How To Build A Family Legacy That Lasts Centuries
Austin Ruse's latest book, 'Not Just for Kings: Cultivating a 500-Year Vision for Your Family,' makes the case for building big and influential families.Austin Ruse's latest book, 'Not Just for Kings: Cultivating a 500-Year Vision for Your Family,' makes the case for building big and influential families.Father sexually abuses teen girl while flying with his wife and 4 kids — victim captures 'appalling act' on video
A Massachusetts father has been convicted of repeatedly sexually abusing a teen girl aboard a JetBlue flight — while he was on the plane with his wife and four kids, according to federal prosecutors.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Massachusetts announced in a statement that 48-year-old Jonathan Alan Lefman, following a three-day jury trial, was convicted Oct. 16 of one count of abusive sexual contact within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States.
'The defendant repeatedly sexually abused a minor who was simply trying to travel safely aboard a commercial flight.'
The charge is punishable by up to two years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, and five years to life of supervised release.
On Aug. 30, 2024, Lefman was a passenger aboard a JetBlue flight — along with his wife and four children — that was flying from San Juan, Puerto Rico, to Boston, Massachusetts.
The arrest affidavit says Lefman was sitting next to his 16-year-old son and directly behind the 17-year-old victim during the time of misconduct.
"On multiple occasions during the flight and while on the ground waiting to deplane in Boston, Lefman engaged in abusive sexual contact with the minor victim," the statement said.
"Specifically, Lefman worked his hand in between the area between the back and bottom of the seat directly in front of him, where the minor victim was seated, and touched the minor victim's buttocks without her permission," the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Massachusetts stated.
The victim said she saw "Lefman's reflection leaning between the seats in the seatback monitor in front of her" when he attempted to touch her on one occasion, authorities said.
The victim told investigators that "a man touched me without my permission," the affidavit stated.
The affidavit added that Lefman also touched the backs of the victim's feet with his feet, under the seat.
"At first I thought he was stretching because we all get tired," the victim said. But later she "started to realize that he was really touching" her and "kept moving forward and side to side" to avoid being touched, according to the affidavit.
The statement read, "On the last occasion when he touched or attempted to touch her buttocks, the minor victim was able to use her cellphone camera to take a video of Lefman’s fingers protruding between the back and bottom of the minor victim’s seat."
Authorities said the teenager took a video of Lefman exiting the aircraft.
An adult female family member of the victim, who was sitting in a different row of the airplane, confronted Lefman after the flight and reported his conduct to a JetBlue supervisor, according to the statement.
The female family member told authorities that Lefman apologized and claimed he was only stretching, the affidavit said.
The victim's family member also told Lefman's wife that "she should be concerned about the man’s behavior as she has children," according to the affidavit.
FBI Special Agent Jason D. Costello wrote in the arrest affidavit that Lefman "did knowingly engage in unwanted sexual contact with 'Minor A' by intentionally touching, through the clothing, the buttocks of Minor A with intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade Minor A or arouse or gratify his own sexual desire."
Lefman was arrested and charged in February 2025 and indicted by a federal grand jury in March 2025.
United States Attorney Leah B. Foley said in a statement:
The defendant repeatedly sexually abused a minor who was simply trying to travel safely aboard a commercial flight. No one should have to fear being sexually assaulted, whether in the air or on the ground. Today’s verdict holds the defendant accountable for his disturbing conduct and sends a clear message that those who prey on vulnerable passengers will face justice.
Ted E. Docks, special agent in charge of the FBI, Boston Division, added:
This verdict delivers justice for a young teen who showed remarkable courage following an appalling act. No one should ever be subjected to such harmful and predatory conduct— least of all in a confined, public space where she was entitled to feel safe. The FBI is fully committed to protecting children and ensuring those who exploit or abuse them, like Mr. Lefman, are brought to justice.
Lefman is scheduled for sentencing on Jan. 12, 2027.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
To Divorce-Proof Your Marriage And Boost Your Happiness, Go To Church Often
Only half of Americans say shared religious values are important to marriage. New data shows those who don’t think so are wrong.The knuckleball taught a father when to step back
October baseball brings every pitch into sharper focus. A ball that catches the corner of the plate can decide a season. For Brian Gaffney and his three sons, however, baseball’s most unpredictable pitch became the occasion for a different lesson: How much should a father push, and when should he let his boys find their own way?
Gaffney recounts the experience in “School of Hard Knucks: My Three Sons and Baseball’s Wildest Pitch.” He sets out to help Joe, Emmett, and Ben master the knuckleball, a pitch that demands almost no spin and can flutter in any direction. Even seasoned professionals struggle to control it. In a backyard with three eager boys, the possibilities for frustration are considerable.
A boy struggling with the knuckleball may learn persistence. His father may learn to listen. They may both discover that a failed experiment can lead to a worthwhile afternoon.
What begins as a family experiment becomes an education in baseball and parenting. The boys practice, adjust their grips, and keep trying to command a ball determined to do as it pleases. Gaffney has to confront something equally stubborn: his own desire to see his sons succeed.
Parents know that temptation. We want to spare our children disappointment, help them clear every obstacle, and give them opportunities we never had. Good intentions can make a game feel like a job. The child who once begged to play may begin worrying more about satisfying a parent than enjoying the sport.
Gaffney recognizes that risk in himself. His pursuit of the knuckleball is ambitious, and his sons’ progress becomes something he cares about intensely. But a father cannot take every pitch for his child. He has to decide when instruction helps, when encouragement is enough, and when to get out of the way.
Baseball offers plenty of chances to practice those distinctions. Even the best hitters make outs far more often than they reach base. A bad inning does not prevent a player from contributing in the next one. A young athlete learns to recover, to trust teammates, and to return to the field after falling short. Parents get lessons of their own from the bleachers.
Along the way, Gaffney draws on the experience of knuckleball specialists, including Phil Niekro, Charlie Hough, and R.A. Dickey. Their unusual craft gives the book its baseball appeal. A pitch that survives on patience and feel, rather than sheer velocity, rewards players willing to keep experimenting after a conventional approach fails.
RELATED: The ‘Cornell 7’ case should terrify every father of boys
The greater reward, though, is the time Gaffney spends with his sons. Families can fill a calendar with practices, games, and travel while overlooking the pleasure of simply being together. A catch in the back yard or a ride home after a loss may outlast the memory of the final score. Children grow older, and the seasons that seemed endless eventually stop coming.
For Christian parents, the story also raises a question of stewardship. Children are entrusted to us with gifts, limitations, and ambitions of their own. Our responsibility includes teaching discipline and right conduct, but it also requires humility. A son’s worth cannot rise and fall with his batting average, and a parent’s pride should never become the price of affection.
A boy struggling with the knuckleball may learn persistence. His father may learn to listen. They may both discover that a failed experiment can lead to a worthwhile afternoon. Neither needs a trophy to show for it.
As the major league postseason unfolds, young fans are already imagining the spring when they will take the field again. Their parents will buy gloves, drive to practice, and cheer from the stands. If “School of Hard Knucks” reminds those parents of anything, it is that the most important thing they can give their children is not a perfect swing or a winning season. It is their time, their encouragement, and the assurance that their love does not depend on the scoreboard.
When October’s last out arrives, the championships will belong to a few teams. The hours spent playing catch will belong to the families who made time for them. Those are victories no scoreboard can record.
No, Two Men Failing To Make A Baby Together Is Not ‘Infertility’
It is sacrilege to turn the creation of new persons into a technical laboratory process for sale to anyone.Stop Letting Your Kids Call You ‘Bro’
There’s a graphic I’ve seen printed on signs, shirts, and other apparel that says, “Mama. Mommy. Mom. Bruh.” All parents, especially mothers, should be appalled. Results vary, but one search of the phrase using Google’s A.I. overview feature rendered a horrifying summary. “The phrase ‘Mama, Mommy, Mom, Bruh'” the overview said, “is a viral internet […]I didn’t understand time until she died
My aunt recently passed away after a long, grueling battle with cancer. An incredibly decent woman, she spent her final years insisting that time is our only non-renewable asset and that the hands on the clock move faster every year you stay alive.
When I was younger, I dismissed this as little more than garden-variety elder sentimentality. Standing at her grave on a rainy Sunday morning, I finally understood what she meant.
We built the effortless paradise our ancestors could only dream of, only to discover that it can make life feel like one long weekend.
In the 19th century, a French philosopher named Paul Janet offered a mathematical explanation for the subjective acceleration of time. He argued that each passing year feels proportionally shorter for a very specific reason. To a 2-year-old child, twelve months equals 50% of all known reality. By the time a person hits 50, that same year accounts for a rather pathetic 2% of their personal timeline. Janet's arithmetic offers an elegant explanation for why the years seem to shrink, though it doesn't tell us much about what is happening inside our skulls.
Reeling in the years
A study published earlier this year offers a more complicated explanation. Researchers have long suggested that time seems to accelerate as we age because adulthood lacks the novelty of childhood and adolescence. When every day resembles the last, we have fewer distinctive memories to look back on, making entire years seem to disappear.
Researchers examined 120 adults, ranging in age from 20 to 91, and found no significant relationship between how quickly participants felt the previous decade had passed and either the number of personal memories they recalled or the importance they attached to those memories. Instead, the sensation of accelerating time was associated with poorer cognitive performance, particularly on a test of delayed memory recall.
The findings suggest that our ability to form new memories may help explain why time seems to speed up as we age. They also raise an uncomfortable question about how much of our lives we actually remember.
Wasted on the way
Consider the difference between stepping onto an airport shuttle in a strange city and making your daily commute to work. In the unfamiliar city, you notice everything: the smell of diesel, the strange angle of the streetlights, the driver's odd accent, and the dodgy-looking individual eyeing your wallet. Decades later, you may still remember that seven-minute ride.
Contrast that with your daily commute. You have driven that specific stretch of road thousands of times. The route is so familiar that you barely need to think about it. You arrive at your desk with 40 minutes missing from your conscious existence, unable to recall much of what happened between your driveway and the office.
Smartphones have given us another remarkably efficient way to make hours disappear. Tens, perhaps hundreds, of millions around the world spend their afternoons tapping on glass screens, watching short videos of strangers selling snake oil or arguing over trivial issues. The ultimate joke of the digital age involves paying hefty sums for a device that competes so relentlessly for our attention that we barely notice our own lives passing.
Even our attempts to preserve memories can interfere with forming them. In a 2014 study, psychologist Linda Henkel found that people who photographed objects during a museum tour subsequently remembered fewer details about them than people who simply observed them. The effect wasn't universal — taking more focused photographs produced different results — but the finding raises an interesting possibility. A parent filming a child's piano recital might come away with a beautiful MP4 file and surprisingly little memory of the performance itself.
RELATED: The Ireland I grew up in is gone
Where the time goes
Family life has its own peculiar relationship with time. Raising kids feels like an endless march through tedious chores — changing diapers, insisting that Legos not be put in one's mouth, packing lunch boxes, folding laundry, and driving to soccer practice. Yet parents, from Boston to Brisbane, are shocked by how quickly their toddlers turn into college freshmen.
Kids force constant novelty into a household through broken bones, lost teeth, spontaneous questions about death, and the unexpected introduction of garden creatures into the living area. Individual days can feel agonizingly long because every hour requires attention, yet the years somehow fly by in retrospect.
Modern society has, in many ways, made convenience the guiding principle of daily life. We tap an icon to order takeout. We stream movies dictated by predictive algorithms. We substitute memes and text messages for actual human voices. We built the effortless paradise our ancestors could only dream of, only to discover that it can make life feel like one long weekend.
And yet some of our most enduring memories come from doing the same things over and over again. Repeating specific holiday meals or annual camping trips may seem like a mindless, even pointless, routine to an outsider. It is not. Those moments become lasting markers in our memories. No one remembers a random Tuesday from six years ago, but everyone remembers the Thanksgiving when the oven exploded or the road trip when the radiator burst and Dad used some colorful language to convey his thoughts. Traditions give us memorable moments to return to as time moves on.
Now that my aunt is gone, I keep thinking about those Sundays at her house. I think of the roast dinners, the endless slices of cake, the hot tea, and her constant reminders to do something useful with my life.
At the time, I thought those Sundays would go on forever.
The gay-parenting research they hope you never see
They said the kids would be fine. Here's the gay-parenting research that got buried.
A peer-reviewed study reported that children with married same-sex parents had more than four times the odds of reported emotional difficulties as kids with a married mom and dad.
There's a lot of mischief being done very quietly in the weeds of what seems like respectable scientific studies.
Oh, wait. You never heard that? Yeah, I know you never heard that.
The research that produced this finding got buried in the academic literature. And today I'm going to show you how easy it was for that correction to escape public notice — and why it matters for real families like yours.
I suspect the pro-gay establishment hopes you don't see this.
Meet Chris from Ohio
I want you to imagine somebody who really needs reliable answers.
Let's imagine a 20-something young lady. I'll call her Chris. Chris from Ohio.
Chris thinks of herself as bisexual or nonbinary. In her mind, she has a real choice between partnering and co-parenting with a person of the opposite sex or a person of the same sex.
Her decision-making is going to partly depend on what she thinks it would be like to be a mom with another woman versus being a mom with a man.
So let's keep Chris in the back of our minds. And if you're reading this because someone you love is in this situation, or because you've lived it yourself, I want you to know this article is for you.
The study behind the controversy
Now, back to the study. The study reporting that children with married same-sex parents had more than four times the odds of emotional difficulties compared with children of married opposite-sex parents. That doesn't mean Chris' own future children would be four times as likely to have problems, but it's certainly a finding she might want to know about.
This whole research saga started with a paper published in 2016 in the peer-reviewed journal Demography that seemed to show the kids are all right with same-sex couples as parents.
Let's call this Study No. 1.
The researchers expected the children of same-sex married couples would look pretty much the same as the children of opposite-sex married couples. And they found what they were looking for.
This study showed no statistically significant difference in emotional difficulties between kids raised by same-sex couples and kids raised by their married mom and dad. The researchers did report a disadvantage for children with married same-sex parents on a separate behavioral-problems measure, but the emotional-difficulties finding showed no significant difference.
But in 2017, one short year later, the very same researchers analyzed a corrected and expanded version of the same dataset and found the result I already mentioned: Children of same-sex married couples had more than four times the odds of emotional difficulties.
We'll call this Study No. 3.
I'm going to show you exactly how this happened.
What the numbers actually say
Okay, so let's look at some numbers. I'll highlight which figures to look at and what they mean.
For Study No. 1, showing no differences, look at Table 5.
The researchers report what are called odds ratios. You use this method when you're trying to compare how likely something is between two or more groups.
You start with a reference category, and all the other groups are compared to that reference category.
In this case, the reference category is children raised by different-sex married couples. In other words, kids raised by ordinary married moms and dads.
Now, if the odds ratio equals 1, that means the two groups have the same odds of the outcome.
In this case, the researchers wanted to say children raised by married couples are equally likely to have emotional difficulties whether their married parents happen to be the same sex or the opposite sex.
And that's essentially what we see in the first line of Table 5. The estimated odds ratio is close to 1, with no statistically significant difference.
This is the no-differences result.
If, on the other hand, the odds ratio is greater than 1, that means the group has higher odds of emotional difficulties than the reference group.
So let's look at the results the very same set of researchers found using the corrected and expanded data in Study No. 3. That would be Table 7.
Doing the math
Now, stay with me here, because what I'm about to show you is something I suspect the academic establishment hoped you would never notice.
Look at the column labeled emotional difficulties odds ratio. For kids raised by married same-sex couples, the odds ratio is 4.16.
That means the estimated odds of reported emotional difficulties were more than four times as high as for children of opposite-sex married couples.
Odds aren't quite the same as probabilities, and the small sample means we should be cautious about exactly how much weight to put on that figure. But it's a substantial change from the original no-differences result.
So now let's remember Chris from Ohio for a moment.
She may have heard about studies like the first one, saying her potential kids would be fine whether she marries a man or a woman.
She probably didn't hear too much about this correction. You would think she has a right to know just how fragile that no-differences result really was.
So how did the researchers get from no significant difference to more than four times the odds in under a year?
From no differences to twice the odds
Now, here's where the Ruth Institute comes into play. We had a little role to play in the background.
If you guessed that there was a Study No. 2 between Study No. 1 and Study No. 3, you win the prize.
Study No. 3 actually came about after some back-and-forth with a critic.
This critic pointed out that the National Center for Health Statistics had issued an advisory about the dataset. Some of the data had been miscoded.
Specifically, the problem involved the recorded sex of married partners. Some opposite-sex married couples had been incorrectly classified as same-sex couples. Because genuinely same-sex married couples were such a small proportion of the population, even a relatively small number of miscoded records could seriously distort the findings.
The NCHS had advised researchers against using the affected survey years to analyze same-sex married couples. But Study No. 1 had included those years.
So the critic reclassified the data, excluding the problematic years. And his reclassification obliterated the original estimate showing no difference in emotional difficulties, although the replacement estimate remained statistically uncertain.
In fact, the children of same-sex married couples had approximately twice the estimated odds of emotional difficulties. The difference wasn't statistically significant in that small sample, but it was a substantial change from the original estimate.
You can see the results in Table 3 of Study No. 2. The panel excluding the miscoded data shows the odds ratio for same-sex married couples is now about 2 instead of 1.
The author of Study No. 2 corrected what appears to have been an honest mistake. So fair enough.
This is how science is supposed to work: back and forth. Everybody's work can improve from this type of give and take.
But still, let's remember Chris from Ohio, trying to decide what to do with her life. Do you think she heard about this miscoded data?
Probably not.
The biological parenthood problem
Anyway, we still haven't gotten to the statistics showing more than four times the odds of emotional problems.
This critic pointed out another problem in the original study, Study No. 1. The authors used biological parenthood as a control variable.
Now, wait a minute. Let's think about this for a minute.
If the focus of the study is the difference between same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents, you really have to be careful about controlling for biological parenthood.
No child of a same-sex couple will have two biological parents in that couple.
So the variable for biological parenthood may be soaking up variation that is part and parcel of being a child with same-sex parents.
That's the critic's argument. Researchers may reasonably want to separate the effects of biological relatedness, family stability, and parental sex. But depending on the question they're trying to answer, controlling for biological parenthood can also remove an important part of the difference they're studying.
The author of Study No. 2 argued that the biological-parenthood variable should be removed and the analysis redone.
By taking out biological relatedness, the estimated association between living with married same-sex parents and emotional difficulties becomes a whole lot stronger than you originally would have thought.
This is exactly the sort of thing I mean when I talk about tricks with data. There's a lot of mischief being done very quietly in the weeds of what seems like respectable scientific studies. And I suspect the academic establishment is hoping you'll be too lazy to figure that out.
RELATED: The 3 failed promises of gay 'marriage'
Out of cite
Now, who was this mystery critic, you might ask? The critic whose name I haven't yet mentioned?
The critic the authors referred to when they wrote, in their response, that they were conducting an analysis in response to commentary by Sullins?
Who is this mysterious Sullins person? It is none other than Father D. Paul Sullins, Ph.D., my colleague at the Ruth Institute.
Father Sullins has been a senior research associate with us since 2018. When he wrote this paper, he was still a sociology professor at the Catholic University of America.
But we'll take a bit of credit, though, because we had the good sense to snag him when he retired.
Anyhow, notice something about the sentence referring to Father Sullins in the authors' revised paper. It does not give the customary parenthetical citation with his name and the publication date of the article they're talking about.
When I first saw this, I thought, "What?"
I scurried back to the references page looking for the full citation to a paper by Sullins. I was shocked to find that his paper, the one to which they're responding, is not even listed in the references.
Well, that is not only bad science, that is bad manners.
How rude.
Anyway, at least Father Paul got them to redo their calculations. But if somebody wanted to put these papers side by side, the way we've done here, it would not be easy to do.
I'll let you decide for yourself whether you think this is an oversight.
Unsettled science
The academic establishment is committed to the no-differences viewpoint.
You can see why I think so in that missing citation. You can see it in the fact that studies showing no differences get plenty of media airtime, while corrections and contrary findings stay quietly hidden in academic journals.
Those are facts readers deserve to know.
And that brings us back to Chris from Ohio.
Perhaps someone like Chris is reading this today. Perhaps someone reading knows somebody who learned from experience that same-sex parenting was not as easy as you had been led to believe.
I want to say to any of you in that situation: I am sorry. This should not have happened to you.
And I want you to know today that you're probably not the only person going through this. The science about same-sex parenting is not nearly as settled as you've been led to believe.
Please share this article. You'll be doing something the academic establishment too often fails to do. You'll be giving Chris from Ohio the information she actually needs and deserves.
Three cops changed DJ Daniel’s life with a slice of pizza
In 2017, as Hurricane Harvey battered Houston, three police officers found DJ Daniel and his brothers wandering through a shelter. The boys had gone looking for snacks. The officers reunited them with their father and took them upstairs for pizza. DJ still remembers that meal — and the officers who helped his family through a frightening time.
That small act of kindness gave DJ a dream. He wanted to become a police officer so he could help others the way those officers helped him.
Three officers had no way of knowing how far their kindness would travel. They simply saw a family who needed help and acted.
Nearly a decade later, DJ has been sworn in by about 4,400 law enforcement agencies across the United States and abroad. In March 2025, President Donald Trump recognized him during an address to Congress, when the Secret Service director made him an honorary agent. A boy inspired by three officers and a slice of pizza had found a professional family numbering in the thousands.
That journey inspired our new children’s book, “Special Agent DJ.” We wanted to tell a story about courage, family, service, and the impression one good deed can leave on a child. We also wanted young readers to understand something practical: When they need help, police officers can be people to turn to.
A child becomes separated from a parent in a crowded store. A youngster gets lost in a park or feels frightened and does not know who to ask for help. Officers help reunite families, respond to emergencies, and protect neighborhoods. Children should learn to recognize when to seek help. DJ learned that lesson firsthand.
His determination has been tested in ways most adults can barely imagine. Diagnosed with brain and spinal cancer as a young child, DJ has undergone 13 brain surgeries. He has lived for years beyond an initial prognosis that gave him only months. Reading has also presented difficulties, yet he helped turn his experience into a book for other children.
RELATED: You can medicate despair. You can’t manufacture meaning.
DJ’s father, Theodis, has been by his side throughout the journey. He has driven him across the country, stood with him at ceremonies, and encouraged him through grueling days. During the book’s development, he helped us work through illustrations, story ideas, and revisions by phone. His steady support helped make the project possible.
We brought “Special Agent DJ” together in roughly four months. That schedule was ambitious for a children’s book, but we had a reason to move quickly: We wanted DJ to hold the finished book, see what he had helped create, and enjoy the accomplishment himself.
A badge or a ceremony may seem like a small thing to someone watching from a distance. For DJ, every welcome from a police department has reinforced the kindness he encountered as a child. Each officer who embraced his dream helped him carry it a little farther.
Parents and educators teach children many lessons about safety. Knowing when and how to ask a police officer for help deserves a place among them. A positive encounter can shape a child’s understanding of public service long after the immediate trouble has passed.
DJ’s story began with a slice of pizza in a hurricane shelter. It grew into thousands of honorary swearing-in ceremonies, recognition in Washington, and a book he can share with children he has never met. Three officers had no way of knowing how far their kindness would travel. They simply saw a family who needed help and acted.
That is the lesson we hope readers take from "Special Agent DJ": A small gesture can change the course of a life.
What to do when your in-laws are working against you
Marriage creates a new family, and sometimes that means setting boundaries with the family you came from.
BlazeTV host Ron Simmons tackles complicated viewer questions of dealing with in-laws who might be causing more strain than the relationship is worth.
One viewer asked Simmons how to “deal with in-laws” who don’t share the viewer's faith “when a child is involved.”
“I think you have to always respect your in-laws, up to the point where you make sure that there’s obviously no abuse or anything like that,” he says. “But I would say respect with boundaries.”
Simmons explains that a job that comes with being a Christian parent is to “expose our children to the love of Christ … so that the Holy Spirit can begin working on them and bring them under his umbrella.”
“And I wouldn’t allow anything, as much as I could, that would get in the way of that,” he says.
Simmons then reads a question from a viewer who explained that her father-in-law asked her husband “to keep his estate and money from the wives.”
“He said it’s not for us to know, but me and my husband tell each other everything. So it feels wrong for him to ask that,” the viewer explained.
“First of all, that’s wrong for … the dad to do that, all right? That automatically puts a strain between his son and daughter-in-law. I mean, that sets up a marriage strain right there,” Simmons explains.
“Now, a lot of people, maybe they're first-generation money, they’re afraid that, you know, the wives are going to not respect that and, you know, go off and spend the money or something like that,” he says. “But as far as you and your husband go, it’s perfectly OK for your husband to talk to you about that, right?”
“You don’t break that bond,” he continues. “That’s why the Bible says that when we grow up and we get married, the husband leaves his mom and dad and clings to his wife, that they become one flesh, and one flesh shares with each other. I promise you, my right hand knows what my left hand is doing, right?
“Is it wrong for him to ask that? Personally, I think it is,” he adds.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com