The long running daytime drama The Bold and the Beautiful (B&B); has been known for the rivalry between the characters Stephanie Douglas Forrester and Brooke Logan played by Susan Flannery and Katherine Kelly Lang respectfully. While the rivalry of Katherine Chancellor (Jeannie Cooper) and Jill Foster Abbott (Brenda Dickson, Deborah Adair, and current portrayer Jess Walton each played Jill for at least over a year) on B&B's sister show The Young and the Restless (Y&R) lasted much longer; the rivalry of Stephanie and Brooke kind of form a Hypothesis with myself. What if that rivalry was a representation, using soap opera characters; was a fight over sexual morals and customs? Stephanie on the side of class, while Brooke was indeed crass and admitted by her portrayer Lang; that Brooke Logan is indeed the most promiscuous woman on daytime television.
Now I am taking this into the real world, and I have followed the legacy of the Gaylor women. Two of them, mother and daughter Anne Nicol and Annie Laurie; co-founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), and while Annie’s only child Sabrina has taken a job outside of FFRF and thus a low profile...she is likely just as evil and wicked as her elders (starting with Anne’s Father, Jason Theodore Nicol who first apostatized). Now both were and are faithful to their marriages and their families and have the bragging rights as well. However, both were not only anti-faith (especially to the Abrahamic Faiths), but also very pro-abortion and even going as far to declaring the murder of unborn children to be a blessing for women and society. They can bring up the women that should have not been mothers to begin with and then some, but regardless of how the child is killed…it is not painless and its never kind…no matter how the Gaylors want to spin it. In my book, the Gaylor women were and are far worse than a fictional woman who “followed her heart” and slept with Stephanie’s husband and sons. They found their own ways to push the sexual revolution on America and why do it? Simple; the Gaylors were seekers of power and with that power you can make changes not only culturally but also politically. They were successful in doing both. Now the Gaylors needed to abolish religion (especially the Abrahamic Religions) in order for women in America if not the whole world to be free and liberated in what they wanted to do.
I am more convinced that the Gaylors true agenda (including Annie’s husband Dan Barker who apostatized from the faith in the 1980’s) is the solidification of the sexual revolution of the 1960’s and the desire to continue to move that “forward” to its proper end. Thus, why they support the LGBTQ+, including the Trans agenda and the “rights” of children to go under the knife…regardless of the lifetime consequences these children will deal with. Nothing about science, but everything to do with the Gaylor’s support of the American La Gouche and their agenda, coupled with the Gaylor’s use of their sexualty to get what they want and/or express themselves the way they want to express regardless of cultural norms…after all its about power.
Pat Benatar’s song Sex As A Weapon is a call for men not to use it to exploit women. When women use it for their personal gain…all fine, dandy and great. Not all of it is a crime, but still a double standard. Some would call the Gaylors American Marxists, and I agree with that too. In fact, FFRF does have a soft spot for Karl Marx.
In Annie Laurie’s tribute to her mother Anne Nicol; she talked about her mother’s disregard of public opinion if not cultural norms. She wore “natural” pantyhose on the college campus in the 1940’s and wore shorts in the summer, all of which upset and shocked certain people around her. It seems the only person she really carried about was Anne Nicol Gaylor and her individual autonomy, regardless of cultural norms.
Recently Annie Laurie wrote a piece about the movie based on the Judy Blume novel Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret; and while Annie did not read the book originally, she did see the movie and recommends her fans and supporters to go see the movie. While it’s an accurate description of a child raised by parents who married out of love regardless of faith (and likely people who left their respective faiths in the process); what really interests Annie is not only the author’s interpretation of God, but also the focus of the protagonist emerging sexuality.
These subjects have made Blume’s book (among others) the target of challenges made by concerned parents regarding these books being available in school libraries and whether the content is appropriate for its target audience. Even if girls at ten years of age start having their first menstruation cycle, why must “the village” step in between the child and parent? I am not saying that parents have all the answers, but they still have and should have the right to the upbringing and education of their children and how they want to deal with such sacred issues…but for someone like the Gaylor women; sex is no different than eating and drinking.
Because of that very thinking in the articles that I mentioned above, Annie Laurie and the FFRF crowd are now demanding that public schools in Utah ban the Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon because of its sexual content. If La Gouche cannot teach sex to children the way THEY see it (and make no mistake; Annie Laurie and FFRF are part of La Gouche), then you can’t have the Bible or the BoM at any public-school level. For the record, the Bible was removed at the elementary schools in Utah but not at the High School level. That is fair enough, if you honestly support what is age appropriate. My friend and co-host Tim Chambers favors age-appropriate books and that includes the Bible. There are children’s bibles that teach the child friendlier parts of the Bible and does not go into all the adult content that the actual Holy Bible has.
Again, sex to the Gaylor women is nothing sacred. Just another human need if not a right. Thus, their passion to push for birth control and abortion. The two-prong concept of sex is not good enough. Human pleasure and human autonomy must come first. These women really do not care about children…even if they were mothers themselves. The Gaylors were no different than the likes who wanted a sexual revolution in the 20th Century. They were no different than the likes of Helen Gurley Brown who transformed Cosmopolitan into the racy and contentious magazine for women (and is still active to this day as the sex talk trumped pictures of nude men ala PlayGirl longevity wise); or Grace Lee Whitney and Nichelle Nichols of Star Trek: TOS fame and their love of the skort costumes…more/less. Bill Theiss who was a costume designer on the show was himself Gay. Side note there.
With this kind of thinking, you might as well accept the termination of a pregnancy as a blessing for women and society. The pleasures of the adults take priority over the needs and care of our children.
The innocence of the children be damned indeed. How far will Annie Laurie Gaylor (and her apostate husband Dan Barker) and La Gouche take sexual liberation. After reading Dennis Prager’s piece on Leftism, the answer it seems; until we have another far and wide disaster in the land. The pleasures of the moment and/or the flesh are too strong, and God’s Judgement must get all our attention once again.
Back in the days of Jesus, they used a millstone (Matthew 18:6 and Mark 9:42). How many in La Gouche including Gaylor and Barker do we have to put into concrete galoshes? How much is enough? Can’t we just give out children a childhood?
OK you prefer the term cement overshoes. Either way, the answer is; “er aye.” Sadly, Annie Laurie Gaylor views the Holiness Code as oppressive towards women. Truly no middle ground with her, and like other minded people like Gaylor; they search, seek, and attempt to destroy the old order. Prager correctly states; that the destruction of the old order in the name of “fundamental transformation” is the very act and aim of La Gouche and the Gaylors are indeed La Gouche.
P.S. The Holy Bible may be R rated (using the American movie system); but it must show the context on what people should NOT do. Maybe we should redefine the R in this case to mean Real. Also being real is calling the Gaylors, scum, garbage, and flat-out TRASH!!!!
Good riddance to bad trash my dear, you deserve this badly-Stephanie Douglas Forrester to Brooke Logan as she hazed Brooke by putting her in a trash can after striping her title of CEO with the family company…STEPHANIE’S COMPANY…STUPID!!!! Brooke deserved what she got. If only we could do the same, to certain people of La Gouche.
I have to admit; I love the character’s passion for what she believed in. That and Mark Levin helped shaped me in my political commentary.
Visit my Facebook DNM's World. Email me at [email protected]. Check my podcast with Tim Chambers at Spotify and Apple/itunes.