|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Define faith? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
I am contacting the moderators with regards to your behavior.
You are in violation of the forum guidelines, I believe, but it is up to the moderators to deal with you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Well, of course a full adult wouldn't want to submit to another adult.
This would tend to keep the submissive person childlike, and lap-dog like, wouldn't you agree?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Seems you are coming in at the end of this thread. You misunderstand me. I also have the kind of relationship with my husband which you describe having with your wife. It is a give and take proposition, with both of us submiting to the other from time to time. What I was talking about was the conservative Christian viewpoint (and Bible directive) that women should submit to their husbands in all things, and that men should be the head of the household. This directive mentions nothing about a mutual submission or understanding. It clearly puts the woman in the role of always submitting and the man in the role of always leading.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Well, this is an awful lot different from what you were initially claiming about marriage. However, if what you are saying is that God likes it that women submit to men in all things, well, then to me you are saying that God likes women to be kept without full adult standing in society. It really can't be spun in any way that makes it palatable. Isn't it possible that this part of the Bible, like the parts about the monetary value of slaves and women, is just a cultural artifact from the days when women were considered less valuable than a cow, and that they are not relevant today?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: And herein lies the problem. When you disagree with each other, you always win. [This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-31-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: I was speaking of the largest conservative Christian denomination in the US, the Southern Baptists, who specifically instruct women to submit to their husbands and for the husbands to lead the family. Again, this was mentioned at the begining of the thread. The divorce rate for this group is higher than the national average, along with conservative non-denominational Protestant churches, while Lutherans, Catholics, and Atheists & Agnostics are below the national average.
quote: OK, please explain how a leader does not also control. A leader, by definition, tells others what to do, don't they? They decide courses of action that the group will take, and others follow. A leader, no matter how loving or how much they have your best interests at heart, still tells you what to do.
quote: I am talking about more subtle things. If a woman never has equal say in important things in the marriage, she is simply a follower. Many women have been trained to not be adults; to be passive and pliable and agreeable and follow the direction of parents and later of their husband. They are trained to not even have ambitions or dreams of their own but to see their lives only in the context of their husbands', and later, of their childrens'. It is certainly easier and safer to not be a grown-up, but it is also a lot like sleep walking through life, and a lot of divorce happens after 20 years of marriage and the kids are all out of the house and the woman realizes she has spent half of her life with no idea what she wants or who she is. She has been dutiful and obedient but she hasn't lived for herself.
quote: I don't think this is what I am tallking about. I think your wife would somehow be able to struggle through the tough descision of deciding what to have for dinner all by herself if she was hungry enough, or if you weren't around. I am talking about really important descisions, like if you are going to move, or buy a house, or have a child, or have an elderly relative move into your house, or change jobs. If your wife and you have equal say in these descisions, and your life and her life are equally important, then you have a partnership. If, ultimately, you as the man always get the final say in the major life descisions, then you are not equal, and you are more of a parent, and you have control.
quote: Again, the statistics do not support your point of view, although you may be less strict than the groups I mentioned. Also, oppression can be a subtle thing; if you are always the leader, and you always have the final say in the big descisions, she is effectively silenced and oppressed.
quote: Well, I certainly agree that there are some beautiful things about love in the Bible, but let's face it, women are not really considered much of value in the Bible as a whole. They are taken as the spoils of war quite often, and there are rules about how much they are worth in trade, and there are lots of rules about what to do with them if they are adulterous or are raped. Things get a little better in the NT, but they aren't considered to be equal in value or importance to men at all. quote;This directive mentions nothing about a mutual submission or understanding. quote: I dunno. It puts women in a terrible place, and men, too. In order to be a good christian, women must want to let their husbands be the leader all the time, and they must make themselves submit to his leadership. In order to be a good christian man, a man must want to lead all the time, and he must make himself be married to someone he can always, ultimately, tell what to do.
quote: I agree wholeheartedly there, but why put all that unneccesary gender role stuff in there? Are all men better leaders simply because they have testes, and are all women better followers simly because they have ovaries? There's that broad brush again, only it's you using it. quote:It clearly puts the woman in the role of always submitting and the man in the role of always leading. quote: I'm still not getting the submit/lead thing. How does one do that at the same time?
quote: mmmm, I don't understand. I take that back. I would understand in an employment situation where there is a team of workers and a team leader. The leader can lead effectively only if the rest of the team agrees to accept her as leader. What I don't understand is how this translates to a modern personal relationship. I mean, the only time people in my personal life have ever "led" me were when I was a child. When I became an adult, I made my own descisions about my life. When I got married, my husband and I made, and make, descisions together. Neither of us "leads" the other. There is no need for a "leader" because both of us are full adults, wanting the best for each other and each valuing what is important to the other. It would insult me greatly if my husband thought he had the right to simply overrule me in any big descision. It would violate our partnership and our mutual respect.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Christians also opposed voting rights for women, opposed women's right to work outside the home, and opposed their right to be educated and practice in male-dominated fields. (In fact, some still do this today) Christians also opposed the Emancipation Proclamation, opposed the underground railroad, supported slavery, gave up jews to the Nazis, and supported Hitler for the whole war. Christian history is diverse, containing both good and bad. However, in this thread, I am responding very specifically to claims about marriage and the role of women, made first by TB, and now by others. TB said "Democratic equality is not the seed of identity that God births into women." in message #32. Change the word "woman" in that sentence to "negro" or "colored" and you get something that sounds like an excerpt from a speech by Strom Thurmond. Sure sounds like religiously-justified oppression to me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Was that at the same time they were considered chattel or after? Look, I hear you on your particular interpretation of the role of women in Christianity and marriage, but if you disagree with TB's interpretation, then your argument is with him. That's why religion is able to be used to justify anything; the people who are able to convince large numbers of other people that their particular version of things is the "correct" version get to tell everybody else who the "real" Christians are.
quote: I know some pagans who would bristle at that implication. mmmm, there was a lot of Christianity and talk of "doing God's work" put out there by Hitler and the Nazis, although it was probably meant to manipulate more than anything.
quote: I thought you said that the Nazis were pagan, not athiests? I don't think you can be both at the same time, so which is it? The rest of your comparison is pure rubbish. How many people have been killed in the name of religion, or justified through religion? The Crusades, Ireland, Israel/Palesine, Ancient Rome and Greece, The Balkans, etc. etc. We can count several thousand on 9/11 alone. This kind of killing has been going on for centuries and is no different from the killings perpetrated by Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro, and all the others you mention. They are done in the name of one group feeling superior to another and deciding that the other group must be destroyed or converted. Every single time some religious person does some horible act in the name of her God or religion, a bunch of others who share that religion say, "but they aren't 'real' *insert religion here*." This excuse has been used to handwave away thousands of years of oppression and brutality performed in the name of religion, and it continues today. I really don't think you want to try to compare history, because religion comes out looking pretty bad. Religion thrived in the Dark Ages, and that should tell you something.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: hmmm. "Weighing their advice" doesn't sound like "submitting" to me. It sounds like you are still ultimately making your own descision after seeking counsel.
quote: Huh? When did I say or imply that I liked that?
quote: But, ultimately, the decision on what to do is still yours. There is a big difference between asking for and/or receiving advice, however harsh, and submitting to the will of another adult. [This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-02-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Why doesn't God want to talk to your wife? Doesn't he think she can understand him, or what?
And sorry, I really don't think you can separate submission and hierarchy. It goes like this, right?; GodMales Male children Females female children OK, that's pretty OT. How about this for a modern version: GodMales Females Children Oh, and was I right? In the event that you and your wife have a disagreement, you always win?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: OK, let me see if I understand. Your wife has to listen to your direction and/or advice, because that's the way God wants it. You don't neccessarily have to listen to you wife's advice, and she isn't supposed to direct you at all, because that's the way God wants it. I am doing my best to make sense of what you are saying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: mmm, it was a pretty direct implication, I thought, but no matter.
quote: Why, if she is in communication with God, too?
quote: Why would he be doing that? Why wouldn't he just tell you both the same thing? I'm not being flip here.
quote: Well, yes, but why not make the decision on what to do together instead of going away, having a man-to-man with God, and then coming back and telling her what the two of you decided?
quote: If that's the case, then you really aren't the head of your family, and you two are equal partners, each able to talk to God and both of you making descisions together, and working through disagreements together. If you are the head of your family, then it has to be: GodMan Woman In this scenario, when the two of you have disagreements, and because you have this apparent especially clear communication with God that is not bestowed upon your wife, you always win.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
OK, fine, you win.
All religious people everywhere have always been extra good (except for the people who aren't/weren't "real" *insert religion here*) Of course, we only get to decide who the "not-real" religious people are well after they do something evil in the name of their God, firmly believing all the while that they are doing God's will. All non-believers everywhere are evil murderers. Yep, that's reality for sure. Christians and the Moors had to ride on horseback to go kill the heathens, while Mao and Stalin had greater killing technology. That makes the Christian and Moor atrocities that much better, it's true. When you feel like addressing the points and examples I provide, let me know.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: So, what I said was accurate then. You can take advice from your wife if you want to, but she must always take your direction. She never directs you, and she is never an equal democratic partner. Is that correct?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2201 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Exactly. John, exactly.
If you aren't equal, BY DEFINITION the power is unequal, and you have it because you are the man. Sorry, it seems that my original assesment still stands: When Funky and his wife, or TB and his wife, or Sattcom and his wife have a disagreement, they always win because they are the leader of their families. So far, TB has been the most honest about it, although he keeps trying unsuccessfuly to soften it and restate it. So farm nobody has been able to tell me how one submits and leads at the same time, either.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024