Sunday Facepalm: “You Deserve To Suffer!”

Jesse Lee Peterson, screen capture.

Just in time for a holiday celebrating mothers, Jesse Lee Peterson has something to say about all those evil parents who, *gasp*, remarry after being divorced. Turns out that’s just a big ol’ no no, and if you do that, you are not only seriously fucking up your sproggen, you deserve to suffer, too.

“The parents who are doing that are selfish parents,” Peterson said. “You’re selfish and you’re destroying the souls of your children … These people who are blending their families like that do not love their children.”

Peterson insisted that anyone who has a child out of wedlock or gets divorced must remain single and must not “get involved with anyone else” until their children are grown and have moved out of the house.

“You deserve to suffer,” he said. “It’s not your kid’s fault that you are out of control and decided that you were going to have sex … with the wrong person and make a baby. They don’t deserve to suffer that because you were crazy.”

Uh huh. It’s interesting how “shit happens” means you must take punishment, not matter what. Context? Doesn’t matter. Circumstances? Doesn’t matter. Why you evil creature, you had sex, you must pay! Forever! I had been unaware that having sex and a resultant child made a person crazy. That would make most everyone on the planet crazy.

Peterson says that parents who find themselves single or divorced must admit to themselves that they are solely to blame for their situation and “then God will give you love” and they’ll have no need for a partner.

Oh, I’m pretty sure that most cases of divorce are not cases of sole blame or responsibility. It’s not a frivolous matter, dissolving a legal partnership. If a person is being beaten, they are not to blame for a divorce. Takes a lot of courage to get out of such a marriage. If a person is dealing with someone who can’t keep their pants up, I don’t think you get to blame them for walking, but that’s just me. I think kids who end up in the middle of those “we must keep up appearances and stay married for the kids” relationships hate them. Kids aren’t stupid, and this sort of thinking presumes kids are idiots who wouldn’t know their parent or parents were unhappy. Discontent and unhappiness spread, quickly. If a blended family provides support and happiness, that’s a good thing, unless, of course, you’re dealing with Jehovah, who frowns on that whole happiness business.

“It doesn’t matter how nice the person is that you get involved with, the kids are not going to accept it,” Peterson warned. “In their souls, they are not going to accept it and you do a disservice to your children when you do that.”

Ah right, so even if the kids do accept the change, and like the change, and are thriving, you’re still killing them, yes you are! Souls don’t exist. No one has one, and no one is going to endanger their child’s soul by building a stable, happy family.

Via RWW.


  1. says

    I’m pretty sure he’s going to take that message to the Oval Office and tell Trump, right? He’s also going to get his fellow christians to stop supporting the adulterer in chief and stage massive protests against him, right`?

    “It doesn’t matter how nice the person is that you get involved with, the kids are not going to accept it*,” Peterson warned. “In their souls, they are not going to accept it and you do a disservice to your children when you do that.”

    Yeah, that’s totally based on reality.
    Look, cupcake, nobody denies that divorces are hard on the kids, probably in some sense especially if the parents are responsible well adjusted people who split up before they started hating each other and before the kids were suffering massively already.
    And new relationships aren’t easy either, because the new person primarily signed up as “new partner” and not “new co parent” but they’re still an adult in the house and take over an adult role and yes those things are messy.
    And then time passes and before you know your best friend is sobbing into the phone because she has done something that was seriously shitty to her mother’s long term partner because “he’s always been there for me and done so much more for me than my real father”. Yeah, sounds like she was never ever fine with him.

    *Why does this sound like it’s being aimed at the person with whom the children actually live, i.e. the mother and not the other one?

  2. StonedRanger says

    So let me see if ive got this right. When my wife married and had a kid, then divorced because her husband was cheating, that makes her a bad person. Then when she remarried and had another kid, that makes her an even worse person. When that husband started cheating on her (with a devout christian women no less) and left her and the kids, it was her fault and now she is totally a horrible, vacuous mom. She was married to these two guys for a total of about four years.
    Then I came along. I moved in and about four years later we got married. I accepted her children as my own and raised them as my own. Their bio dads had no contact with them after they left the marriage. They call me dad. 36 years later, we are still married and somehow Im now a bad person? Im not prone to violence, but if that guy said that to my face im afraid I might have to show him just how horrible a person I could be. Its real world harm from god dealers like this that caused me to be an anti theist. Im usually pretty laid back as an atheist, but fuck this guy. I will never understand the religious point of view that no one can be happy without their particular sky pie running their lives. I have never needed a god to be a good person or to be happy. Take your soul and shove it. What a jerk.

  3. says

    Stoned Ranger
    Well, you see, according to Christian Logic*, if she had been a better person, those men would never have cheated on her. They’ve always got a “blame it on the woman” card. And if that doesn’t help it’s still her fault because she should have magically known that those dudes were shit.

    *You find that in your grocery store next to vegetarian fish fingers and vegan cheese.

  4. says


    *Why does this sound like it’s being aimed at the person with whom the children actually live, i.e. the mother and not the other one?

    Because it is. It’s women who get knocked up, so hey, your fault! I swear, if it was men who got pregnant, the world would be so different.

    There’s also the implication that it’s strictly a woman’s fault if she has a relationship with a man who turns out be nasty goods, why she should have known! FFS. If you’re going to buy into all that god shite, shouldn’t Jehovah or Jesus or someone be whispering in your ear about who is a great person and who isn’t? From where I sit, that would make it the fault of ‘god’.

  5. says

    I only just caught this…

    Dipshit ought to realize that the main destroyers, historically, of families have been disease, famine, and war: how many orphans did WwI ans WwII create? If he cares about families and souls he should be an antigovernment peacenik anarchist.

  6. mostlymarvelous says

    I know I’m late to this party, but … FFS.

    How does he think people managed before there were antibiotics, let alone such a mysterious thing as industrial health and safety laws? Folk tales about evil stepmothers and unfriendly stepfathers must have been made up out of pure imagination apparently.

    My great-grandmother was a child of a blended family. When her mother died her father, with his 3 or 4 children, promptly married a widow with a couple of kids of her own. They had 2 or 3 children (I simply cannot remember who was who in this mixture). Then that mother died. Now with 7 or so kids, fortunately not all of them were living with him by then, he married another widow with kids of her own -- and had a child by that marriage. Of course, by this time, some of the oldest kids had already married, so my grandmother had an uncle who was younger than her and her two older siblings and a few of her cousins.

    In the end, this family was blended with the children of 5 marriages -- and they all had “siblings” who were not related (genetically) to them in any way. And what was wrong with that? There were occasional confusions with some of the children having the same names, I believe Florence was just a little too popular. It certainly made Xmas and birthday celebrations bigger than they might otherwise have been -- but nobody complained.

  7. says

    Mostlymarvelous, tell me about it! That was common practice, for a very long time indeed. Widowed with kids? Marry again almost immediately, those kids needed another parent. Myself, one of my uncles is more brother status, being 4 years older than I am.

Leave a Reply