Debbie Thurman, ex-gay activist, has deleted her blog titled The Formers following a post in which she affirmed the kidnapping of young Isabella Miller by her non-custodial parent. Thurman had called the apparent parental abduction an act of Christian “civil disobedience” which constituted “true motherhood.”
Truth Wins Out broke the news on Wednesday about Thurman’s support for parental abduction. TWO quoted much of the original post.
The blog LezGetReal discovered the blog deletion last night. The writer of that post, Melanie Nathan, followed up with a humane appeal to Miller and Thurman today.
What follows is a record of most of the comments that appeared on the original post prior to the blog’s deletion.
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 4:17 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from rjh17013:
Lisa and Isabella God Bless You. Lisa I am behind you 100%. I wish I had the resources to do what you have done. I will Pray for you and Izzy. I hope one day to meet you. God Bless You. You are Truly a great Mother. Some day I hope to find a wife that has the same conviction of you to care for not only for their children but mine also. Take Care.
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 4:17 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from theformers:
You know, I’ve often wondered how this all would have gone down if the two women could have come to some kind of mutual understanding about visitation early on. Perhaps it was never to be.
I have thought often of Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:25, repeated in Luke’ gospel): “Make friends quickly with your opponent at law while you are with him on the way, in order that your opponent may not deliver you to the judge, and the judge to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.”
Then I think of this passage from 1 Cor. 6:2-6:
“Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?”
So, how are we to view this case, then? It’ not easy, is it?
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 4:24 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from theformers:
Thank you, Mike. This is a fair statement:
“The people of faith at Truth Wins Out pray for the best interests of Isabella Miller ‚Äî and for the rule of law, and for respect for the U.S. family court system.”
I wish our family court systems in every state were truly ruling in the best interests of the children. Selfish parents have made a huge mess of things, and I do not envy any judge who has to sit on those benches.
No, God’ will is not necessarily ours. We are to pray for ours to be in accordance with His.
I respect those who sincerely hold views different from mine in this case. This has been a most difficult thing to arbitrate. It may have to end up at SCOTUS, on the enforcement issue.
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 5:52 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from ldyjag12:
sorry to hear that Lisa Miller has decided to be selfish by not sharing custody with Janet. So rather then do what’ right for her daughter she has deicded to put her daughter through hell by hiding her. How is hiding ever right or the best. So rather then share custody she now has run the risk of losing Isabella forever by doing this. No court will allow a mother to share custody or grant visitation to a parent who runs. So Lisa since you wanted your daughter I hope your daughter will understand why she can never have friends or why she has to move to new places in the middle of the night to stay hidden. You have now chosen your life so I hope your happy by looking over your shoulder for the law who will be after you.
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 5:59 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from theformers:
None of us (no one I know of, that is) knows where Lisa and Isabella are. So it is a bit premature to infer that we know what their life will be like if they stay there, wherever that is, for however long they choose to stay. I think of Roman Polanski, a real criminal, for instance, who remained on the lam in a non-extradition country for a long time. He had the gall to travel to countries where he could have been nabbed a lot sooner than he was. His life was not exactly hell, was it? I presume time will reveal what we do not know now.
It’ interesting that no one yet has wondered out loud if they could have met with foul play. That certainly crossed my mind more than once.
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 9:38 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from Mark:
Nor do we pray that a fundamentalist minority be granted exceptions to the law.
Mike — what do you mean “fundamentalist minority” — do you mean those believers who hold to the fundmamental Truths of scripture? The clarity of scripture and supporting fundamental doctrinal Truths is nothing to apologize for, even if as Christ said we will be the few (minority). In fact, true saints die for and defend them, while false converts seek ways to corrupt God’ word and clear message. The gospel is not “consumer” driven.
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 9:39 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from Mark:
We should cease with the lies! Placing a child in the care of a homosexual couple is nothing short of child abuse! May God forgive us!
@ldyjag12 — Lisa is her Mother, there is nothing selfish about her actions. Your fake concern is as obvious and evil as is your asinine theology.
date Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 11:04 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from wptrc:
@Mark — Can you please explain how placing a child in the care of a homosexual couple is child abuse? I just don’t see the connection.
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 6:07 AM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
– Interestingly what is happening is the civil disobedience on the part of Miller, but she is doing it in the name of Christ — What happened to separation of church and State. Miller’ disobedience is criminal — it is in flagrant disregard of the order of a Judge.
Imagine if we all ignored Court Order’ I doubt that Christianity would prevail in such a society of civil disobedience.
Essentially what Miller is doing which is intolerable is: 1. refusing to accept her obligation and responsibility to society which she created when she entered into a civil union and had the baby with Jenkins; and 2. Giving license to all Christians who do not have custody of their children to kidnap them and run away. Imagine if one parent is Jewish and the other Christian, does the Christian get to usurp the custody of a child — is good parenting validly judges by signing up for a particular religion?– because their belief is RIGHT? Do they get to say — heck with the judge my religion is better than yours? This Miller gal must go down big time or everyone with a difference to an ex is in jeopardy. Society demands separation of Church and state for this very reason; and further that civil disobedience when it comes to our children’ rights is a gun which trigger you do not want to pull. This view is confirmed by what is stated in Taggerts quote “I doubt she’ll ever see a day of jail. Once word of this gets out, millions of people are going to be outraged. And there are plenty of local and a few state law enforcement agencies around the country, who will not waste a minute trying to find her. “William Cohen is a leftwing hack and this ruling is a joke. Without the support of law enforcement, especially wherever Lisa opts to call her new home, this ruling is going nowhere.” lol
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 6:18 AM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from theformers:
You are quoting other sites — specifically, the Only One Mommy Facebook group, which may be confusing for readers here.
You raise a legitimate issue in that no one would want to open some legal door for husbands and wives to think either parent can flee with their children merely because they dislike each other or feel they have some religion-sanctioned right to do so.
What is not so clear in cases such as this one, however, is how same-sex unions ‚Äî which cannot produce children with biological ties to both partners ‚Äî can be viewed the same as heterosexual marriages. When a nation clearly divided over the very definition of “parent,” what do we expect?
Family courts are now faced with a near-impossible task because this Pandora’ Box has been opened. Whichever way they turn is going to be problematic.
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 10:22 AM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from Mark:
@wptrc,
God defines sexuality, and the family. Homosexual couples desire children; that desire over shadows everything. In essence, homosexual couples are denying the created order, and can only by force of law make others “accept” it. When man forces children into a “family” that is specifically against the natural order, it is abuse. Take for example Rosie O’Donnell’ response to her son; the very essence of self-centeredness: “I tell him Mommy only likes other Mommies.”
To purposely deny a child a mother and father, to place them in the care of a couple that lives out a shameful distortion and perversion of human sexuality — is abuse at the highest level. [I suspect one day soon I, and others, will go to jail for speaking such Truths].
Lastly — unless God has opened your eyes, (you repent and believe His word) you will continue to fail to see the connection. Christians don’t battle flesh and blood, our battles are spiritual. In fact, any passage of “gay adoption’ laws are His judgement on our disobedience. I pray one day these children grow up to tell their stories — as some are already doing by the grace of God.
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 7:33 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from wptrc:
@mark — Thanks for the reply and clarification. I am a christian as well and actually was baptised with Lisa Miller in 1984. I just have to disagree that Homosexual couples desire children. I know many homosexual couples, that do not have or desire children. Also, following your logic then all divorced couples with children fall into this abuse category.
I have many friends that are couples with kids both gay and straight, and with and without kids. I also know many single parents as well. In all cases, they put their children first and would do anything for their children.
My regret is that this issue has totally grown into a complex issue, and by not following the rules of law, the best interest of Isabella is not being looked after. I would want to raise my child to understand that while he/she may disagree with the law or a court order, that as a member of society we are obligated to follow those orders. I hope that Lisa and Isabella are safe and that Lisa follows what’ truly in her heart and does what is right.
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 9:09 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from Mark:
You may call yourself a Christian, but by judging by your very first comment here, I might conclude you may be more of a nominal Christian. I could be wrong. No disrespect, but what does it matter who you were baptized with, and when did you or any other person think they could possibly speak for the homosexual “community”? If my comment was misunderstood to say ALL homosexual couples’ desire children, I apologize; obviously that would be ridiculous.
There are zero homosexual couples, raising kids that have put their children first; for if they were, God would be first and they would never be a “couple” raising kids. Get it?
Regarding single parents and my logic — straw man argument.
You should know, as a Christian, you assert very unbiblical conclusions, draped in a post modern mind set — “if it works, it must be good’; I am referring to your entire second paragraph. I hope you change this soon. In addition, where in the Bible do you conclude a believer is to follow man’ law if it violates God’ law regarding sin?
Your last paragraph is a complete contradiction as I understand it — i.e follow the law but do what is right? You need to stop with the nonsense, and make a bold stand for Christ and don’t be afraid of complex issues; you may miss the fact that God uses them, and you and I to bring Him glory.
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 9:20 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from Mark:
@ wptrc,
Re first comment made — I think this just solidifies, why it should be legal for gays to marry (at least by law) in the US.
“Gays” can’t get “married” no matter how you look at it; what you actually mean to say is we should change the definition of marriage. Not a good place to be as a self professing follower of Christ, is it?
In addition, there is a reason the state provides benefits those who are married, the family is the cornerstone for any society. When did you start to agree with men over God? Does God or man define marriage, family, and sexuality?
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 9:58 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from wptrc:
@mark — I’m sorry for my comments, and as I look back I realize I was totally out of line in what I was saying, and need to respect that we have both have different views.
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 11:22 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from Mark:
@wptrc,
Please, no apology necessary. You have done nothing wrong, and it is, or can be as it was in this instance, beneficial to understand other folk’ views. I don’t think it is necessary that we respect different views, as much as we should show respect (civility) to others.
date Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 11:32 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from Mark:
Lisa’ sinful relationship with Janet is pursuing her right into her Christian life and the life of her child. May God have mercy on them both. And may they escape pursuit until the child is grown. Or may the courts come to their senses! And/or may Janet repent of the evil she is doing.
Susan — well said! From what I have read, Janet is a reprobate at every turn God gives her; willing and ready to promote the “gay agenda” of uber rights over all else, including a child. God’ judgement awaits her and all others who shake their fists at and spit upon His tender mercy.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 8:32 AM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from theformers:
I just want to say thank you, commenters, for keeping it civil.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:23 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
Firstly thank you for allowing a difference of opinion.(“You are quoting other sites the Only One Mommy Facebook group, which may be confusing for readers here.” ) I do not know what sites you are referring to when you suggest I am quoting. I am not quoting — I am a free thinker and I respect and obey the law of this land. Through my higher education I have a depth of understanding that feeds my free thinking. Its actually quite offensive for you to assume that I am not thinking for myself. I am also able to do what is required of me as a citizen of a vast and diverse country and that is separate my religious views form the law — the civil law. The separation of church and state is actually integral to the survival of any state. If Christians, Jews, Moslems, Bahai, Buddhists are unable to keep their religions out of State and Fed Civil law, then we invite societal anarchy. Any religion who thinks it owns this country’ thought ought just by virtue of numbers and then is entitled to usurp the civil with religious belief, ought not live in a diverse country.
As far as “what is not so clear” per your response, it is actually very clear. When you have the courage to separate religion from civil law, you will note that for the purposes of living in society the law gets to make definitions. Domestic Partnerships, Civil Unions all have legal definitions that legitimate the parents in the eyes of the law. Your confusion ought to be put to rest when you look at adoption. You cannot adopt by religion, but you certainly can adopt by civil law and then you are the PARENTS of the child. With ALL legal righst and obligations. Your argument nullifies adoption. See the importance of separation of law and religion?
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:25 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
SEPARATE church and State if you want an orderly society — have the courage to know that your religion can function regardless of the laws of our country.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:29 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
Great mothers do not defy the law, ggreat mothers do not place their child at risk of publicity, a life of hiding, denial of a parent and a bond. The greatest sin in all this is that Miller should have adgered to her promise and committment to Jenkins and her daughter. She gave birth in the climate of taht relationship and her legal obligation is to allow the child access to the other parent. The grievance was committed by Miller at day one when she refused to allow simple visitation. That at that moment MUST have been painful for the child, however small — that child knew the other parent and a connection that was broken by Miller — what could be worse than that?
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:35 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from theformers:
Oblogdeeoblogda (sorry, there was no reply option under your last comment), you misunderstood what I meant when I said you’d quoted something from another site. I think it either came from another blog or the Only One Mommy Facebook group. All I was saying is some folks might be confused when they saw you reference a comment that had not been made here. That’ it. No implication in it that you are not a free thinker.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:36 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
If Miller and Jenkins had entered a mediation process right at the start — and both validated the other at the very least as a person who had already been a participant in the life of the child, then a visitation plan could have been entered into even without a court having to decide. the child would not have been put through this nightmare. TO what extent was Miller egged on by her christian fellowishio and used as a weapon against the idea of gays and lesbians having parental rights? That is my question.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:42 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
Actually I agree with wptrc. re marriage and clarity. However what happened in this case is that there was such a law. The court order made it contemptable if Miller failed to give visitation, She kept the child away for years resulting in the Judge taking away custody based on her failure as a a parent to do what the court deemed in the best interests of the minor child. The court is the upper guardian of all minors. That means it decides. The law was not the problem here — what was the problem and remains the problem is Miller’ defiance of the law.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:56 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
So Mark — if a lesbian adopted a child from an orphanage in Asia( reducing the risk of child prostitution for the child) and is the legal parent — is that not puttin g the child first? If you counter this argument with an objection to bringing bio kids into the world by gays — imagine then you are saying new life is not worthy — that if parents are gay then rather dont exist. Imagine saying this to all those beautiful and wonderful well adjusted kids brought to life be lesbian mothers? Your view is extremely narrow and actually if you were right.
It is very strange that you would think a christian bible should be above the law of the Country if that were so we would be stoning our spouses for committing adultery — that would involve us stoning a bunch of Christians such as those who made headlines by messing around this past year? I did not see you with a stone in your hand? Practice what you preach Sir! Hardly likely.Your argument is hence proven senseless.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:05 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
By the way Studies have shown that kids raised by Gay parents are well adjusted “Lesbians and Gay Men as Parents Beliefs that lesbian and gay adults are not fit parents likewise have no empirical foundation (Anderssen, Amlie, & Ytteroy, 2002; Brewaeys & van Hall, 1997; Parks, 1998; Patterson, 2000; Patterson & Chan, 1996; Perrin, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001; Tasker, 1999; Victor & Fish, 1995). Lesbian and heterosexual women have not been found to differ markedly either in their overall mental health or in their approaches to child rearing (Bos et al., 2004; Kweskin & Cook, 1982; Lyons, 1983; Miller, Jacobsen, & Bigner, 1981; Mucklow & Phelan, 1979; Pagelow, 1980; Parks, 1998; Patterson, 2001; Rand, Graham, & Rawlings, 1982; Siegenthaler & Bigner, 2000; Thompson,McCandless, & Strickland, 1971). Similarly, lesbians’ romantic and sexual relationships with other women have not been found to detract from their ability to care for their children (Bos et al., 2004; Chan et al., 1998b; Pagelow, 1980). Lesbian couples who are parenting together have most often been found to divide household and family labor relatively evenly and to report satisfac-” It is about love and involvement on your childs life and your sexuality has zero to do with providing exactly what a kid needs. There are countless of straight parents who even kill their kids. SHow me one lesbian parent who has killed a kid.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:12 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
Please show me where in the Bible it refers to a “lesbian lifestyle” or that it is sinful. The only biblical references to homosexuality pertains to sodomy itself and not the lifestyle or reationship. In fact generally the sodomy is referred to in the context of war and is preceived as relating to rape. However when it says that a man should not lay with a man, that has to do with the ACT and not the lifestyle. Noweher does the Almighty have a problem with same-sex relationships.
The problem is you interpret sex as being the only compnent of a relationship which is not the case for lesbians.
date Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:15 PM
subject [New comment] This Is True Motherhood
Comment from oblogdeeoblogda:
I dont think I referenced a comment from elsewhere I am not sure what you are referring to. I would like to clarify so as not to confuse.
