One final point: it would have been quite possible, by careful wording and attention to the probable feelings involved, in both cases to have asked the question in such a way as not to have caused hurt. E.g., “Joe or Jersey, it occurs to me that your stance is that the Bible’s strictures are usually to be taken literally, with certain exceptions made clear by other parts of Scripture. Given that information, which you’ve defined on these three linked threads, and given this Scripture quote ((insert here Jesus on divorce)), how is it that you feel justified in marrying when Jersey is divorced (making the assumption from her references to a previous marriage that she is)? I don’t mean to harass, but it does seem contradictory to your stated principles, and I was wondering how you resolved that apparent contradiction.”
IMHO, such a question would be polite, would not attack, would leave Jersey room to decide whether or not to post the personal details of her previous marriage, and would still make the point that the person posting it wishes to make – there’s a whiff of apparent hypocrisy there that needs to be explained.
Sometimes what you say is not so important as how you say it.