Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Indeed. I find it difficult to have respect for quotations from an ancient book which justify the subjugation of half of the human species. No matter how some rationalize it, it makes women subject to men. It is entirely too much like the Nazi doctrine of Kinder, Küche, Kirchen (children, kitchen, church).
Paul also said: "Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him"
Guess Paul never met the long-haired Jesus we see in all the paintings.
People can cherry-pick the Bible to support or condemn pretty much whatever they like. It appears to be a time-honored tradition.
Hee-hee! Well, I guess Heinrich Hofman, Michaelangelo, and Raphael knew!
Regarding the Scripture you placed at the top of your post, I suppose you know that this was written to a people whose men traditionally kept their hair short, and this is what is meant by the English translation of the "very nature of things." Obviously, the Bible does not teach that it is a sin for men to have long hair. If it did, everyone from Paul to Samson would have sinned by doing the Natzarite vow to G-d.
It depends upon the kind of society one desires, but I don't like it. But my downfall has always been that I like bright and intellectual women. After all, half of a spciety's potential brainpower is wasted if it is not allowed to develop itself.
Hee-hee! Well, I guess Heinrich Hofman, Michaelangelo, and Raphael knew!
Regarding the Scripture you placed at the top of your post, I suppose you know that this was written to a people whose men traditionally kept their hair short, and this is what is meant by the English translation of the "very nature of things." Obviously, the Bible does not teach that it is a sin for men to have long hair. If it did, everyone from Paul to Samson would have sinned by doing the Natzarite vow to G-d.
Yes I know the original context. But no doubt this verse was used by religious conservatives in the 1960's - despite being completely out of context.
But who cares about context when someone is on a self-righteous mission to condemn others?
Who granted these "rights" may I ask, and on what authority? The Rights of man from the French Revolution? The Magna Carta? The much maligned US Constitution? I am curious as to from where we get the concept of basic rights. Individual freedom is a recent notion historicaly and still quite experimental. In fact, many personal liberties have already been taken away just in my short life time. Women couldn't even vote in the US until after World War 1.
Fems would rather be ' abused ,sarcasm ' by many men throuhout their lives than one man who stays with the if they are careful who they choose to marry .
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
So speaks the American Taliban.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pappy&Me
LOL, I consider your insults a compliment so flame on .
There should be a happy medium, don't you think ?
No jack boot fems and no burkas .
Women should be mothers and wives or keep celibate if they choose a career . Instead of making only one man miserable they make many miserable , haha.
I'm not a fem but I do get my way most of the tiem, plus I don't have to put up with a bunch of idiots on the job or worry about being infected with std or infecting others ..
Keep celibate if they choose a career? I'm sure you're the talk of the office....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pappy&Me
Hitler was a terroist, but nothing wrong with kitchen, children and church . It beats desease ,lonliness, fatherless children and breakdown of society .
Those are the only two choices you see?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgnostic
But does feminism for the realization of double standards in these underdeveloped countries have a unanimous capacity to lead to peace? Then perhaps is War and conflict between national heritages GOOD for feminism or not?
Hmmm.. He's emerged from his spaceship up in northern Canada again, to make another "spicy" comment.
___________________________________
A once-good friend of mine (I couldn't stand his late-in-life conversion to stupidity..) became a born-again Southern Baptist after his' wife's insistent bleetings. Then, the Elder Council of that austere group made a decision in about 1994 that men within this nutball church culture should/"shall" have dominion over their wives, that the wife should be totally submissive to her husband. In every way.
My rather chauvinistic friend took this to mean, among other things, that he could now have his way in bed with her. "Finally!" he said. "No more 'I"m too tired' from the little woman!"
The problem is that men don't think with their heads in general, and as well, they got to be the authors and designers of all these various religions. The resulting commonality is that women should always take a lesser position. The Kama Sutra is proof of this....
Cat, I don't think I really have to write this to you, but please! Don't believe everything you read that people claim about the Bible. Way too many of us are wrong!
Only by SOME men -- and apparently by SOME women!
You do err, not understanding the Scriptures! You are quick to criticize the Bible, not understanding the meaning of this Scripture! Nowhere does the Bible say that females are disgusting. Those are YOUR words, YOUR assumptions, YOUR thoughts!
Keeping it very short, the Bible wraps much in the the idea of respect for blood. When a woman gives birth, much blood is shed. This is considered a "little death." For the female child, she is to spend more time separate because she has given birth to a child who will also likely give birth and even more likely will have a monthly cycle.
Furthermore, being "unclean" is not sin as many suppose. It is a natural state of humankind. While G-d commands that we avoid sin, he never commands that people avoid becoming unclean. If He had done that, there would be far fewer people on the earth, because while G-d encourages the expansion of the human race, the exchange of body fluids makes one unclean. Think about it.
What is way too often missed is that the idea of marriage was given as an example of what G-d is to individuals. In other words, marriage was given to help us understand our relationship with G-d, to help us understand salvation. I understand that you may not be a believer. Regardless, this idea is for believers, not for unbelievers. many of us believers can look at the idea of marriage and understand G-d better. We don't knock it.
Only by those who are not believers in the first place. Yes, we have been victimized by such.
You may still criticize Paul if I wrote to you that women keeping silence is not in Torah but in oral law. Since it is not in Torah, believers think that this was a specific circumstance, as were many of his letters broaching special circumstances -- such letters as those telling men not to pray with their heads covered and women not to pray without their heads covered. When a letter is to a particular church, and it doesn't seem to be following Torah, one must be smart enough to ask why; to ask if there were special circumstances; to ask if, since what is written is not in Torah, the advice continues to be the same for all other congregations, for all time.
I don't see how a direct verse quotation is erring and as a former christian of many years, I have an excellent understanding of the bible.
The fact is christians pick and choose what they like and then justify the rest, often blaming 'interpretation'.
The bible is very clear about the role of women, both in the old and new testament. If you don't like what it says don't blame me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken. 
Patriarchy is bad for society (IMO).
