Are The Historical Respective Roles Of The Genders Relevant Today?

I think that along with the huge benefits of the sufferage movement have also introduced some unintended consequences. For instance, that most Americans cannot do without dual incomes can directly be attributed to women working.That being said, I wouldn't trade this pitfall in for an antiquated society that shackles their women to the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

I agree that "all men created equal" is somewhat of a facade, or at the very least, poorly worded. It is true that not all people are the same. We have different mental faculties, different abilities, different skills, etc. I think the general opinion is that all people should have the same opportunities. I have the same opportunity to play professional basketball. But like it or not, Lebron James and I were not created equally in terms of basketball. He has a genetic advantage over me, "fairness" be damned. This doesn't have anything to do with the suffrage movement or the topic. Be careful not to slip down the slippery slope. Men and women generally think differently and they obviously have different physical attributes. But should that necessarily preclude women in all cases on the sole basis of gender? I don't think so, as incalculable women have faired better than men in many areas dominated by masculinity. If stoning women to death is your version of the "best" then by all means, go live with the Taliban. They won't argue that point. What if what is best for her is allowing her the ability to freely choose her own destiny and not have her husband micromanage every aspect of her life? My goodness, Buz, you do know where Islam got its principles with women, don't you? Islam is an extension of the bible. Halakha and Shari'a are parallels of one another.If you want to find a women who chooses to live a more traditional role, they are out there. More power to you in finding one. At least then it is a choice on both sides. The issue is that you seem to want to persuade all women to ascribe to your value system. But maybe they don't want that. Shouldn't it be their choice?

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

You're absolutely right. I won't even entertain it.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

He's simply stating the historical fact of what Jefferson meant by equality. But you make a good point. There is at the opposite end of this extreme, a lobby who wants to androgenise the world and pretend there aren't differences between men and women. It is equally silly in my opinion. There are some jobs that preclude people on the basis of their gender.The question is whether should apply in all cases. That would be a bad move, forcing people to conform to a one-size-fits-all mentality.Apparently you feel that all women should be barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen on the basis that they are generally the meeker sex. How it has worked since time immemorial is the Taliban's version. Like it or not, that is the biblical version, where society looks at men as something to be desired and women being silent, servile, and shitting out kids at an alarming rate.Slavery has also existed from the beginning. On the basis that it is "traditional," should we reinstitute it? This is completely ignorant. So you think that kids respect daddy because he intimidates them? That's fear, not respect.Since Isaiah comes from a time when stoning to death unruly kids was the norm, I'll just go ahead and abstain from his parenting skills if you don't mind.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

I think he's talking about how it is illegal (or at least taboo) for the opposite sex to use the same bathroom. There are two all-female subs now, but yes, it is a logistical nightmare. The Navy also precludes women from joining the SEAL program too (SWCC also, I think) but not EOD. I wouldn't be completely averse to it, but I think they have very real reasons why they preclude them.The issue is that these are the exceptions to the rule. Buz apparently unilaterally wants women "back in their rightful place" without regard to anything other than antiquated tradition and his book of magic spells as his guide.

quote:

---

The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. -- G.K. Chesterton

---

Forgive him for he knows not what he says.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

That sounded weird.I'm not averse to three swats on the butt for an egregious offense, but I have found that taking prized possessions away works more effectively to curb the ill behavior.I am curious as to what kind of corporal punishment you employed when your sons were younger. How old were they went it first began and how old when it ceased?

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

Precisely, and perhaps there is no greater biblical illustration than Solomon's descriptions. Even then one could highlight the notable disparity between Solomon's version of what a good wife is and juxtapose it by his failings as a husband (all his concubines).These terms like "biblical principles" just don't make any sense because of their contradictory nature. Buzsaw is misinformed on what "biblical principles" mean. In reality he is simply conflating American values he grew up with and saw as "wholesome" and is injecting a biblical spin on it.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

First of all, Buz, PD provided scripture that refutes just that. Please provide scripture that supports your position. Secondly, even supposing this was the case, do you mean to say that thousands of years of tradition should be upheld at all times on the sole basis that it's traditional? Slavery is irrelevent to the topic, but if we were to go by your traditional stance, we should still practice slavery because it's a "biblical principle." You aren't even addressing that. Instead you introduce the non-sequitur that "sure they had slaves, but they treated them really well." But it's still slavery. So do you therefore support it because it's "traditional?" But why not? That's the question. It's not a cheap shot. It is designed to get you to identify the problem with upholding traditions for the sake of their being traditional. It's circular. You need to identify actual reasons why you support something and not support it de facto just because ancient and outdated people's practiced it.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

I think too many people throw away a marriage too easily now or days. I won't dispute that. However, some people have no business being together and they are prolonging not only their own misery, but are also imparting that misery to their children, by staying together for the misguided sake of staying together.Some people make mistakes getting married to one another because of youthful indiscretions. Sometimes when you are young you just cannot reasonably conceive the scope and magnitude of many things, including marriage.A lot of people in the past got married to alleviate feelings of sexual guilt, so that their lust for one another was over-riding more sensible thinking. Is that better in your eyes? Look, it is no ones business what you and your wife do and what you agree to privately. I think the only issue is if you had things your way, you would get in everyone's business and outlaw divorce. For me it is a matter of personal freedom. If there is no compromise then it sounds like it is essentially "your way or the highway." Unfortunately? Why is that unfortunate?

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

Holy crap, man... Were you sodomized by a priest with a crucifix as a child or something? I can understand being rightfully upset by the sheer hypocrisy often associated with Christians, but you seem excessively pissed.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

I meant to phrase it as a question, not as a statement. I apologize for that. I am asking if you had it your way, would you outlaw things like divorce for the sake of preserving the institution of marriage? I'm sorry you feel that way, it's certainly not my intention to be mean for the sake of being mean. It would be helpful if you have any specifics because I don't feel any different. But I will give you the benefit of doubt because perhaps I can't see the water I swim in.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

Yes, it does. Paul goes in to great detail about how to treat slaves and how to act if you were a slave. The issue is that people's version of slavery back then is not always the same as how one views it today. Which is irrelevant since they were the one's in bondage. The bible has numerous instances of hebrew double standards. For instance, Jews were allowed to charge interest against foreigners but not against other Jews. If you can't critically analyze the bible then you have no right to view its supposed infallibility. Consider a good thing, otherwise how else would you be able to defend it? Perhaps Satan, the ultimate non-sequitur. Whenever you can't prove a point, just state your detractor is working for the devil. There have been plenty of creationists who have shown up at EvC, get destroyed in debate, and run away with their tail between their legs. If it seems a little unbalanced in here, know that it's not for lack of effort on part of the creationists.You could also argue the specifics instead of resorting to ad hominem against Coyote too. That's always a plus.

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston