Forbes Morrison likes Graceful Summer Dresses

[SOURCE]

Forbes Morrison is a regular commenter on TwatManâ„¢ Billy The Mules website.  He’s 23 and married.  So he’s probably getting plenty of sex with his 6th child on the way.

He also runs a website called Gospel Australia, and one of his recent blogs caught my eye.

I found it such a bizarre topic that I just had to share it with you!

The following is an online exposure of dialogue between myself and a pastor of the Warrnambool Presbyterian Church of Victoria.   Upon visiting the website for the Warrnambool Presbyterian Church I was quite disturbed by the picture on front page of the website.  Below is a screenshot of the website front page, I have blurred the photo in question, but though blurred, you can catch the crux of the issue.

I’m sure like me you want to know just why this image needs blurring.  Just so you can compare the two here is the same image, unblurred.

He captions his blurred image with this:

The shocking picture of the church web page, woman’s dress endorsed by ministers

Shocking!  I’m so shocked.  A church in Warrnambool, by the sea, has a picture of a family frolicking in the water.

How shocking.

He then shares the email he fired off to the church to give them a piece of his mind!

1. MY FIRST EMAIL TO CHURCH ADMINISTRATION (FORWARDED TO PASTORS):

“I was browsing some of the websites for local congregations of the Presbyterian Church of Victoria, and when I found yours I felt I could not but email with an admonition;

He’s so outraged that he just has to send an email with an admonition!  He’s quite the moral guardian!

The very first thing that shows up on your website is a picture of a topless man and a woman in her bikini, particularly standing on her side so the average joe male visiting your website can see the precise size and shape of her you know what.

Her ‘you know what’?  Breast?  Toes?  Haircut?  You can see the precise size of her boobs?  Oh no! And my word, the man is not wearing a top!

As just another brother in Christ, I would like to be bold enough (no one else will tell you) to admonish you to take that picture down and put up something more appropriate.

No one else will tell them because it’s not an issue.

How about a nice family photo in a garden, with the people fully clothed? Or something like that.

They are fully clothed.  Their ‘you know what’ are all covered up.  It is a nice family photo!

Is the abundant life Christ is speaking of about wearing a bikini with your topless husband and two little kids on the beach? Surely not. In fact I don’t think the abundant life has anything to do with showing off ones assets at all.

They don’t look like big assets to me, but perhaps he’s wife has little ‘you know what’.

It’s not just the immorality of the picture itself, but the very picture brings into question the theological and historical position of the church regarding modest dress – which of course is addressed by Paul in the pastoral epistles (1 Tim 2:9). Is a bikini modest?

Who’s got a bikini on?  She’s got a bikini top on, and a wrap around thingy covering her other ‘you know what’.

I am a young 23 year old married male, and my wife knows I’m writing you this

Thanks for sharing that.  Did you have to seek permission?

I allow her and encourage her to dress fashionably and creatively,

Allow her?  What year do you live in?  I bet you give her $20 a week for clothes.

but as a couple we are both shocked that churches do not seem to hold standards of modesty, especially on their website for the world to see.

See what?  A family on the beach?  You can’t be serious.

but the photo has got to go and be replaced with something more modest and non-sensual.

I’ve looked at the bare-chested man.  He doesn’t seem too sensual.  I can’t even see a bulge in his pants.  He’s assets seem well hidden.  He’s not even furry.  As to the woman, what possible part of your brain would find that sensual?

I am sorry my first contact with your church has to be on such awkward terms, but no further contact can really be made unless such a thing is resolved. I hope I have not offended you, but I do also hope I have exhorted you and challenged you.

So if you want to talk with the great Forbes you must do as he says.  He and his wife demand it.

And please, call his wife to check if it’s ok to respond.

Then comes the reply from Ben Johnson.

2. MINISTER BEN JOHNSON REPLIES

“Forbes,

The first and most obvious concern is the immorality of the picture a topless man and a woman in her bikini (top).

Given that this family is on the beach, we do not consider it to be inappropriate attire.

So why the choice of a family on the beach rather than in a garden?

Regards in our Lord,

Ben Johnson”

But that’s not enough for Forbes, he’s gotta get right back in there and jolly well tell Ben how bad he is not to instantly agree with him and do as instructed!

3. MY REBUTTAL TO MINISTER BEN JOHNSON’S JUSTIFICATION OF IMMODESTY

“Hi Ben,

In essence, you are saying then (if I understand you right), that all the beach girls getting around stripped down to what would in a bedroom be titled as ‘lingerie’, is acceptable?

Are you saying that women can’t wear lingerie down the streets, but they can to the beach, with the condition of a different fabric? I don’t understand the logic.

You really should get out more.   As far as I know, woman could well wear lingerie down the street if they really wanted to.   I’ve seen less on the women walking down Chapel Street in Prahran on a Friday night.  They really know how to show off their ‘you know what’.

How does geography and water change the moral exposure of a woman’s privates?

I can’t see her private parts, they’re all covered up.  You have a very good imagination Forbes.

Plus, they’re technically not on the beach, they are on the internet, for the private home viewing of online browsers…

No, no, I checked, they are technically on the beach.  They may have been photo shopped onto the beach, but the photo is quite definitely on the beach.

Not only can the image be seen in your private home, but you could pretty well view it anywhere, and nobody apart from Forbes and a few jews in Caulfield would blink an eye.

My wife and I have been to the beach before, but its like being on the site of a mild porn film – as countless (literally countless) women are dressing as revealing as they would in the privacy of their own bedrooms. I’d rather stay at home these days!

Really?  You watch mild porn?  Does your wife join you, or is it a solo activity?  You have an issue with women swimming in comfort?  You really think that people should be fully clothed when swimming.  Jesus, you have jesus bad.

That said, perhaps you should discuss with the other pastors the possibility of having a picture of a couple with kids walking down the beach – but this time, with clothes on! I mean, there is no reason why you would email me back defending the fact she is wearing a ‘beach bra,’ and that he is topless. And I am sure that you and the other pastors would not find it a bad idea, to have a photo similar, but with the man wearing a t-shirt, and the woman wearing a graceful summer dress or something appropriate.

I’m laughing. Now she has to wear a graceful summer dress, but it’s important that she doesn’t how off her ‘you know what’.

A photo like that would leave a lot to the imagination, and if any stumbled it would be their own fault.  But I must say, with the photo you currently have, it leaves little to the imagination.

I’m not sure, but I think he’s saying he wants the challenge of using more of his imagination to undress women.

Ps, I noticed on your upcoming events you have an event subtitled “challenging the sexualisation of girls.” Surely you must put your walk to this talk – as the photo on the website is quite debasing to femininity. A woman worthy of respect keeps her assets for her husband in marital fidelity and privacy – not to advertise to the world.”

Keeps her assets for her husband?  What a fucked up world this little christian dweeb lives in.

Yours in the blood by faith alone,

Forbes Morrison.”

Who signs their letters like that?  What does it even mean.  I bet he made it up all by himself.

4. NO REPLY FROM OBSTINATE MINISTER BEN JOHNSON

Now because Ben didn’t bother to respond, he’s obstinate.  I suspect he knows a excatly what he’s doing.

By refusing to take the photo down at two admonishments, and since twelve months have elapsed since this dialogue, I have decided now to unashamedly go public on the issue, as an act of protest against Warrnambool Presbyterian’s exploitation of women, endorsement of immodesty, and compromise of biblical standards.

Yep, Forbes is having a huge impact on the world.  The church is so shamed that the image is still on their website.  How do they live with themselves.

Footnote: I do not contend that the bottom half of the women in the picture is immodest, only the top half, and even if readers disagree with my view on this matter, surely my readers will agree that such a photo is not becoming of a church website, especially a Presbyterian Church of Australia.

Now you have to agree with him that it’s not an appropriate image for a church website.  He wants you to.  Otherwise he’ll seem like a right dick.

Perhaps Forbes needs to buy some modesty glasses?

 Mind you, there’s no surprises here. Forbes belongs to Street Church, they get around shoving their stupid religion down the throats of the general public in Adelaide.  He’s almost famous.  But alas, he’ll never be regarded as anything other than another South Australian oddity.

Related Posts

• God Did It!
• Jesus, Billy is missing out
• Christians Have a Home!
• Learning to Turn The Other Cheek with Great Sage Billy M
• The Australian Christians lack respect for our institutions
• The Gays Are Coming to Get Billy!
• Christian Tim Worries About Speeding Sins!
• Hamilton Man Trevor Walmsley is not in the bible!
• Muehlenberg turns the hate up to 9.9
• Muehlenberg shows us the real evil