Jesus is my only hope. autistic/adhd misfit 🌈🧠✨🔍 left of center
Joined March 2011
- Tweets44.3K
- Following954
- Followers3.2K
- Likes104K
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
JUST IN🚨: A man sat in complete darkness for 2 hours while his DNA emitted light captured in an image, revealing that humans radiate bio-photons and are truly light beings, demonstrating that life glows even without external illumination.
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
CW: VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
Always remember and be grateful for women like Alice Paul who fought for the rights and freedoms we often take for granted today.
Never stop calling out ungrateful anti-feminists who enjoy those freedoms while cowardly vilifying the Alices of the world
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
Well this is such important historical context it should be praised and read.
I sorry to any men this may be a trigger for. This happens to be the truth how it rolled out and why.
Subject : NoFault Divorce.
Great job @th3muse
Thanks for putting this all together it’s a great read!
Seeing many men here complain about “no-fault divorce” so I researched it.
Divorce used to be accessible **only to men.**
Women could not hold any assets—whether earned or inherited—in their
own name.
Because of this, it WAS women who pushed for
no-fault divorce.
But it was first signed into law by CA Gov. Ronald Reagan, who supported it because he went through a fault-divorce.
Reagan was the first president who had been divorced.
• At-fault divorce required proving fault, and had two standards:
1. Where adultery was the cause of divorce, a woman
was usually required to demonstrate her husband had MULTIPLE infidelities.
2. PLUS some other wrong.
• While a man often needed
to show ONLY ONE adulterous encounter to obtain a divorce.
Judges were also frequently biased, and assumed a woman was OBLIGED to
**endure physical violence**
as a NORMAL part of marriage.
So, maybe the courts can be out of hand today—in general—but there was a legitimate reason this started.
I doubt the bros who want it “canceled” care about learning context tho. 🤷♀️
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
Chivalry was romanticized. Here is the reality before “feminism”:
Women could not own property, sign contracts, or bring/sue in court.
Could not keep her own wages —all earnings belonged to her husband.
No legal custody rights to her own children.
Could not vote or hold office.
Could not go to university or graduate school.
Personal property transferred to husband upon marriage.
Contraception was illegal.
Life expectancy was 40-48 in the 1800s.
Wives had no legal right to refuse sex; marital rape not a crime (in all 50 states) until 1993.
No access to anesthesia for most of the 1800s.
Brutal housework—manual labor—estimated at 50–60 hours per week.
Husband could "physically correct" wife and beat her with a "reasonable" instrument (the "rule of thumb" doctrine).
A wife who left her husband lost all legal rights to her children and property.
No restraining orders or domestic violence statute.
“Protection” meant ownership.
Woman was dependent; property.
But hey, at least he opened doors for her!
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
Private property is not a Western invention, a capitalist novelty, or a 19th-century philosophical construct. Sumerians were recording property rights on clay tablets in Mesopotamia around 3000 BCE, and the contracts they left behind destroy every collectivist myth about ownership being a recent imposition on some natural communal state.
These tablets documented land sales, grain loans, labor agreements, and inheritance transfers. Specific people owned specific plots. A seller transferred title. A buyer paid silver by weight. Witnesses signed. Merchants and farmers built this system because voluntary exchange requires knowing who owns what before the trade happens.
Clay fired in a kiln lasts millennia. Urukagina of Lagash, around 2350 BCE, recorded protections against officials seizing private property without consent. That is property theory in practice, predating Locke by roughly four thousand years.
Property rights emerge spontaneously from human interaction, not from government charters. Sumer proves the point in baked earth. Every time a politician tells you that unregulated markets are a dangerous modern experiment, you are looking at someone ignorant of the oldest economic documents humanity possesses. Markets did not need permission then. They do not need it now.
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
@godlywomanhood is accusing Michelle of "taking down the nation" because she works to provide for her family.
She's such a nasty person.
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
Here are 30 Bible passages that refer to women leading, being resourceful, and using their initiative.
They all mention a woman, or women, who had a significantly influential and beneficial role in the community of God’s people.
margmowczko.com/bible-verses…
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
The founding fathers weren’t “separation of church and state.” They wanted the freedom to worship the Lord God differently than the Church of England. They WANTED God in government.
It became something different later. Later others not loyal to God removed Him from everything. That is not what they intended.
I find that interesting. I don’t think they would approve of much of what our government does now.
I think they’d approve of “freedom of religion” but NOT in government. I don’t think they’d approve of Muslims in government—because that could (in their time at least) lead to a reversal of all they’d fought for.
Just my thoughts 🤷♀️
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
Does Christian nationalism have fruits?
Are its supporters kind, peaceful, good, merciful, joyful, humble, mutually submissive, full of self-control?
Did Jesus, Peter, Paul, etc. try to control others and change laws?
Did they ever mandate values, culture, and governance?
Did Jesus ever teach male dominance? What about favoring certain people over others?
Did Jesus reject foreigners and immigrants? Did he support human politics?
CN is manmade ideology with fruits that produce stuff like the crusades and witch trials at Salem.
When humans lean on their own understanding and away from God, we get stuff like CN.
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
Kingdom Women
I believe that the role of women in the Church is not a secondary theological issue. It gravely misrepresents the heart of God, and so, is of primary importance. Nor do I believe that being egalitarian is a criterion of salvation.
However, (and it's a BIG "however"), the belief that God cannot, will not, or does not work through His daughters, except in roles that patriarchy deems "appropriate" for them (wife, mother, children's teacher), blasphemes the One who calls and equips His daughters for His service in every area of His Kingdom's work... including the role of pastor. And it attempts to limit, or hinder, the work of the Holy Spirit in a world that desperately needs the Godly voices of all of His children, regardless of gender.
Patriarchy, (and its beliefs/practices), was a cultural reality in Bible times, that has become a false teaching in the Church of today. And false teachings are never secondary issues. Truth is always a primary matter.
Those who claim that scripture requires that, "only men can be pastors," miss the blatant implication of the same scripture that they use against women, that according to its literal reading, would not allow Paul or Jesus to be pastors, as they would not meet the listed "requirements!" How foolish!
The 21st century Church is not required to remain in the 1st century in terms of cultural identification and practice. God is not bound by our man-made boxes. Christ's call to the Kingdom is equally for females as for males, without human-imposed sanctions upon the Holy Spirit. God will continue to gift and call His daughters into whatever service He desires, without our personal approval. Amen.
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
1 Timothy 3:2 reads – "An overseer must be... the husband of one wife." To a patriarch this is a smoking gun that prohibits women from church leadership. But this simple observation sends them running for cover.
If patriarchal readings insist on taking this literally to mean "the leader must be a male," then consistency forces an equally strict reading: Unmarried men and widowers are disqualified from ministry. Under a strictly literal reading of this requirement, Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul were unqualified to lead the church, as neither was a "husband." Furthermore, if "one wife" means you must be a husband, a widowed pastor who doesn’t remarry is instantly out of a job. This is where the most vocal critics of egalitarianism go silent.
Michelle Muse ☀️🌙🛡️🪽 retweeted
A guy just asked me to point out women leaders mentioned in scripture, as though that would be a challenge!😂
My response:
Miriam, Deborah, The Wise Woman of Tekoa, King Lemuel's Mother, Huldah, Anna, Mary (the Mother of Jesus), Mary Magdalene, Martha, Philip's 4 daughters (prophetesses), Junia, Euodia, Syntche, Phoebe, Priscilla, etc..
Many of the women mentioned above were prophetesses. Paul considered the gift of prophesy (one who spoke on behalf of God), as the most desirable of the spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 14:1), and lists the gift of prophesying (and prophets) before teachers and teaching (Rom. 12:6-8, 1 Cor. 12:28-30, and Eph. 4:11).
God gifts and calls whomever He chooses to serve Him, in whatever capacity He desires, without regard to gender, or input from us. And He will continue to call His daughters into service in every area of ministry.
(AI photo created by Michael Clegg.)
