Meat Authority vs. Power

[NickF]

There seems to be a slight disconnect in many people's minds or perhaps a lack of realization. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. Similarly, just because you have authority from God to do something, doesn't mean you can do it. You "may" do it but practical concerns may prevent you from exercising said authority.

Since a recent thread has resurfaced, I thought I'd start a thread that has a bit of a different bent on the same subject from my perspective. This is not a response to any person's viewpoint or statement. Simply my thoughts on the matter without obfuscation from lots of cross talk.

I think scripturally there is a great deal of evidence to support the idea that the father has authority to arrange his daughter's marriage. Including the ability to nullify a vow the day he hears it. The father even has the authority to deny a man marriage to his daughter. She belongs to the father.

Scriptural reality and truth sometimes does not matter if the reality in the world is that the authority depicted in scripture is not enforceable.

The reality is in this nation, at this time, if a man bucks the conventions of this day and place, there are consequences. A man has the authority to take a second wife, but without proper groundwork and preparation in the mind and heart of his first wife, the consequence is often that she takes the children, and at least half of everything he owns, possibly ruining the man's life and reputation. Authority and reality are often quite different. Authority to do something does not mean power to do the thing. Rights/authority mean nothing without the power to enact the right or exercise the authority.

The reality is that it doesn't really matter if a father has the "scriptural authority" to dictate whom a daughter marries. The society we live in will not support the man in his authority, so he is stripped of the power to enforce the authority.

IF the man wants to ensure a good marriage for his daughter, he must be wise as a serpent and gentle as a dove. He needs to build the foundation in the mind and heart of his daughter from childhood through young adult years in such a way that he has her trust, and heart. That she greatly honors and respects his authority and heart towards her to do good for her and not harm her.

• When he says "honey, that boy is a bad match" that her training causes her to viscerally step back from the young man and break contact because she KNOWS her father is right and she is wrong. Despite her feelings on the matter she obeys.
• That when her father says, "here's a young man you should seriously consider, he would be a good husband to you." and her thoughts are "but I don't like him because *insert reason*" that she takes those thoughts captive and sets her "feelings" aside to SERIOUSLY consider the match her father suggested.
• By that I mean not just think about it, but consent to dates/meetings/time spent whatever you want to call it. And really get to know the man DESPITE her seeming lack of attraction or aversion to the man for whatever reason.

BECAUSE she trusts the heart, wisdom, and intent of her father.
BECAUSE her father has proven himself to be worthy of that trust and wisdom.
NOT because God's word says he has authority, but because she can safely trust in him.

I am 9 years older than my wife. She listened to her parents when they suggested she consider me as a marriage potential. They started setting the groundwork by inviting me to come over to do work when she was 15. She had the opportunity to observe my work ethic and character. Neither of us were considering each other at the time. She didn't know they had their sights set on me, and I certainly wasn't paying attention to a 15 year old girl at 24 years old. But they set the stage and allowed her to observe first. They asked her to consider me after she turned 16, but her first reaction was "eww, he's too old". However they had even years prior to that influenced her thinking to remove that cultural conditioning that marriage should be to someone the same age by having her read a series of books about Elsie Dinsmore who married someone 17 years her senior. She trusted them, considered me and found me eminently worthy as a husband DESPITE her initial reservations about the age difference.

This is the exact same principle I've spoken about in regards to pursuing a marriage with an additional woman in regards to the first wife. A man may have the "right" or the "God given authority" to do so. But that is irrelevant if the man has not demonstrated his own authority to such a degree that his first wife is so utterly convinced that she follows his lead even if she has reservations and fear.



Same principle with a horse and rider. The rider may own the horse and have the authority to tell the horse to follow him across a white frothing river in a mountain in pursuit of an elk he shot, strap the meat on the horses back, and haul it out of the mountains. The authority is utterly meaningless if the man has not demonstrated his authority in the training of the horse, building the trust, such that the horse believes "if the rider says we go across this scary river, that's where we go even if I'm afraid. And if the rider says this blood smell is not to be feared, I'll let him strap it to me anyways even though all my instincts say run away, I will trust him even so." These principles are so easy to understand it's astonishing when I see men losing their wives and children because they start down the poly path with no foundation. Patriarchy First.

When the husband says "I want you to meet this woman I think will be a good addition to my family and household", the first wife trusts his leadership and his heart towards her. She trusts that he will not pick someone with a personality that will clash and cause strife and division. She trusts that if there is strife and contention, that he will quickly intervene to solve the issue and bring restoration and healing so that there can be togetherness among the adults of the household. She trusts that following him is better than a life without him, because he has PROVEN already. Words on a page mean little when emotions are high. Heck, even vows spoken earnestly on a wedding day mean nothing to a woman who is solidly in her emotions with no constraining love and control by her husband.

His authority means jack spit if he has not adequately demonstrated to his first wife that he is worthy of her respect and trust.

(I am going to segue slightly to add a caveat that I believe is irrelevant to my statements but because I know that if I don't head this butwaddabout off at the pass, it will derail things)

BECAUSE the man has the authority to dictate whom his daughter marries or doesn't marry, or whether or not he takes an additional wife... Because of this.... The daughter has a responsibility before God to obey. The first wife has a responsibility before God to obey her husband.

Likewise with authority and power, responsibility and obedience do not always meet reality. The responsibility to obey does not convert into obedient actions if the gulf between trust and the required action/decision are too great. If the child does not trust the father to catch him when commanded to jump in the water, the child will not be able to overcome the self preservation instincts of staying solidly on land. The daughter will not be able to overcome her selfish desires or self preservation instincts to pick what she thinks is a wiser course of action. The first wife will not be able to overcome her emotions of fear and doubt to follow her husband with a gentle and obedient spirit. The foundation must be solid.

The man must have the heart, trust, true ownership, and obedience of the one being commanded to expect obedience when it runs contrary to selfish desires, or self preservation.

There's a beautiful story about a father driving down the road who hears a battery hissing under the bench seat of the old beater pickup, the passenger door is broken so everyone has to exit through the driver door, but they have the windows down. He hears the hiss and thinks that the battery is about to explode, slams on the breaks and shouts "GET OUT OF THE TRUCK NOW!" as he opens the driver door and bails out, he turns around and no kids are in sight, they dove head first out the passenger window onto the gravel road. The children so trusted his leadership and goodwill towards them that they did what they knew would hurt, because they trusted his leadership. When he said "get out" they knew they needed to get out.

That's the kind of trust a man must have with his daughter to have the power, to implement his authority to arrange a marriage for her. Without that power built from trust and respect, his authority means nothing. It's the same kind of trust a first wife must have for her husband to follow him down a path that she knows will hurt emotionally, when she knows it means the loss of some relationships she values. When it means the loss of much in her life that has been easy and lovely. It's far easier to perceive and dwell on the known loss rather than focus on the possible gain. Because of these things, it takes a great deal of trust on the part of a wife to follow her husband into polygyny. It likely is even scarier and requires more trust for a young woman to trust her father's decision in a husband for her.

Authority according to God is well and good. It should be a goal to live up to the authority we as men have vested in us by God. But having the authority vested in no way imparts the power or wisdom to exercise the authority. We must demonstrate and earn the power to exercise the authority because obedience from our children and wives in this evil land is a rare jewel. Obedience to God is not common, expecting that obedience without training in obedience is a fool's hope.

A man that chooses to overstep his power is a fool. False belief that his God given authority translates to power has been the downfall of many men. We would all do well to heed the mistakes of men in the past. We see it all the time, there's even a saying about writing checks that you can't cash.

 

[NVIII]

Great topic! Applies universally, and is almost as broadly misunderstood. It could be the header at the top of every thread and never not be useful.

(Btw, however the following is perceived, I'm pretty sure I agree with 90% of what you said. Most of this is meant to bolster it, but some of it might be incoherent rambling. Most of the "you"s are "anybody"s.)

Authority to do something does not mean power to do the thing.

The converse is also true: power also does not equal authority. The ATF and CPS, for instance, are fond of demonstrating how easily power can masquerade as authority.

The contrapositive is true as well: lack of power does not equal lack of authority. Therein lies the rub. To make it worse, there is a thorn: authority and responsibility are inseparable. You are never given authority to use to your own end, but always to use for the one who gave it to you, and in a specific scope. And use it you must. To refuse to use it is to abuse it, because it wasn't given to another as a backup in case you fail. You are the head of your family, the only one. Whether they realize or acknowledge it or not, they need you and are depending on you to exercise your authority. To deny your authority is to neglect your responsibility. To deny your responsibility is to neglect your family. You would never tolerate an employee saying, "I ran into problems, so I assumed it was cool if I just didn't do what you told me to do." Neither would you permit one you put in authority over others to blame the ones under him for a failure. The buck stops with the one in authority, whether they had much to do with the outcome or not. You are still on the hook for the things that were placed under your authority whether you like it or not; figuring out the problems is part of it.

Judging by the history books, I'm fairly certain that even ignorance of your authority will not save you from blame. It certainly won't save from consequences. This is why I think fully understanding one's authority is gravely important, even if all forces seem set against you in the exercise of that authority. To forsake that search because of the level of perceived difficulty so that you can claim ignorance is a coward's way. Your conscience will spurn your argument.

There's a saying that goes something like this: "Power without authority is tyranny, and authority without power is slavery." Today we are living with the consequences of our fathers denying their authority, rejecting their responsibility. Today, we are slaves to the idols they bowed down to. Today we make bricks without straw. But we still must make bricks. And you recognize this. That is why you spent 12 paragraphs and 3 bullet points describing how and why we might work around our lack of power in an effort to earn some respect and cajole some obedience from the people who belong to us. Well, I exaggerate a little. But that really is where most men in Western societies are at nowadays: pinned between a rock and a hard place, hoping to God some real test doesn't show up because they know their grip on the reins is a joke seeing as the horse is without a halter or a bit and the saddle isn't cinched. And yet, ignorant and emasculated, being stripped of his power, if the horse gets a wild hair and bucks in public, the man still has the blame for that.

So, yes, absolutely it would be wise to do everything in our power (haha) to make sure that the horse is willingly obedient (though, for most this translates to: we and the horse both want the same thing, not necessarily that the horse is obedient) because we are no longer permitted to secure the bit and fasten the halter and turn it a direction against its will. Long gone are the John Wayne days when you might immediately enforce your will even in public, and a passerby would not call the police but would hand you a stick and say, "Here, save your hand." We are in the days where an anonymous tip begins a forced private interview of our children and an examination for butt bruises. And you already mentioned what a wife might freely do (and be applauded) if she succumbs to temptation to rebel and forsake her husband. So, we pray that doesn't happen, and we are so thankful for women whose submission has no price tag, who willingly obey us out of reverence to God, and for children who do not turn away in their youth.

Authority according to God is well and good.

It's all there is. He is the Author. All authority in heaven and earth originates with Him. Our authority is His authority, the portion delegated by Him to us. We are entrusted with it and commanded to exercise it for Him, for His purposes. We may delegate portions to others as well, and we may demand an accounting from them for how they use it, but we are between them and God in the chain of command, and in the end, as far as He is concerned, the buck stops with us, whether we've screwed around and lost our power or not.

 

[Joleneakamama]

The king James mistranslated Romans 13. Just sayin'....

Related because power and authority are confused there.

 

[Keith Martin]

The reality is that it doesn't really matter if a father has the "scriptural authority" to dictate whom a daughter marries. The society we live in will not support the man in his authority, so he is stripped of the power to enforce the authority.

Amen -- and this dynamic will remain in place over a whole host of issues until men collectively become ungovernable, but I would assert that attempting to become ungovernable in regard to one isolated issue such as arranged marriages will doom that effort to failure. Conversely, if those who rule us have been read the riot act by enough men, they will back off, and resistance to lower-level issues will melt away if most men want that type of authority.

 

[NickF]

Great topic! Applies universally, and is almost as broadly misunderstood. It could be the header at the top of every thread and never not be useful.

The converse is also true: power also does not equal authority. The ATF and CPS, for instance, are fond of demonstrating how easily power can masquerade as authority.

100% agree

The contrapositive is true as well: lack of power does not equal lack of authority. Therein lies the rub.

Correct, lack of power means the lack of the ability to do anything about the authority one has.

To make it worse, there is a thorn: authority and responsibility are inseparable. You are never given authority to use to your own end, but always to use for the one who gave it to you, and in a specific scope. And use it you must. To refuse to use it is to abuse it, because it wasn't given to another as a backup in case you fail. You are the head of your family, the only one. Whether they realize or acknowledge it or not, they need you and are depending on you to exercise your authority. To deny your authority is to neglect your responsibility. To deny your responsibility is to neglect your family. You would never tolerate an employee saying, "I ran into problems, so I assumed it was cool if I just didn't do what you told me to do." Neither would you permit one you put in authority over others to blame the ones under him for a failure. The buck stops with the one in authority, whether they had much to do with the outcome or not. You are still on the hook for the things that were placed under your authority whether you like it or not; figuring out the problems is part of it.

Judging by the history books, I'm fairly certain that even ignorance of your authority will not save you from blame. It certainly won't save from consequences. This is why I think fully understanding one's authority is gravely important, even if all forces seem set against you in the exercise of that authority. To forsake that search because of the level of perceived difficulty so that you can claim ignorance is a coward's way. Your conscience will spurn your argument.

Absolutely agree here.

There's a saying that goes something like this: "Power without authority is tyranny, and authority without power is slavery." Today we are living with the consequences of our fathers denying their authority, rejecting their responsibility. Today, we are slaves to the idols they bowed down to. Today we make bricks without straw. But we still must make bricks. And you recognize this. That is why you spent 12 paragraphs and 3 bullet points describing how and why we might work around our lack of power in an effort to earn some respect and cajole some obedience from the people who belong to us. Well, I exaggerate a little.

If you assume I am speaking about how to "work around" a lack of power instead of how to earn power that is necessary to exercise one's authority, you need to re-read what I wrote. I said nothing about "cajoling some obedience". And I certainly didn't intend to communicate something that weak sauce. That kind of attitude in a man disgusts me. So you won't ever hear me advocating for anything of the like. I may have not communicated the point well enough so I'll reiterate.

You must demonstrate your authority, and create the power base through training and teaching as well as demonstration of your authority. You are not born with the power, nor does power get instantly conferred the moment you take a wife or have a child. Authority is conferred, power is not. Men earn power and respect with hard work and effort.

But that really is where most men in Western societies are at nowadays: pinned between a rock and a hard place, hoping to God some real test doesn't show up because they know their grip on the reins is a joke seeing as the horse is without a halter or a bit and the saddle isn't cinched. And yet, ignorant and emasculated, being stripped of his power, if the horse gets a wild hair and bucks in public, the man still has the blame for that.

Agreed. This is why I'm training my sons to be men, to not shirk their duties. To identify emasculated men, notice their behaviors, and press hard in the opposite direction from what creates weak effeminate soy boys.

So, yes, absolutely it would be wise to do everything in our power (haha) to make sure that the horse is willingly obedient (though, for most this translates to: we and the horse both want the same thing, not necessarily that the horse is obedient) because we are no longer permitted to secure the bit and fasten the halter and turn it a direction against its will. Long gone are the John Wayne days when you might immediately enforce your will even in public, and a passerby would not call the police but would hand you a stick and say, "Here, save your hand." We are in the days where an anonymous tip begins a forced private interview of our children and an examination for butt bruises. And you already mentioned what a wife might freely do (and be applauded) if she succumbs to temptation to rebel and forsake her husband. So, we pray that doesn't happen, and we are so thankful for women whose submission has no price tag, who willingly obey us out of reverence to God, and for children who do not turn away in their youth.

It's all there is. He is the Author. All authority in heaven and earth originates with Him. Our authority is His authority, the portion delegated by Him to us. We are entrusted with it and commanded to exercise it for Him, for His purposes. We may delegate portions to others as well, and we may demand an accounting from them for how they use it, but we are between them and God in the chain of command, and in the end, as far as He is concerned, the buck stops with us, whether we've screwed around and lost our power or not.

15000% agreed

 

[MrB]

I think there is a miss-understanding of what authority is and it’s limitations.
authority is not absolute , there are boundaries or caveats qualifications to which must be adhered to.

lack of power means the lack of the ability to do anything about the authority one has

Do you think you need power to have authority?

 

[NVIII]

You must demonstrate your authority, and create the power base through training and teaching as well as demonstration of your authority. You are not born with the power, nor does power get instantly conferred the moment you take a wife or have a child. Authority is conferred, power is not. Men earn power and respect with hard work and effort.

Glad you elaborated. I think I understand what you are trying to say. I would use the word "influence" for what you are describing here. My mistake for not identifying it sooner. My use of the word "power" had been more synonymous with "force": physical force, force of law (which ultimately is also physical), etc.. Influence is certainly powerful and should be considered part of a man's power. And yes, it must be developed, as you've pointed out. It is a great tool a leader can use in place of force, which a man certainly is born with but might not be allowed to use nowadays, which is a shame because influence can be and not uncommonly is stolen away even after careful development. Not carefully enough, apparently.

 

[NickF]

I think there is a miss-understanding of what authority is and it’s limitations.
authority is not absolute , there are boundaries or caveats qualifications to which must be adhered to.

Correct

Do you think you need power to have authority?

As I stated, authority without power is neutered. Authority without the ability to exercise the authority is worthless. An idea without execution is of no value. Authority without the power to enact and execute the authority is null.

You must have power to act out your authority.

 

[MrB]

You must have power to act out your authority.

I see what you say but it’s not always the case
I can be an authority on a subject and have no need for power. My authority can rest in my knowledge of that subject.
No power needed
or
you could have all the power in the world but I might not accept your authority.
I think
one is not contingent on the other although there can be a relationship

 

[Keith Martin]

It's English, so we just have to expect numerous definitions for any word.

Some here are using the word power when what they mean is coercion.

FDR's definition is a practical one: "Power is the ability to get things done."

Being "an authority" on a subject gives one the power to influence.

Being "an authority figure" implies that one is in charge of something and has the power to enforce policy or make things happen, but very often in life people are put in authority-figure positions but the people above them withhold any real power, so they are, as @NickF says, neutered. This happens more often than not throughout the middle levels of bureaucratic structures, whether they be public or private. Muckety-mucks love to have several levels of 'supervisors' beneath them that are basically eunuchs assigned to attend meetings, make reports of those meetings, and 'supervise' lower-level employees, telling them what policies and procedures they're supposed to follow. But rarely do their supervisors have any real power to enforce failure to comply. Thus, the overarching value of having levels of supervisors in-between oneself and the people who actually do the work that needs to get done. Supervisors are the dispensable scapegoats who get blamed for the lack of production beneath them that they had no power to require.

 

[MrB]

It's English, so we just have to expect numerous definitions for any word.

Some here are using the word power when what they mean is coercion.

FDR's definition is a practical one: "Power is the ability to get things done."

Being "an authority" on a subject gives one the power to influence.

Being "an authority figure" implies that one is in charge of something and has the power to enforce policy or make things happen, but very often in life people are put in authority-figure positions but the people above them withhold any real power, so they are, as @NickF says, neutered. This happens more often than not throughout the middle levels of bureaucratic structures, whether they be public or private. Muckety-mucks love to have several levels of 'supervisors' beneath them that are basically eunuchs assigned to attend meetings, make reports of those meetings, and 'supervise' lower-level employees, telling them what policies and procedures they're supposed to follow. But rarely do their supervisors have any real power to enforce failure to comply. Thus, the overarching value of having levels of supervisors in-between oneself and the people who actually do the work that needs to get done. Supervisors are the dispensable scapegoats who get blamed for the lack of production beneath them that they had no power to require.

And there lies the rub
we give the government our power to exercise authority in the capacity as governing over us
but they have no power that we haven’t given them

as a husband you might have some authority but it means nothing if there is no submission to that position
if your wife has more power than you can she submit to your authority?

 

[NickF]

I see what you say but it’s not always the case

It is always the case. I may have authority over my own body but if a goon squad shows up with more firepower and shoots me, I lack sufficient power to exert my authority.

I can be an authority on a subject and have no need for power. My authority can rest in my knowledge of that subject.
No power needed

This is apples and oranges from what we are talking about. Having knowledge does not mean having authority. And it certainly does not determine power to exert your authority. Apples and oranges. Talking past each other

you could have all the power in the world but I might not accept your authority.

Irrelevant if you are powerless.

I think
one is not contingent on the other although there can be a relationship

I think we are speaking past each other at a grand scale.

 

[NickF]

It's English, so we just have to expect numerous definitions for any word.

Some here are using the word power when what they mean is coercion.

I am not implying coercion but the ability to exert one's will. To as FDR put it "get things done"

FDR's definition is a practical one: "Power is the ability to get things done."

perzackly

Being "an authority" on a subject gives one the power to influence.

Yes, influencing is power, but not exactly the heart of what I was speaking to, more of an ancillary aspect of my main thrust.

Being "an authority figure" implies that one is in charge of something and has the power to enforce policy or make things happen, but very often in life people are put in authority-figure positions but the people above them withhold any real power, so they are, as @NickF says, neutered. This happens more often than not throughout the middle levels of bureaucratic structures, whether they be public or private. Muckety-mucks love to have several levels of 'supervisors' beneath them that are basically eunuchs assigned to attend meetings, make reports of those meetings, and 'supervise' lower-level employees, telling them what policies and procedures they're supposed to follow. But rarely do their supervisors have any real power to enforce failure to comply. Thus, the overarching value of having levels of supervisors in-between oneself and the people who actually do the work that needs to get done. Supervisors are the dispensable scapegoats who get blamed for the lack of production beneath them that they had no power to require.

Good breakdown

 

[MrB]

Many think they are operating with authority
but they are not they are operating from power and just bully others into submission

 

[Joleneakamama]

Many think they are operating with authority
but they are not they are operating from power and just bully others into submission

King Saul did just this and waged an unjust war against a neighboring nation. King David later had to satisfy justice.

 

[MemeFan]

Correct, lack of power means the lack of the ability to do anything about the authority one has.

Nope, it only means you can't get done what you want. You are still free to influence, push, advocate, educate ... for what you want.

This mindset reveal altitude of avoiding action. I lack power and there is nothing I can do.

And most important lesson: Stop copying leftists who see everything throught power prism. There is more to relationships that just power.

Wife acquisition is supposed to be about love and helping each other, not getting mindless servant.

 

[MeganC]

The king James mistranslated Romans 13. Just sayin'....

Related because power and authority are confused there.

In the past people often confused power and authority. Like if someone was king then they held power and people said you were not supposed to question the king because his authority to wield the power came from God (Divine Right of Kings). In the case of these kings the power was inseparable from the authority.

Some members of law enforcement confuse these two. Cops who are outside of their jurisdiction all too often expect that their authority will be respected and feared even if they have no authority outside of their jurisdiction.

The two California tax cops who came here one time discovered this. Their badges and their guns might have been impressive in California but in Wyoming? Not so much.

The only man who had authority over me was my husband. There are other men whom I respect and to whom I personally recognize authority because they have credibility. But that's my choice. It's also revocable.

The relationship of power and authority is fascinating to me because it is sometimes revealed to be very, very fragile.

Nicolae Ceaușescu in December1989 was the most powerful man in Romania. He held absolute authority.

On December 21 he got up in the morning as the nation's all-powerful dictator and when he finally slept that night (if he did) he was a scared old man on the run from the same people he had ruled with an iron fist. His power and authority were undone in the space of a few hours. Four days later he was executed and by the same soldiers he'd once commanded.

I see the same thing to varying degrees with men, husbands, politicians, bankers, pastors, women in positions of power, and etc.

Their power and authority can be fleeting.

Absent a love for God anyone who believes they hold power or authority will eventually be disappointed.

This song by Cold Play resonates for me:

I used to rule the world
Seas would rise when I gave the word
Now in the morning, I sleep alone
Sweep the streets I used to own

I used to roll the dice
Feel the fear in my enemy's eyes
Listen as the crowd would sing
Now the old king is dead, long live the king

One minute, I held the key
Next the walls were closed on me
And I discovered that my castles stand
Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand

I hear Jerusalem bells a-ringin'
Roman Cavalry choirs are singin'
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field

For some reason, I can't explain
Once you'd gone, there was never, never an honest word
And that was when I ruled the world
It was a wicked and wild wind

Blew down the doors to let me in
Shattered windows and the sound of drums
People couldn't believe what I'd become
Revolutionaries wait
For my head on a silver plate
Just a puppet on a lonely string
Oh, who would ever want to be king?

I hear Jerusalem bells a-ringin'
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason, I can't explain
I know Saint Peter won't call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world

 

[NBTX11]

The king James mistranslated Romans 13. Just sayin'....

Related because power and authority are confused there.

The king james mistranslated a lot of things.

 

[NBTX11]

You could also mention power and love. My children obeyed me, because they knew I loved them and had their best interest at heart and wanted to obey and please me. I'm no one special, but I told my son I loved him every day of his life while also showing dad to son affection. Something that was never done to me by my father. When he was 18, he came to me and asked my permission and advice to join the military. Not because he had to, he didn't need my permission at that point, but because he wanted to. I had set the table over the years and he greatly valued what I had to say about it.

 

[NBTX11]

The two California tax cops who came here one time discovered this. Their badges and their guns might have been impressive in California but in Wyoming? Not so much.

More details. What happened? Do tell.