The Poepol Of The Week Award goes to Professor Nico Koopman, theologian from the University of Stellenbosch.


nico_koopmanUndoubtedly, the Poepol of the Weeks Award goes to Professor Nico Koopman, theologian from the University of Stellenbosch, for his comments on physician assisted suicide, from the article published in News24.

“Suffering is simply part and parcel of life on earth,” says Professor Nico Koopman, theologian from the University of Stellenbosch. “But God is with us in our suffering and we are not alone. The suffering person also has a right to life and through suffering we often grow spiritually. God gives knowledge and insight to medical personnel to relieve people’s suffering.”

Now this proves once again how religion rots the brain slowly over time. You have to be bat-shit crazy to believe this dribble. I have no doubt that  Professor Nico Koopman is firmly entrenched in his bronze age beliefs, and will do anything in his power to prevent laws that allow people to get help with ending their suffering with physician assisted suicide.

This is one of many basic human rights that organized religion opposes fiercely.

Professor Nico Koopman truly deserves the coveted Poepol of the Week Award. How the University of Stellenbosch put this moron in charge of theology their gods will only know. But then again, that whole department is built and based on whoo and bullshit, with no credibility in the real world where reason and logic applies.


In Die Beeld, poepol van die week, Dr Jan Grey: “Moeg vir Malema? Kom na Australië, sê leraar”


Praat van poepolle wat Suid Afrika uitvoer na die buiteland toe. Hierdie Dr Jan Grey is ‘n goeie voorbeeld van die tipe arseholes wat ons almal ‘n slegte naam gee reg oor die wereld. Hierdie drol dink hy gaan die Australiers se siele red. Fok my! Gepraat van arrogansie en ‘n hoe opinie van een self. Die Australiers het beslis nie sy dom godsdienstige bekering nodig nie. Hy is ‘n doktor in geloof en spook stories wat hy gebruik om mense mee bang te maak en dan hulle van hulle geld te verlos. Ek wonder of die goeie doktor al ooit ‘n dag in sy lewe gewerk het? ‘n Kenner van spoke en spook stories en geld insameling by werkende mense. Gin wonder hy dink die ossies het sy hulp nodig nie. Hulle het seker vir hom ‘n put gedruk toe hy vir hulle vir geld gevra het. Ek wed jou die doos ry ‘n BMW  of ‘n Merc en woon in ‘n paleis. Hierdie kenners kyk altyd goed na hulle self. Die Goue Kus is een van Australie se duurste woongebiede. Die drol kan wragtag nie ernstig opgevat word nie.

Moeg vir Malema? Kom na Australië, sê leraar

2011-06-27 23:56

Neels Jackson

’n Afrikaanse predikant in Australië en die moderator van die NG Kerk het uiteenlopende menings oor emigrasie weens die uitsprake van mnr. Julius Malema, leier van die ANC-jeugliga.

Dr. Jan Grey, predikant aan die Australiese Goudkus, meen enigeen wat dit oorweeg om Suid-Afrika te verlaat, moet Australië toe kom.

Grey sê hulle bly lekker en hou lekker kerk in Australië. Daar is amper geen moord of doodslag nie en die toekoms is rooskleurig.

Hy is egter bekommerd oor Au­straliërs se lewensbeskouing, wat volgens hom wissel van sekulêr-humanisties tot ateïsties.

“Hulle is doodgewoon losbandig en uitgelewer aan ’n ongebreidelde hedonistiese lewenstyl,” skryf Grey per e-pos.

Dis net hier waar Suid-Afrikaners, wat volgens Grey grotendeels ’n stewige Christelike onderbou het, ’n groot bydrae kan lewer, meen hy.

Daar is volgens Grey ’n groot tekort aan Christene en onbeperkte geleentheid om gemeentes te stig.

Hy sien in sy geestesoog ’n magtige geestelike herlewing in Australië, maar dan moet Christene van Suid-Afrika gaan help as hulle deur die Here so gelei word.

Prof. Piet Strauss, moderator van die NG Kerk, sê egter dié kerk se algemene sinode het sedert 2002 herhaaldelik in ’n roepingsverklaring bevestig dat die kerk van Afrika is.

Die NG Kerk glo God wil sy mense hier gebruik en volgens Strauss loop ’n mens nie so maklik van ’n roeping af weg nie.

Hy weet Malema ontstel baie mense met sy uitsprake, maar die meeste swart mense is nie so radikaal soos Malema nie.

Die bydrae wat die kerk se lidmate in Suid-Afrika kan lewer, is belangrik en daar is nog genoeg ruimte om dit te kan doen, sê Strauss.

Religion lies about women


Religion lies about women

“The discrimination against women on a global basis is very often attributable to the declaration by religious leaders in Christianity, Islam, and other religions that women are inferior in the eyes of God,” former President Jimmy Carter said last week. Many traditions teach that while both men and women are equal in value, God has ordained specific roles for men and women. Those distinct duties often keep women out of leadership positions in their religious communities. What is religion’s role in gender discrimination?

“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”

Here, in Ephesians 5, attributed to St Paul, we have in a nutshell the church’s attitude to the respective positions of man and woman. The man’s role is to be the head, the woman’s to submit to him. The meaning is crystal clear, unmistakable; and yet, despite the fundamentalists who firmly believe such Iron Age prejudices still apply today, there are many liberal Christians who have the decency to cringe at the primitiveness of such instructions and who therefore bend over backwards to pretend they’re not as bad as they quite patently are. “Ah yes,” they say, “but Paul goes on to say that husbands must love their wives. And not just love them, but love them as they love themselves. So clearly this is a reciprocal arrangement, equal in value, imposing constraints of equal weight on both man and wife. All is well with the world and we can continue to pretend that Christianity is the friend of women.” But no. All is not well with the world, and only the deluded or the disingenuous could claim to see equality where there is only subservience.

It is interesting to note the context in which this infamous passage occurs: immediately following the commandment to women to submit to their husbands we find the commandment to children to obey their parents, and to slaves to obey their owners. No amount of instruction to the husbands, parents and owners in question not to ruthlessly exploit their positions of power can alter the fact that women are classed with children and slaves when it comes to their social standing, freedom and self-determination and, like them, are called on to embrace their inferior status with cheerfulness and enthusiasm. In this same sequence of instructions slave-owners are exhorted not to threaten their slaves. Does this make slavery acceptable? Of course not. Only religion could attempt to present such a loathsome idea as though it were not a blot on the dignity of humankind, and the requirement for women always to submit to their menfolk is no less repugnant.

The truth is that the Abrahamic religions fear women and therefore go to extraordinary and sometimes brutal lengths to control them, constrain them, and repress them in every way. Show me a non-religious society that feels so threatened by the thought of female sexuality that it will slice off the clitoris of a young girl to ensure she can never experience sexual pleasure. Show me a non-religious society that feels the need to cloak women from head to toe and force them to experience the outside world through a slit of a few square inches. All three Abrahamic religions share the myth of Adam and Eve, the myth that it was through woman that evil was let loose in the world. They share the heritage of Leviticus, which declared a menstruating woman unclean, to be set aside, untouched, a revulsion that remains even today among some orthodox Jews, who will refuse to shake a woman’s hand for fear she may be menstruating. What kind of lunacy is this? It is the lunacy of a Bronze Age mindset fossilized by the reactionary forces of religion.

And perish the thought that these religions – in their alleged equal valuing of women – should permit them actually to control their own bodies! Women exist for the purposes of reproduction! So let them reproduce! Let them reproduce, whether they wish it or not. Woe unto the woman who dares to engage in sex without being willing to conceive as a result! Woe unto the woman who uses contraception to control her fertility and manage the size of her family! And a hundred times woe unto the woman who actually dares to terminate a pregnancy she does not want! The question of abortion illustrates perfectly the role of women so far as the church is concerned. A woman’s reproductive organs are not her own, and she may not be permitted to decide what happens to them. The Catholic Church would forbid abortion, even when the mother’s life is at risk if she continues with the pregnancy. It would forbid it, even if she has been raped and is carrying the child of her violator. How much clearer could it be that the woman has value only as the carrier of a man’s child and has in herself no intrinsic worth whatsoever?

In the eyes of the Abrahamic religions, the archetypal woman is Eve: disobedient, unreliable, easily led astray, and a seductive temptress of man – man being more noble, yet easy prey to the wiles and seductions of his weaker mate. Woman is the source of danger, the one who corrupts him, the conduit for all that is evil in the world. She is dangerous … yet irresistible; and this very irresistibility makes her more dangerous still. But you will notice that the dangers of sexual temptation are not to be faced equally by men and women: no, religion demands that it is the woman who bears the burden. Solomon, we are told, had 700 wives and 300 concubines, and David had a more modest yet still energy-sapping five wives and 10 concubines, yet neither of these has become a by-word for male insatiability. Jezebel, on the other hand, has become synonymous with sexual excess, despite this not being among the vices attributed to her in the bible story. Fundamentalist Islam, far from requiring its male followers to control their lusts and take responsibility for them, conceals its women in hideous, sexless sacks, depriving them of their beauty and their individuality, literally even their ability to breathe freely – and still permits polygamy, though only for men, of course. And have you ever stopped to wonder what became of the male lover of the woman taken in adultery in the Gospel of John? Why wasn’t he threatened with execution by stoning and hauled before Jesus?

The New Testament is woefully short of significant female characters, and a brief look at those who do make it to the hall of fame will suffice to tell us exactly how they were perceived. On the one hand we have Mary Magdalene – the prostitute. And on the other we have Mary the mother of Jesus – the virgin. To paraphrase the late Dorothy Parker, the New Testament’s view of women runs the full gamut from A to B. Prostitute or virgin: take your pick, ladies. The woman who engages in sex with multiple men is held up as the epitome of fallenness, brokenness, wickedness; as one so corrupt that Jesus’s willingness to forgive her is seen as bordering on the miraculous. And at the same time we are offered as our ideal, our aspiration, our role-model – the eternal virgin: sexless, locked forever in a childlike state; devoid of sexual passion or sensuality; obedient, self-sacrificing, selfless: a woman, in other words, from whom all that would make her fully human, let alone fully woman, has been stripped. Here, finally, is the woman that religion need not fear. This is the highest ideal to which a Christian woman may aspire: a cardboard cut-out of womanhood, a mere handmaid, silent, submissive, a vessel for the production of babies, passively and gratefully accepting her fate.

Religion is one lie after another: the lie of original sin, the lie of eternal life, the lie of hell, the lie of answered prayer, the lie that life can have no meaning without religion, the lie that religion is the source of morality, the lie of creationism, the lie of a spy-in-the-sky who hears your every word and reads your every thought. And to this list we must add the lie that it views men and women as equal. It has got away for so long with the kind of lunatic word-games that allow death-by-torture to be presented as an act of love, and eternal torment in the flames of hell to be seen as a necessary act of justice, that we should perhaps not be surprised that it has also managed to dupe its followers into seeing the systematic suppression and silencing of women as an act of liberation and equality. Nevertheless, it is a lie, like all the others: a cynical and wicked lie. It is time women everywhere woke up to it.

Paula Kirby  | Apr 13, 2011 3:58 PM

Gretha Wiid is ‘n dom fokken poes.


Hier is ‘n artikel in die Huisgenoot oor Gretha Wiid:

“”Gretha Wiid se streng seksgebooie

Gretha Wiid is die toonbeeld van ’n moderne, modieuse vrou. En manlief Francois pas perfek aan haar sy met sy gejelde hare en bonkige juweliersware.

Sy skroom nie om woorde soos seks, masturbasie en orgasme te gebruik nie – sy verdien immers haar brood met praatjies, met handleidings wat sy oor seksopvoeding skryf en met die verkoop van DVD’s oor onder meer die huwelik. Maar Gretha is terselfdertyd ’n vrou wat nege jaar gelede tot bekering gekom het, destyds op die rand van bankrotskap en met haar eie huwelik wankelend oor Francois se affair.

In Pretoria het baie moedelose getroudes aanklank gevind by haar boodskap. En toe sy verlede jaar in die styl van die prediker Angus Buchan haar eie Worthy Woman Conference hier aanbied, het nie minder nie as 7 000 vroue kom luister.

Maar deesdae is dit veral haar en Francois se DVD met die titel Seks en die Huwelik wat opslae maak. Daarin sê sy immers hoogs omstrede dinge soos dat alleen-masturbasie sowel buite as binne die huwelik taboe is, nes seksspeelgoed, en dat God se gees nie deel kan wees van seks buite die eg nie.

Eintlik is enige intimiteit voor die huwelik uit, sê sy. Ongeag jou omstandighede, daardie lyn mag nie oorgesteek word nie. “Dit beteken ook nie jy moet trou om vinniger seks te hê nie. Jy moet net trou as jy weet dit is die maat wat God vir jou uitgesoek het.

“God het nie bedoel dat jy jou eie lyf moet ontdek nie. Ek weet seksoloë sal van my verskil, maar dit doen meer skade as goed. “Om te ontdek wat jou prikkel, is iets wat jy saam met jou man moet doen.”

Die lyn is inderdaad fyn: In die huwelik mag julle mekaar se liggame geniet en wedersyds betas, sê Gretha, maar wel nie alleen nie.

“Die riglyne is nie om jou pret te bederf nie, maar om jou te beskerm. Ons weet uit duur ondervinding hoe geseënd ’n mens binne dié raamwerk kan leef. Dit is wat God vir almal wil hê.” “”


Ok mense, dis maar een artikel wat wys watse dom fokken hoer poes Gretha Wiid is. Jy kan nie hierdie kak self uitdink nie. Maar Gretha, die self aangewese seks expert van god, jesus en die heilige gees, wat al drie nie van doos hou nie, is aan die brand met haar heilige raad oor masturbasie en seks. Fok my!!!!! Hoekom luister ons mense na hierdie mal kont? Sy behoort in ‘n malhuis, nie in ons skole nie. Sy en een of ander dom poes Suid Afrikaanse sanger gaan van hoerskool tot hoerskool en vertel vir die meisies hulle mag nie met hulle koekies speel nie, en hulle kerels mag ook nie met hulle koekies speel nie.  Dit laat liewe jesus huil. Fok my!!!!! Die mal fokken kont!!!!

Dit raak beter:

Gretha Wiid reageer op julle kommentaar

Huisgenoot gee nou vir Gretha ‘n kans om te reageer op al die kommentaar op ons artikel, Gretha Wiid se streng seksgebooie.

Hallo julle almal, Gretha Wiid hier.

Gedink ek wil ‘n paar dinge in perspektief stel.  In die eerste plek dink ek dis belangrik om te verstaan dat geen artikel ooit enige iemand se persepsies en oortuigings volledig kan weerspieël nie.

En om iemand se hart net ten dele te hoor of te ken, beteken dat jy met ‘n halwe prentjie sit oor iemand.

Joernalistiek is ook meestal subjektief en skryfwerk word nou maar eenmaal gefilter deur die joernalis se eie  persepsies en oortuiginge.  Die blote feit dat die opskrif verwys na seksgebooie plant reeds die gedagte en persepsie by die leser dat dit my reëls is, en dat ek daarmee die septer wil swaai. Is dit hoe Huisgenoot my sien?

Ek glo dat baie van julle sou verkies om te dink dat ek reageer omdat ek myself wil verdedig, of om mense (soos julle) te probeer oortuig.  Dit is nie wat leef in my hart nie.  Huisgenoot het egter my opinie gevra. My opinie, dis al.  ‘n Opinie wat ek graag wil toets aan dit wat ek glo waar is… God se Woord.

As kerk (liggaam van Christus) het ons so lou geword.

Moslems blaas plekke en mense op vir hulle geloof.  Hulle staan op in skole as hulle geloof teenkanting kry. (Fok my!!!!!! Dis haar idea van god dien? Hierdie mal fokken hoer poes is gevaarlik!!!!!!)

Ons christene kyk anderpad. Ons wil God net volg solank ons niks moet opoffer nie. Ons wil glo dat ons kerke ons kan red, dat ons predikers se woord die begin en die einde van openbaring en die volle waarheid is. Ons wil God ken, maar Hom nie dien nie. Ons wil kerk-kerk speel, en elke Sondag ‘n quick-fix of ‘n spike vir die week kry.

Maar om die braaivleisvuur met drank en vuil grappe word God opsy geskuif – Hy wil mos hê dat ons die lewe moet geniet, reg?  Ons sê elke mens sleg wat durf iets aanhaal uit God se Woord wat ons dalk aanvat of konfronteer – ons verdoem hulle as arrogant en as valse profete.

Doen asb die moeite om ten minste 2 Tim. 4: 1-5 te gaan lees.  Daar lees ons dat daar ‘n tyd sal kom dat mense net wil luister na dinge wat hulle nie konfronteer of aanvat nie.  ‘n Gemaksone waar ons glo dat ons almal eintlik okay en gered is net omdat ons sê dat ons christene is of aan ‘n kerk behoort.

As jy ‘n kind van die Here is – nie ‘n geheime agent vir die koninkryk nie – dan is dit ook jóú plig om te staan by God se Woord.  En as iemand jou vra wat reg is volgens God, mag jy mos geen ander lering as die Woord as antwoord gee nie. God sê hoeka dat ‘n fontein nie vars én brak water kan gee nie.  Is jy vars of brak?  Warm of koud?

Kies dan vandag weer, en staan daarby – in publiek, in jou kamer, tussen jou eie mense, tussen vreemdes.  En hou daarby – selfs al word jy uitgekryt en sleggesê.  Dis die minste wat ons kan doen om Jesus te eer vir die lyding wat Hy vir ons moes deurgaan.  Ons vlees moet neergelê word, sodat ons gees kan lewe!

Ons is so vinnig om te verkondig (en te verdedig) dat ons nie mag oordeel nie.  Natuurlik mag ons nie ménse oordeel nie, maar ons mag die vrug wat ons dra meet aan wat God sê.

Jesus self het vir die prostituut se menswees opgekom deur haar omstanders uit te daag om die eerste klip te gooi as hulle nie self sonde het nie.  Net daarna het Hy egter aan haar gesê om te gaan, en nie meer vol te hou met daardie sonde nie.  Jesus het nie die mens geoordeel nie, maar die sonde wel. En wie is ek om te sê wat sonde is en wat nie?  Die Woord is my riglyn.

Daarmee saam oordeel ek nie die sonde van enigiemand nie – net God is by magte om dit te doen. Maar as ek gevrá word wat ek dink reg en verkeerd is in God se oë, is die Woord my grondslag. So sal Hy ook my sonde oordeel – waarvan daar steeds baie is!  Maar as kind van die Here kán ek nie, en mág ek nie stilbly oor wat God se Woord sê net omdat ek mense se teenkanting vrees nie – spesifiek nie wanneer ek in die openbare arena gevra word om my opinie nie.

Jesus Christus is Koning en sy Woord staan bo ALLES! Maak die Woord altyd vir ons sin?  Nee!  Is dit vir ons menslike verstand altyd duidelik waarom God sekere dinge as sonde uitwys?  Ook nie. Solank ons op aarde is sal ons net net dele ken, onthou julle?  En slim redenasies kan ook nie die Waarheid uitrafel nie.

Die Woord self leer ons so in 1 Kor. 1:18-31.  Die Woord leer ons dat God se gedagtes vêr bo ons gedagtes is.  ons koppe en ons vlees sal nooit volle sin maak daaruit nie.  dit sal vir altyd ‘n stryd wees tussen gees en vlees – dit wat ons wíl, en dit wat ons móét!

So baie van julle het vrae gehad oor dinge soos masturbasie.  Ek lees wat God sê oor vleeslike begeertes en drange – nie ‘n Gretha Wiid opinie nie, ‘n Woord waarheid –  (Rom. 8:5, Kol.3:5, Gal.5:19, 2 Pet.2:10, 1 Joh.2:16, ens.), en begeer om my lewe daarvolgens in te rig.  Nie koekerig en verkramp ten opsigte van die seksuele nie – maar bevry, vol pret en avontuur, maar binne God se raamwerk.

Vir die dames wat glo dat my man ‘n buite-egtelike verhouding gehad het agv ‘n onbevredigende sekslewe saam met my – jy’s geregtig om so te dink.

Ek is oortuig dat ek steeds baie het om te leer. Ek het egter reeds geleer dat mans nie noodwendig rondloop weens ‘n gebrek aan seks by die huis nie, maar meer as dikwels eerder weens ‘n soeke na erkenning van sy manwees, onopgeloste seer uit die verlede en ‘n soeke om identiteit te bevestig.

Daar is so baie vrouens wat seer het omdat hulle altyd moet hoor dat hulle mans rondgeloop het agv van hulle ontoereikendheid of kwansuise onvermoë.  Dis nie noodwendig waar nie.

My eie man het lank gesoek na die maatstaf van sukses, die finale kriteria van ‘being man enough’.  So baie mans wil hulle manwees probeer bewys met geld, karre, mag in die besigheidswêreld, gesag in die huis, alkohol, pornografie….ag, noem dit.

Hulle vroue kan mooi, sexy, smeulend en baie vaardig wees as dit seks kom, dan sal die man se soeke en leemte steeds nie gevul wees nie.Francois is nie skaam om oor sy verlede en sy foute te praat nie, want God het hom kom heelmaak.  Sy identiteit is geleë in sy Vader. Punt!  Natuurlik het ek ‘n stewige bydrae daartoe gehad dat my man iemand anders se arms opgesoek het.

Ek het vir my kinders geleef en hom emosioneel afgeskeep.  Elke mens soek tog erkenning, waardering en bewondering by sy/haar maat?  Ek het dit nie aan hom gegee nie.  Seks wel – maar nie bewondering nie, nie respek vir sy mens- en manwees nie.  En dít is my en Francois se boodskap:  ons moet na mekaar kyk – almal van ons in verhoudinge.

Ons leef so maklik by mekaar verby, praat by mekaar verby en groei op die ou end weg van mekaar.  Geen seks in die wêreld kan so iets red nie.  Spr. 27:7 sê dat selfs ‘n bitter eetding lekker sal wees vir iemand wat werklik honger is.

Baie vroue knoop aanlyn verhoudinge aan, sms-verhoudinge met kollegas, intieme geselsies met manne by die werk – bloot omdat hulle by daardie persoon waardevol, belangrik, mooi, interessant, en gewaardeerd voel.  En dan drink hulle maklik die beker van bitter water – net om hulle harte se dors te les.  Owerspel gaan allermins altyd oor seks…inteendeel. Dis die dinge wat ons harte en menswees voed wat ons bymekaar hou, nie seks nie.

Ek hoop dat julle my hart sal raaklees hierin – ‘n hart wat graag vir alle mense liefde en tyd wil hê, maar allereers, ‘n hart wat gebind is aan die hart van God. Jy kan kies om dit te beskou as ‘n opinie, of actually jou Bybel optel en sélf vir die antwoord gaan soek.  Party van julle soek bewyse?  Waar is die bewyse van jóú antwoorde uit die Woord?

The only thing evil needs to prosper, is for good men to do nothing and fear the onslaught of people.  Compromise God se Woord, en jy compromise jou eie blessing!””

He-he. Mens kan duidelik sien sy het lekker die klits kweit geraak.

Ouens soek nie dié ‘girls’, sê Bobby

Byna 800 gillende meisiestemme het Bobby van Jaarsveld se sterstatus gisteroggend by die Afrikaanse Hoër Meisieskool in Pretoria luidkeels bevestig.


En toe hy me. Marna Jordaan, skoolhoof, soen om haar geluk te wens met haar verjaardag, was die toejuiging oorverdowend.


Maar op ‘n manier was die boodskap wat Van Jaarsveld gister saam met me. Gretha Wiid gebring het, eintlik ‘n weerspreking van alles wat sterstatus beteken.


Die boodskap, wat ook beskikbaar is op ‘n nuwe DVD, Die Hollywood Hang-up, het die meisies aangemoedig om hulle nie deur die skyn van Hollywoodflieks te laat mislei nie, maar om goeie keuses in hul lewens te maak.


Van Jaarsveld het gesê goeie ouens soek nie “enige los ‘girl’ “ wat haar lyf aan die wêreld wys nie.


Ouens wat net ‘n meisie se lyf soek, soek dit ook net vir een aand.


Wiid het gesê as ‘n meisie haar lyf adverteer, sal die ouens nie vir haar hart gaan nie.


As ‘n meisie ‘n ou soek wat haar wil hê vir wie sy is, moet sy wees wie sy is.


Van Jaarsveld het ook gewaarsku dat jongmense nie dieselfde foute as hy moet maak deur te drink nie.


As jy dit doen, kan jy nie meer lekker dink nie en dan verloor jy al jou waardes, het hy gesê.


Wiid het vertel haar grootste droom was om as ‘n maagd te trou.


Op universiteit het dinge egter vir haar verkeerd geloop en toe ‘n ou een aand aanbied om vir haar ‘n drankie te koop, het sy gevoel: Stuff die wêreld.


Sy het daardie aand te veel gedrink en seks gehad. Sy weet tot vandag toe nie met wie nie.


Sy het haar grootste droom prys gegee, nie omdat sy besluit het om seks te hê nie, maar weens haar houding wat haar te veel laat drink het.


Wiid het die verhaal van die fliek August Rush vertel en van die liefde daarin wat op ‘n geheimsinnige verbintenis tussen twee karakters gegrond is.


“Dis ‘n klomp twak,” het sy gesê. Dis die flieks, nie hoe dit regtig gebeur nie.


Die basis van ‘n verhouding is nie so ‘n connection nie, maar dat twee mense vriende kan wees, dat hulle hulself bymekaar kan wees en nie teenoor mekaar hoef voor te gee nie.


Waar die byeenkoms met oorverdowende gille begin het, is dit in stilte afgesluit, terwyl Van Jaarsveld vir die meisies gebid het en hulle spontaan mekaar se hande vasgehou het.””


Wat kan mens se????? Gretha Wiid is ‘n dom fokken hoer poes.


Pre-marital sex ‘end of church’

Pretoria – “If the Dutch Reformed Church has decided to justify living together and sex before marriage, it will most certainly mean the final collapse of the church.” (Great!!!!! I wish it was true!)

This is the opinion of Gretha Wiid, presenter of the Worthy Women Conference (WWC), amid debates regarding the possibility that the Dutch Reformed Church (NG Kerk) will revise its policy regarding unmarried couples living together and sex beyond the confines of marriage.

“I don’t care what the pope, the church or anyone else says. My husband, Francois, and I believe that marriage is sacred, and that sex before marriage can only be harmful,” she told Beeld on Wednesday.

According to Wiid, sex is not just about a relationship between two people, but rather about a covenant between them and God. (Lekker 3some action. Are you feeling it god? Is that the right spot?)

Drastic moral decay

“If these decisions are confirmed, we’ll see even more drastic moral decay among our youth. We’ll see hurt and damaged adults in the world.

“The church is handing pain and brokenness on a silver platter to those who’ve given sex before marriage some thought,” said Wiid.

Wiid says that as long as people continue to adjust God’s word to fit in with their own lifestyle, they will just behave more rebelliously.

“Before you know it, we, the Christians, will be revising God.” (Duh…. people have been revising gods forever. Gretha must be half brain dead.)

“It’s terrifying and yet also exciting, because it just goes to show that we’re living in the last days,” said Wiid. (She wants the world to end. She can’t fucking wait. The delusional fucking cunt!!!)

Wiid is a relationship counsellor and motivational speaker who has been active with youth ministry in schools over the past eight years, and for the past four years she’s been presenting women’s get-togethers each Saturday. On Wednesday she said that she’s planning to launch her own talk show, possibly even as soon as March next year.

“We’ve been keeping our faith in the Lord for this opportunity for many years.”

Wiid plans to focus “deeply on family relationships” in the current affairs programme.

Thieves within a marriage

“There are many thieves within a marriage. Everything from the television to working overtime. The employer no longer understands that his employee has a family who’s waiting for him or her in the evenings.

“If marriage became important to the employer, marriage would also be elevated. I want to facilitate topical conversations among family members,” Wiid said excitedly. She did not want to elaborate further on this topic.

After many rumours that the WWC had only been a quick money-making scheme for the Wiids, she says she’s been in the ministry for many years already, and that the WWC happened to be the first conference to receive so much exposure.

“What most people don’t know is that I’ve done three other women’s conferences this year, each attended by nearly 1 000 women. But WWC just received much more exposure.

“And Francois and I did not go to Mauritius after the WWC,” Wiid joked.

“We believe in our hearts that, if marriages are healthy in all aspects, a generation of emotionally healthy children will be born. The people who are going to be deciding about living together and premarital sex should know that they will have to account for their decisions one day. And they will.”


Ons arme ou volkie. Hoer poesse soos Gretha Wiid gee ons almal ‘n slegte naam. Fok mense, word asseblief wakker. Hierdie teef is so mal soos ‘n haas wat hondsdolleid het.




Religion: Faith: Healthy v. Neurotic


Time Magazine:

Theologically speaking, faith is a gift of God. But in the cold-eyed view of the trained psychiatrist, religious belief may also be a cover-up for deep inner anxiety and a cause of neurosis. Dr. Leon Salzman, professor of clinical psychiatry at Georgetown University medical school, argues that it is often difficult “to determine where religion ends and disease begins.” At the annual meeting in Washington of the Academy of Religion and Mental Health, a number of psychiatrists and clergymen tried to define the tenuous borderline between healthy and neurotic faith.

Church-Induced Guilt. Both clergymen and doctors agreed that authoritarian religion can be a major source of neurosis. Salzman noted some symptoms of unhealthy faith that often show up among new adherents to dogmatic churches: “an irrational intensity of belief” in the new doctrine, greater concern for form and theology than for ethical and moral principles, hatred of past beliefs, intolerance of deviation, and the desire for martyrdom to prove devotion. Jesuit Philosopher and Critic William F. Lynch added that neurotic religion frequently shows up among Roman Catholics as a denial of human feelings, a desire to find the will of God in every decision, and an unhealthy dependence on dogma as a means of obtaining absolute certainty.

More evidence that “legalistically structured” religion can produce neurosis came from Dr. Klaus Thomas, founder of Berlin’s Suicide Prevention Center. At the Center, he said, about 40% of 3,000 suicide-prone patients suffered from “ecclesiogenic neurosis” arising from guilt feelings—especially about sex—induced by their religious training. The church needs a “theology of eroticism,” he concluded, that would allow for what Luther called “sensuality governed by the Holy Spirit.”

Neurotic faith is not just a laymen’s problem. Dr. Leo H. Bartemeier of Baltimore’s Seton Psychiatric Institute suggested that ministers should be “as free as possible from delusions about their own omnipotence.” And the Rev. Edward S. Golden, secretary of the United Presbyterians’ Inter-Board Office of Personnel Services, argued that “there is a crisis in health with moral, physical and emotional manifestations among American clergy.” One sign of widespread disturbance among ministers, he noted, is that of the nation’s 8,500 United Presbyterian clergymen on pastoral assignment, 3,000 want to leave their churches, while 1,200 congregations are dissatisfied with their current preacher.

Humanity Breaks Through. Clergymen with emotional problems, both pastors and doctors agreed, usually come from homes with a weak father and a domineering mother. Unaccustomed to strong paternal authority, argued Golden, these ministers find their problems accentuated when they take over a parish, often to be overprotected by congregations that look up to them as Christ figures. Usually the symptoms of emotional distress are evident long before neurotic clerics are ordained, suggested Psychiatrist Robert J. McAllister, a consultant to Catholic University. Reporting on 100 hospitalized Catholic priests at the Seton Institute, he pointed out that 77 had serious emotional problems as seminarians; 32 ultimately became alcoholics. McAllister’ added that a conflict between their desire for perfection and their basic needs and desires can drive men to leave the priesthood entirely: “Suddenly their own humanity breaks through and they are gone.” One solution for the problem, suggested Dr. Bartemeier, would be for clergymen to submit to psychoanalysis. “If psychiatrists find it necessary, why not the same for the clergy?” he asked.

Perhaps the best definition of the frontier between health and neurosis in religion came from Dean Samuel Miller of the Harvard Divinity School. One measure of a healthy faith, he said, is “its ability to remain in relation to the threatening aspects of reality without succumbing to fear, shame, anxiety or hostility. An unhealthy religion runs away, becomes obsessed with a part in order to avoid the whole. The body is denied for the soul’s sake; the future becomes so fascinating that it blots out the present; all truth is limited to the Bible. A healthy religion unites existence, an unhealthy one divides it.”