This then spawned into a women debate, the agnostics claimed that Christianity suppress women and order them to be silent in the church. I argued that the Scripture teaches that men and women are equal, however, within this equality there is different roles. I then showed him from the Bible how a female is not allowed to preach / teach in the church and how that is a male only function. But, I stressed that it was in no ways declaring a woman lesser than a man.
43 comments
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
Biological differences: absolutely. No amount of politics is going to change the fact that men create sperm and tend to have greater muscle mass than women and women are capable of pregnancy and tend to have more curves. Any discrimination that is based solely in social attitudes, however, is suppression (goes for either sex).
I'd need a facepalm image the size of my house to describe my reaction to this.
Way to master doublethink, Joshua. Suppression totally equals equality. *sarcasm-o-meter explodes*
Ok, I forbid you to have a voice in a church tht, nonetheless, you have to obey, but that´s not inequality.
"But, I stressed that it was in no ways declaring a woman lesser than a man."
I'm glad you stressed that. But can you actually prove it?
I didn't buy that one even when I was a studious Catholic.
"Just as man can't have babies physically, women can't enact the Transubstantion spiritually!"
Er...male/female souls?
Male-only function? Yeah, that's discrimination. Telling women to be silent? Telling women to obey their husband? Dictating what we do with our bodies? That's oppression, and it IS declaring that women are "lesser" than men.
You might wanna expand on that last thing. How is prohibiting women to speak up in congregations not supressing women?
Gender roles change over time. Most are only cultural, very few are physical. Men can't have babies, women can't ejaculate semen. That's about it.
Men might be generally stronger than women, but some women are stronger than some men.
Women might be generally more nurturing than men, but some men are more caring than some women.
Did anyone ask Rachel and Leah what they wanted, in regards to marriage?
What was so bad about wanting one last look on her home, which she would never see again?
What was the name of Lot's wife, btw?
Why does the Bible state how many sons are born, but seldom how many daughters?
Why are almost all strong women characters in the Bible more or less evil?
The only differences between the fiancee and I are biologically, and even then the parts are mostly homologous. Gender roles are made by a culture, and some of things (women more emotional, men stronger) are generalizations and not always the case, like the picture posted by Zits could easily beat me up I'm sure.
A woman should be allowed to anything that a man can do and vise versa, if not then that is discrimination.
Where, Josh? You know what? I'm not even gonna call you Josh anymore. Ima call you MonkeyDude...
So, MonkeyDude. WHERE exactly in the scripture does it say anything about equality between man and woman? Everything I've read out of the bible seems pretty clear-cut. Women should only be touched for "baby-making purposes", your naughty bits are evil, any thoughts ABOUT your naughty bits is evil, and you should hold down everyone who doesn't think exactly like you. Does that sound about right, MonkeyDude?
Why am I reminded of "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others?"
*edit* Looks like I'm not the only one.
Hey, there was plenty of equality back in the old days: for example, women weren't allowed to vote, own property or divorce their husbands for beating them, while men weren't allowed to darn socks, change diapers or scrub the kitchen floor.
Since the Bible is nothing more than the collected "wisdom" of misogynistic Bronze Age Middle Eastern dwelling tribesmen, we can safely ignore it.
If women wish to be preachers, let 'em. For my part, I can ignore a female preacher just as easily as a male one.
In terms of the primordial division of roles, the women concentrated upon consolidation and organization, while the men ran around killing shit.
The role of priest in the community doesn't really fall in line with that stipulated division, but is usually grasped at by failed hunters or otherwise feeble males.
In that light, it seems to me that the exclusivity of the priesthood is not something a healthy male could take pride in.
Speaking as a male, I suggest that healthy women do not have a good reason to associate with preachers.
Separate but equal?
Again?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.