the honest thing.

   --TwoDragons

2. Skipweasel
   September 10th, 2008 at 6:40 am

   Will they be teaching sexual health and contraception at the same time?

3. streetattack
   September 10th, 2008 at 8:40 am

   I thought for sure this was a spoof, I mean come on. The whole walk around you line is hilarious becuase it is sort of obscure.

4. Kelvin k Rutto
   September 10th, 2008 at 9:21 am

   Iam kenyan boy age 26yrs working in kenya army .iwould like to make friendship with white ladies which may lead to marriage call me on.+25472677055

   Sent from my mobile using FeedM8

5. mike_nc
   September 10th, 2008 at 9:26 am

   Your wording of the article makes it sound like Churches want to use flirting tactics and dating services to lure in people and increase congregation size, which is not at all what the article says.

   "Dwindling congregations and a lack of experience in relationships have left many churchgoers struggling to find a partner, according to clergy.
   ...
   Now hundreds of Christians are attending courses designed to make them more successful in turning a first date into a long-term relationship."

6. the real sam
   September 10th, 2008 at 10:14 am

   no no no no no no no... churchgoers definitely do not need to procreate.

7. TwoDragons
   September 10th, 2008 at 10:28 am

   Mike_NC--now THAT sounds much better...

   --TwoDragons

8. John
   September 10th, 2008 at 11:11 am

   "Excuse me, but is your name Grace? Because I find you irrestistible."

   During communion: "Can I get you another drink?"

   “You must have missed The Fall line, because you are lookin’ righteous.”

   “God may be the bread of life, but you are the butter.”

   “You may not have chosen me, but I have chosen you."

   “Until this moment, I thought I had the gift of singleness.”

   "Would you be willing to experience the gift of tongues?

   "Hey baby, let's go get Totally Depraved."

   "You're the best-looking dish at this potluck."

9. notfromconcentrate
   September 10th, 2008 at 12:12 pm

   Ah. Anti-religious bigotry tries to define religious people once again. Funny stuff.

   (The Real Sam)
   Answer a question for me please:
   Can you name another group of people upon whom it would be acceptable for you to apply your anti-procreation message? This is for those of you who scoffed at the "bigotry" label that I applied previously. Directed at any other group of people, that kind of statement would rightfully be called bigotry.

10. CheeseDuck
    September 10th, 2008 at 4:37 pm

    Those pick up lines all seem REALLY LAME.
    I mean, what the heck is ‘I like to arrange the substantial Christian section of my bookshelf into alphabetical order. Coffee?"

11. ted
    September 10th, 2008 at 6:56 pm

    Hmmmm...... "How about a little three-in-one action?"

12. Ben B.
    September 10th, 2008 at 6:57 pm

    > Can you name another group of people upon
    > whom it would be acceptable for you to apply
    > your anti-procreation message?

    Sure. A bunch of people who believed an all-powerful unicorn lived in the sky, created the entire universe, and would help them out if they pray to the Holy Horn and surrendered their inner feelings to said beastie, plus, they'd get to go to the great Corral in the sky, whereas everyone else would suffer under unicorn poop for all eternity. Because someone, or several someones, wrote a book that said so. Such beliefs would be quite stupid and the people who held them very gullible, yes?

    We don't need more of such folks. We don't even need *any* of them.

    Now replace the unicorn with the Christian or Muslim or Hindu gods. Or a teapot. Doesn't seem any less stupid to me no matter how you set it up -- religion is too small an idea to account for much of anything.

    More examples? Sure. A couple of Down's syndrome folk; breeding is, as they say, contra-indicated.

    The bottom line is that genetic errors *do* punish the children for the defects of the parents; it has nothing to do with fairness.

    There are lots of examples. The idea that everyone should breed is actually not a very bright idea in and of itself.

13. notfromconcentrate
    September 11th, 2008 at 12:46 pm

    ben B,
    Religious Creed and/or political beliefs are not hereditary in a genetic sense. That's like me telling you that your intolerance and egotistical assertions about the lack of intelligence of the billions that do not agree with you is written in your genetic code, and you should therefore abstain from reproducing.

    The bottom line is that one individual has no right to keep another from living (and thus procreating) as they see fit. I realize that you are not physically forcing your anti-procreation message on anyone, but you have to realize that your stance is intolerant and does not adhere to the tenants of basic equality and human rights. Your rant is an example of the eugenic philosophy

    There are lots of examples. Communist China, the Third Reich. The idea that anyone should be discouraged from pursuing their basic reproductive rights because of their religious (or atheist) beliefs is actually not a very bright idea in and of itself.

    Your response, juxtaposed with the preceding explanation of your response reveals you to be an utter...well, I don't want to resort to name calling. I'll leave that approach to your self presumed enlightened intellectual status. Tee-off amigo.

14. TheGreyPheonix
    September 11th, 2008 at 4:43 pm

    Ben, do you believe that in 1492 columbus set sail? if so then why?

    It better not be because history books said so, however if it is by your view that you are a gullible fool who should not be alive or be able to procreate. (your words not mine)

    >We don’t need more of such folks. We don’t even need >*any* of them.

    so we don't need you.

15. PJ
    February 5th, 2009 at 5:28 pm

    I have actually had guys say some of these lines to me.

    This article seems like a spoof to me. Which brings me to the topic of sense of humor. Some of you should get one. No wonder no one wants to be a Christian. You all sound like a bunch of people sucking on sour lemons (ok, I don't know any other kind of lemon...). Lighten up - no one is trying to attack you.

    Breathe, just breathe...

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT