Are The Historical Respective Roles Of The Genders Relevant Today?

The post in the other forum that touched off this debate is as follows: Sounds like the old "separate but equal" nonsense. "Sorry, ladies. You're equal but you can't vote."How about women holding property, Buz? Is that off limits too?How about educational opportunities?How do you feel about subservience to husbands whims and commands?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Save us, dear Lord, from those who would save us.

​

Art Hoppe, On the Death of Robert Kennedy
San Francisco Chronicle, 1968

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

To stay young requires unceasing cultivation of the ability to unlearn old falsehoods.

​

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

What size rod do you use to beat your slaves? And I presume they are fit to work again within prescribed time?Sorry, but some of your "values" have gone by the wayside. If you were "wise and mature" enough to discard these false and outmoded "values" perhaps you could be "blessed" as well.You are accepting "values" from the past without thinking about them, and without critically evaluating them -- just because they are values from the past. That's been shown to be a path that leads to uncritical acceptance of slavery and all manner of other nonsense.You may not realize this, but you are making yourself, and your beliefs, into a joke. You are not persuading anyone here that your beliefs are worthy. Rather, you are doing the exact opposite.As Heinlein wrote, "unlearn old falsehoods."

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

No, we agree with you. The biblical role was as you say.What we are saying is that that position is not tenable today. It doesn't matter whether the bible says yea or nay, things have changed. Unfortunately you have continued to advocate a 3,000 year old position. We know that too. What we are telling you is that all were wrong! It doesn't matter if the bible said it, in retrospect it is still wrong, and it does you no credit to adhere to that outmoded position.On another board, a poster much as yourself told us that it was not wrong to own slaves. He was obviously basing his opinion on biblical lore. He was wrong, and anyone who holds his position is wrong. It may have been within custom and tradition 3,000 years ago, but we have advanced beyond that now. At least most of us have. That was the "tradition" 3,000 years ago. Now we know slavery is wrong. Advocating the biblical approach to slavery is also wrong. We have advanced beyond that; those who hold a strict biblical view have not. But you advocate honoring "tradition" which includes ancient customs which have long since been discarded by civilized societies. And you apparently do so just because those customs are "approved" by the bible.We are telling you some of those customs and traditions are outmoded crap and belong in the dustbin of history.Just because they are in the bible doesn't change that in the least.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Total non sequitur.Just admit that the biblical view of slavery has been relegated to the dust bin of history. It'll be a good start.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

We don't want to debate slavery.At this point it would be enough to get you to admit slavery is wrong. You seem to be avoiding that issue. My guess is because it is condoned in the bible.But come on, just admit slavery is wrong and we can move to another issue.ETA: Or are you going to be like a poster on another board who, when pressed on this same issue, responded: "My position on slavery? I don't consider it is wrong to have slaves." Edited by Coyote, : Addition

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

And I am still waiting for Buz to affirm that slavery is wrong.I'm betting he won't, because slavery is approved in the bible.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

To each his own. No, I don't do science here. I do science elsewhere and report some of the results of my work, and that of others, here.And if you note, I only contradict the bible when it makes specific claims that can be checked against empirical evidence.The claim of a global flood about 4,350 years ago is one that is particularly amenable to investigation by archaeology, which is what I do.I have excavated probably 100 or more sites which contained soils of that age. I failed to find evidence of a flood. What I did find was continuity, continuity of human cultures, fauna and flora, mtDNA, and sedimentation. What was occurring before that date continued after that date. There is no evidence for a massive flood in any of the excavations have done.One particularly telling bit of evidence: I have found evidence of genetic continuity from before to after the date of the flood. One Native American lady I worked with had direct lineal ties to a skeleton well over 5,000 years ago. (Other archaeologists have found much older lineage ties, but that is the oldest one I have.)If there was a massive flood those ancient people would have died, and been replaced by people with mid-eastern mtDNA, kin to Noah. That did not happen.No flood, and continuity of everything we can see. That suggests to me that there was no massive flood at about 4,350 years ago. Certainly not in the area in which I work.Now, I don't see this as a "crusade against the Bible" but as pointing out where the claims in the bible are not supported by the evidence all around us.How is it you can accept these claims of the bible when they are contradicted by so much empirical evidence?If you want to discuss the flood further, please respond on one of the flood threads and we can continue there.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.