Jennie Chancey’s doublespeak? What do you think?

Jennie Chancery is the wife of Matt Chancery, candidate for the president of the Alabama Public Service Commission. Jennie is also the co-author of Passionate Housewives, a blogger, and a writer on Doug Phillip’s Vision Forum web site (Matt himself is a close associate of Doug Phillips).

There has been some controversy over Mr. and Mrs. Chancery’s views on whether or not women should vote. In an article from the Dothan, Alabama Eagle newspaper website, Mrs. Chancery states that she is not attempting to advocate for women no longer having the right to vote.

Jennie Chancey clears up her views by saying she does vote.

“I don’t oppose women voting,” she said. “All I am taking is a historical viewpoint. I am not a revolutionary saying, ‘Let’s go back.’ I am just saying let’s stand back and think.”

In an article at her own Ladies Against Feminism website, Jennie first says that all the fuss is basically much ado about nothing.

No one on this side is advocating the mass burning of voter registration cards or the collective shutting off of women’s brains. If that’s the stereotyped conclusion you jump to after reading the following piece, please read it again and understand that this article is here to provoke thought and to encourage readers not to make decisions in a historical vacuum.

Did you carefully note the last part? Because despite her assurances that she’s not advocating the mass burning of women’s voter registration cards, what she is asserting in this article is the practice of men voting for the household…basically only women who are widows “of a certain age” (ie, not expected to remarry) and those whose fathers are deceased and have therefore become “the head of the household” should be voting for themselves.

The Bible is filled from beginning to end with the phrase “you and your household.” God’s promises to Adam and Eve were also to “their seed.” His promises to Noah involved his entire family. His promises to Abraham involved “you and your children after you.” The government of the household is a small republic. The husband may represent the household in public and when he votes, but his “constituents” stand right behind him. They speak with one voice. Now, this doesn’t mean there are never times when a wife disagrees with her husband’s decision. But, in the end, she models the Bride of Christ and submits to her head.

and,

“So what about women? Can’t we get back to the point here? Why should men represent their families at the ballot box?” Well, why not? Someone else represents you in Congress; you do not directly vote on every issue. If you have a problem with men voting for their households, you must necessarily take issue with the republican form of government our Founders laid down.

and

God is the one who defines the household and declares who shall be the head of it. A married man is the head of his household. A widow “indeed” (over sixty and not obligated to remarry) is the head of her household (like Lydia in the book of Acts). Single young men like Samuel or Daniel were leaders even while single and so headed their own “households” (they were not dependent upon anyone). If a father died without a son, his daughter could become his heir, basically becoming the de facto head of the household and bearer of the family name (Numbers 7:1-11). But the normal pattern God has clearly laid out in Scripture is that of a young woman living under her father’s roof until she is given in marriage and a young man leaving home to “cleave to his wife.”

and

Some might ask how a woman could be politically involved in this traditional historical model. It’s important to note that the ballot box is only one of many facets to politics and government. Alexis de Tocqueville noted in his book, Democracy in America, how intelligent and “superior” (his word choice) American women were. He saw their direct influence upon the men of the day as a good thing and as something that raised them to a lofty, important position.

and finally,

We need to learn from and imitate our intelligent, capable foremothers. Are you a woman who is vitally interested in the issues of the day? Talk to your husband (or your father, if you’re a daughter)! Draw him out into conversation and get to know his mind on the issues. Most of all, be willing to listen. You may be astounded at how well your husband can articulate his viewpoints when he is asked for them. Ask lots of questions! And be willing to be wrong. When your viewpoint cannot hold up to scrutiny, accept defeat gracefully. If your husband ends up changing his mind, be humble. And when you really feel your husband is wrong, commit your feelings to the Lord and pray for your husband as he represents your household “in the gates.” It is a solemn duty to serve as the “magistrate” of the household and not one to be taken lightly. Much rests upon husbands and fathers as they represent their households, so lighten that burden by being supportive, encouraging, and involved.

So, readers, by all means I encourage you to go read the whole thing and determine for yourself if Jennie is indeed advocating that, from a biblical perspective, women should not have the right to vote (with the possible exception of old widows and fatherless de facto heads of households)…or is poor Jennie being woefully misunderstood? And, certainly if Jennie has this perspective, doesn’t it likely follow that Matt does as well? After all, Jennie is big into defining submission to her husband as allowing him to speak for the household. It does not seem very plausible that Jennie would have spoken out on this issue if Matt doesn’t have the same views.