How should Christians redeem their regrets over past decisions?

Recently, I posted a dating ad from a 39-year-old never-married single mother. She explained that she was now a Christian and was looking for a man to marry her, so that she could have a second child “the right way”. Some people thought we should take her conversion at face value. Others thought she was desperate and looking for a financial bailout. How can we tell if she is really sincere?

Well, I was still thinking about the comments on that post when I saw another great post from Laura, who writes at An Affair With Reason. Her post is about the feelings of regret that people have because of their past mistakes, and how Christians should deal with those regrets.

She writes:

As I thought about what to write I became distressed, sorrowful, angry, and even despondent over some of my own decisions. As I sobbed inconsolably, I noticed that every caustic thought began with, “If only….” That’s when I realized I was still carrying the burden of regret and I didn’t know how to let go. It wasn’t that I still needed God’s forgiveness or that I had any doubts about my standing with him; I knew I was forgiven. It was the lifelong consequences that I experience to this day which embittered my soul and squelched my joy.

The “if onlys” are a heavy burden to carry. They represent shattered dreams that will never be recovered in this life. They invoke feelings of discontentment, grief, and doubt. They cause us to sob with regret for what could have been, to pray for second chances that we know will not be granted.

So what do we do with the regrets that we must live with for the rest of our lives? Lately, as I’ve reflected on conversations I’ve had with many women who have made regretful decisions over the years and on the direction of our culture, I’ve noticed two very distinct paths:

1. Attempt to assuage our own guilt and regret by convincing others to make the same foolish, and even sinful, decisions we made.

 OR

2. Humble ourselves, grieve our losses, and commit to teaching the younger generations to choose a better way.

The first path is the wide and well-traveled one. Tragically and despicably, most people today seek to justify themselves and ease their consciences by getting others on board with their own ignorance, foolishness, and sinfulness.

She’s got quite a few examples of the kinds of regrets that men and women have, and different ways of dealing with those regrets. Some ways self-serving, others God-serving. Her examples are really interesting. It reminds me of “The Great Divorce” by C.S. Lewis, where he explains why some people don’t resist God, and others do. Some people want to justify the past, and keep making decisions to benefit themselves. Others want to serve God. They want to take on the difficult work of opening up to others, and loving them by telling them the truth.

When I hear someone with a past say that they have now become a Christian, I normally ask “is this conversion just convenient for you or is it the result of some process where your mind was changed through study?” You can ask the person to show their work – how did they get to the right answer? And what has becoming a Christian cost them? How does it affect their relationships with non-Christians?

People “convert to Christianity” all the time based on need. Sometimes they’re trying to get something for themselves, e.g. – wanting to not be judged for their past, so they can attract a partner to financially support them. But other people spend years reading books and changing their minds page by page, debate by debate. Then they put their knowledge into practice.

I have mentored women who did this. One girl who contacted me through the blog wasn’t able to talk to her smart atheist brother about her faith. Then, she read a bunch of apologetics books about science and history, then called me and slipped the phone into her pocket and let me listen to her make a bold, informed stand for her Christian worldview for two hours. She won every point.

When people really become Christians, they don’t do it in order to be happy and or to be liked. They take on work, and they take on shame, because they have a Boss now. That’s how you can tell that real repentance has taken place. The letters of Paul in the New Testament are filled with advice for Christians who want to be bold, put themselves second, and advocate for their Boss. You should read them. When you read the Bible, try to put aside your feelings, your desires, and your concerns about what people will think. You’ll find that putting work for the Boss ahead of what you want is worth the price of being “second”. I would start with Philippians, then go on to 1 Peter.

By the way, this isn’t the first time I’ve linked to Laura’s posts. Here are some of the other times I’ve linked to her work on my blog: on voting, on Islam, on mentoring boys, on fighting with pastors, on learning what works when dealing with atheists. She had a 10 part series advising women how to choose a husband, which really made me feel good as a man. Today, most people see a husband as an accessory – like a handbag. He’s there to provide, or to be a handyman, or to complain at if the wife is unhappy. Men should read that series, and find out what we can do in a marriage, if we are valued for our distinctive male nature.

Judge rules that man must pay $50,000 a month to ex-girlfriend for 10 years

When I was younger, I used to think that having definite views on morality and theology was a bad thing. I had my share of rejections by Christian women who didn’t like that I rejected universalism and annihilationism. Others didn’t like that I was pro-life. And today, most Christian women tell me that supporting gay rights is a non-negotiable for them. But maybe being alone was not all bad.

The news story is from one of Canada’s national newspapers, the National Post:

A wealthy businessman will have to pay more than $50,000 a month in spousal support for 10 years to a woman with whom he had a long-term romantic relationship even though they kept separate homes and had no children together, Ontario’s top court has ruled.

Under Ontario law, an unmarried couple are considered common-law spouses if they have cohabited — lived together in a conjugal relationship — continuously for at least three years. But that doesn’t necessarily mean living in the same home, the court found.

[…]When their 14-year relationship finally broke down in May 2015, Climans asked the courts to recognize her as Latner’s spouse and order him to pay her support. He argued she had been a travel companion and girlfriend, nothing more. As such, he said, they were never legally spouses and he owed no support. An eight-day trial ensued.

In her decision in February 2019, Superior Court Justice Sharon Shore sided with Climans. She ruled they were in fact long-time spouses, finding that despite their separate home, they lived under one roof at Latner’s cottage for part of the summer, and during winter vacations in Florida. Shore ordered him to pay her $53,077 monthly indefinitely.

Superior Court Justice Sharon Shore didn’t care that the man never married this woman, or lived with her, or had children with her. He had money, and she wanted it, so the judge gave it to her.

Elsewhere in the article, we learn that he had asked her to sign a pre-nuptial agreement many times, and each time she refused. (Those are not even enforced in divorce courts) It’s like her plan all along was to demand that a judge awarded her all of this man’s money.

Some people will say “well, these are Ontario family courts, this is normal. Haven’t you heard about what happened to Dave Foley?” I think every man knows the story of what the Ontario divorce courts did to Dave Foley.

Here is a story about it from the far-left Toronto Star, otherwise known as the Toronto Red Star.

It says:

Dave Foley of beloved Toronto sketch troupe the Kids in the Hall is starting a new career in standup comedy, but not in Toronto — he suspects he’ll be arrested if he returns to Canada.

The 48-year-old faces a back child-support bill in Ontario of more than half a million dollars: the accumulation of a debt that accrues steadily at more than $17,000 per month. On the set of Servitude, a film shot in Toronto last year, “I told the production guys, I have a court appearance on Monday and there’s a good chance I’ll be in jail on Monday afternoon,’” Foley said in an interview with the Star.

During an appearance on comic Marc Maron’s WTF podcast last month, Foley explained that his marriage to Toronto writer Tabatha Southey ended during his run on NBC’s five-year hit comedy NewsRadio, and he has failed in his efforts to adjust his child support downward to reflect his new life after sitcom stardom.

“My income has dropped in the last 10 years, as anyone can tell from the number of s—ty movies I’ve been in,” says Foley. “I’m not exactly picking and choosing my projects.” However, four years ago, Superior Justice Nancy Backhouse denied his motion to vary his support payments.

[…]Foley says that Ontario’s Family Responsibility Office now has an enforcement order and last year sought a six-month jail sentence for him, which was to extend indefinitely, until the overdue support was paid.

Ontario family courts are notoriously anti-male, and men know this. Unfortunately, the female judges who make these rulings don’t seem to understand that men know what they are doing, and then opt out of marriage. It must be so wonderful for these judges to punish the men who appear before them. But they can’t punish the men who respond to what they are doing by declining to marry women, and then declining to date women, and then declining to even speak to women.

I looked up Superior Justice Nancy Backhouse, and found another article about her decisions, entitled “Judge rejects pre-nup, awards ex-wife $5.3-million”. So, pre-nuptial agreements are also thrown out in Ontario divorce courts.

But it’s not just Ontario. I have two Christian friends here in America who married their Christian wives as virgins, and then their wives divorced them. I heard what happened to them in divorce court. They lost custody of their kids, and they are forced to pay alimony and child support even though their ex-wives poison the children against them, and deny them communication rights and visitation rights. And men know that this is happening to other men. How can women expect men to marry when the financial risks are so high?

Forbes magazine explains:

Of the 400,000 people in the United States receiving post-divorce spousal maintenance, just 3 percent were men, according to Census figures. Yet 40 percent of households are headed by female breadwinners — suggesting that hundreds of thousands of men are eligible for alimony, yet don’t receive it.

The divorced courts are biased against men, and men are getting the message. They look at these cases, and they understand that marriage is not worth the financial risks. They don’t want to have their possessions stolen by radical feminist judges.

Further reading

An excellent book to read about this issue is Dr. Stephen Baskerville’s book “Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family“. You can read what the book is about here. Dr. Baskerville is a Christian and a conservative. He has a PhD from London School of Economics, and teaches at Patrick Henry College, a conservative Christian college.

Nikki Haley’s troubling record on China, Black Lives Matter, Blackrock ESG, etc.

Here are a few stories about Nikki Haley, and at the end, I’ll tell you who should vote for her.

First one, this is new from this week, reported in the Washington Examiner:

Many Republicans envisioned Haley as a viable alternative to the current front-runner, former President Donald Trump, for voters in the Republican primary. Yet such hopes could be dashed after an absolute clunker of an appearance by Haley on Fox News on Tuesday. The former South Carolina governor declared her support for eliminating anonymous accounts and unverified users on social media platforms. And, without stating where such power would actually come from, Haley also announced, as one of her first acts as president, she would force all users to be verified.

“When I get into office, the first thing we have to do, social media accounts, social media companies, they have to show America their algorithms. Let us see why they’re pushing what they’re pushing,” Haley said during an appearance on Fox News. “The second thing is every person on social media should be verified by their name.”

[…]@NikkiHaley comments on Fox News on Tuesday should raise red flags for all Republicans. One cannot be the party of freedom & all things good in the country but declare an intent to eliminate anonymous political commentary.

This one is also new, from yesterday, reported in The Daily Caller:

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley met with several Wall Street executives in a series of events Tuesday in her bid to be the Republican nominee for president, according to the Financial Times.

Haley attended a small meet-and-greet breakfast in New York where CEO of BlackRock Larry Fink was in attendance, followed by a fundraiser later in the day co-hosted by Gary Cohn, former president of Goldman Sachs, according to the FT. BlackRock has been criticized by conservatives in recent years for its adoption and promotion of Environment, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) policies, which aim to invest in companies based on their commitment to social and environmental causes.

“Let’s call ESG what it really is: corporate socialism,” Haley’s campaign said in a previous statement to The Hill. “What we need is capitalism and not businesses caving to the left. When they do, everyone loses.”

Republican-led states, like Florida and Texas, in opposition to BlackRock’s use of “woke” ESG investment, have pulled their money from the investment firm. Altogether, Republican-led states pulled almost $4.5 billion from the company in 2022.

This one from the far-left Washington Post:

“I saw something on the internet that said you gave China thousands of acres of land in South Carolina. Why would you do that?”
— audience member asking a question at a Haley for President town hall in Boone, Iowa, Oct. 9

“Don’t believe what you read on the internet. … We didn’t sell any land to the Chinese. But, yes, I recruited a fiberglass company.”

— former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R), in response

In her campaign for president, Haley has warned repeatedly about Chinese investments, including land purchases, in the United States. Yet as governor from January 2011 to January 2017, she recruited Chinese companies to her state. Chinese capital investment in South Carolina more than doubled from $308 million in 2011 to nearly $670 million in 2015.

The audience member asked whether she “gave China thousands of acres of land.” She answered that “we didn’t sell any land to the Chinese,” specifically mentioning a fiberglass company.

This is political sleight of hand — denying something that was not asked.

The fiberglass deal did not involve the sale of land — but that’s because the company received almost 200 acres of county-owned land free of charge if promised investments were made. By our count, Chinese companies received about 1,500 acres while Haley was governor, much of it through land sales, despite her denial at the town hall.

Another one, from The Iowa Standard talks about her tweet about George Floyd, who is now known to have died from a drug overdose, and who had a long, long criminal record.

Nikki tweeted:

“WE SPENT THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS CELEBRATING OUR SON’S GRADUATION. TONIGHT I TURNED ON THE NEWS AND AM HEARTBROKEN. IT’S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE DEATH OF GEORGE FLOYD WAS PERSONAL AND PAINFUL FOR MANY. IN ORDER TO HEAL, IT NEEDS TO BE PERSONAL AND PAINFUL FOR EVERYONE.”

More from the article:

Tucker took exception to Haley’s declaration that it needs to be “personal and painful for everyone” in order for healing to happen.

“Really, why’s that,” Carlson said. “And of course, what happened next was personal and painful for everyone. Our cities burned down. A lot of people died. And I thought, ‘Why should what happened between a cop and George Floyd outside a convenience store in Minneapolis be personal and painful to anybody else? What are you even talking about? Oh, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re trying to please the people whose opinions you actually care about at The New York Times.’”

Another one, from the Washington Examiner:

[…][B]ack in 2020… it was initially reported that someone had tried to racially intimidate NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace by allegedly “placing a noose” in a garage Wallace was assigned to before a race in South Carolina. Quicker than one could say, “Start your engines,” Haley rushed to condemn the supposed act of hate even while the incident was under investigation before anyone had all the facts.

‪“We should all stand with @BubbaWallace today against the cowards who secretly put the noose in his garage stall,” Haley posted on Instagram. “Watch your back cowards. Bubba has a bigger army than you do. #HateWontWin #WeStandWithBubba.” ‬

But there weren’t any cowards. No army was needed. The story was bogus and not a hate crime. No one “secretly put the noose in his garage stall.” It was just a regular garage pull that had been there long before Bubba Wallace was assigned the garage. Haley didn’t have to make such a statement. She could have waited until all the facts were known.

[…]At a time when she could have shown the country how principled, strong, and tough she was, Haley bought the Left’s narrative, caved, and rushed to do her best CNN or MSNBC anchor impression.

Who should vote for Nikki Haley? Anyone who would also vote for Hillary Clinton. She is the Hillary Clinton of the Republican party. Always putting her foot in her mouth trying to pretend to be something she’s not, and never apologizing for any of it.