Women are religion’s longest running victims

First topic message reminder :

Should man rule over women for women’s own good?


Scriptures, and other myth’s, say that God determined that men should rule over women. This gives form, --- in a demographic sense, ---- to our common and society, and says that our demographic pyramid should have a hierarchical shape and or form. This initiates tension and has God demonizing woman, as well as any notion of female equality with man.

His motive must be for the good of women. Somehow!
After all, sanctity of the family is one of the main points of morality.

God was arguably right for his time. Think in the barbaric way. Below the belt. Thank God that time is almost past. Women in our modern world do not need man’s dubious ape like help. I hope you agree. Be honest now with yourself be you male or female.

Men have dominated women long enough I think. To give them equality would be justice.

What do you think?
What would real men do?
What would real women demand?
Do men and women have what it takes to be free?

Justice under law should be gender and age neutral, with limits, but with a good spirit of assuring equality. We do not administer that justice. We only give it lip service. Men are not walking their talk. Neither are women.

In Gods timocracy, a place of government in which love of honor is the ruling principle. All honors go to the Queen and her children. A king’s first responsibility is to insure the veneration of his queen. Honor demands it. He accepts this burden and pleasure wisely. The Queen, as the Beta archetype is the life of the kingdom. The archetypal king’s duty is to raise woman’s position. That means that all men have the same duty. That of not denying women equality and elevating her.

Men. Be good kings. You are making good just men look bad. Step up.
God wills it.

Women. Be good queens and demand what is yours.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ez6wfJWVCeI&feature=player_embedded

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iMBUoxLOmA


Regards
DL

polyglide wrote:Free will is open to all.

Opportunities are different for most but those that are, are either accepted or not by free will.

Influences may make a difference to the path taken but that does not deny free wiil.

That would include the church so why do they not repent and start preaching that women are equal to men and drop their ---- he shall rule over you misogynistic attitude?

Regards
DL

You are picking on PG again please stop it GIa.

stuart torr wrote:You are picking on PG again please stop it GIa.

I will pick on all who deny women equality and support those who do the same.

That would include you if you are of that ilk.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:-
I will pick on.......

You are welcome to criticise anyone's views on any topic on this forum, but please understand that alarm bells start ringing when comments are posted which could create the perception that bullying may be taking place. Kindly make sure that you play the ball, not the man (or woman)!  

Regards,
Ivan

Well said Ivan, A thing GIa is prone to i'm afraid.

Ivan wrote:You are welcome to criticise anyone's views on any topic on this forum, but please understand that alarm bells start ringing when comments are posted which could create the perception that bullying may be taking place. Kindly make sure that you play the ball, not the man (or woman)!  

Regards,
Ivan

I think it impossible to do so but I am still here so I would guess that my bullying is low key enough.

You cannot separate an idiotic idea from the idiot who puts it forward.

Regards
DL

You are the only idiot around here GIa, who wishes to pick on posters who are not strong enough to fight back at you, so be careful who you pick on ok.

stuart torr wrote:You are the only idiot around here GIa, who wishes to pick on posters who are not strong enough to fight back at you, so be careful who you pick on ok.

If they are too weak to debate or discuss issues then they should not be in a debate and discussion forum.

Regards
DL

Not so GIa, they come on to debate not to be picked on by morons like you OK.

Greatest I am, yes, you certainly are the most ignorant, the most ill advised and no doubt the leased loved, you must feel very pleased with yourself.

OH polyglide you are back posting, good and a very good post may I add

C'mon folks, please play nicely. Forums thrive with a little friendly banter, but don't let it escalate.  

The title of this thread is, in my opinion, a good one. I've never quite understood how the Catholic Church can appear to revere Mary, as the mother of Jesus, yet be so opposed to women priests and bishops. Any thoughts on that?

I give up sometimes, never mind.

I agree that there is no real purpose in point scoring, it is in the end both irrelevant and pointless, however, it does help to let some people know that they are not on the right wave length.

So far as I am aware I know no one personally that does not both treat women as equals and in fact in most cases show their appreciation for all the tasks and effort most women put into family life.

Of coarse there are extreems throughout the world involving the abuse of everything they touch and in some cases based on false religions etc;

In reality there are distinct differences between a man and a woman, they are not equal in many different ways, this does not mean they are second class or not entitled to equal consideration, however, the fact that there are distinct differences means they have different roles to play and iif God decides that man should do one thing and a woman another, I know who I would back as being in the best interests of mankind.

I've never quite understood how the Catholic Church can appear to revere Mary, as the mother of Jesus, yet be so opposed to women priests and bishops. Any thoughts on that?

I've always viewed that particular dichotomy as illustrating the innate sexual prejudice of most Christian religion - women are great and revered when they take to passive role of being the grateful recipient of the divine seed (Virgin Mary) but somehow dirty and deplorable when they wish to take a more active role (women priests and bishops).

I think most Judaeo-Christian religions embrace that particular mindset about women and I guess I might want to put it down to the very strong reaction against matriarchal religions.

There's probably lots more to say about that, but I'm off to bed

Women should come first along with the children in family life I believe, I always put myself last as the money provider and helped out as much as I could with nappy changing and baby washing ETC.
Making sure mother got rest when she could.

Hi Stu,
Could not agree more.

Both man and woman have different roles to play or they would not have been made differently.

In the interests of both, it is best to assist each other as far as is possible to make things as equal as possible, however, there are things beyond man's capabilities that only women can do and likewise the other way round.

It is an impossibility to make things equal in all respects.

As far as I am concerned regarding women being preachers,
I feel as a Christian I think God delegated the spreading of the Truth and preaching to man or he would have had women deciples etc;

That is my own view and in no way do I feel women to be inferior to man, nor should they be treated differently in fact they should be cherished and loved, as in an ideal world all should be treated so.

Just an Item in the Daily.

What Makes The Earth Rotate?

It rotates simply? My question mark, because it has not stopped moving since it was first created.

The solar system was formed by the condensation of a rotating mass of gas.

That momentum was conserved, so any planets formed from the gas would also be rotating- and that includes the Earth.

Million dollar question.

Where did the gas come from?

The Earth rotates from gravity.

Extremely sorry PG FOR a flippant remark.
The Earth spins on it's Axis as it travels in it's rotation, the polar axis as you can imagine starts at the north pole through the middle and comes out at the south pole.
The Earth has then a magnetic pull caused by our tidal patterns and the Earth then takes a day to go round it's axis, well 23hours 54 minutes 27 seconds approximately. It is now taking 1.28 seconds longer now than it did a century ago due to our tidal patterns, and will get longer each century now on.

Thank Stu, I learn something every day.

regards.

That is ok PG, any time that I can help at all just ask.

Hi Stu,
One problem that has always concerned me is the abilities that humans have as opposed to any other living thing.

You are well aware of what I believe regarding creation, however, there would be inbetweenies if evolution had played a major part.

The other matter which makes one think is the fact that there are laws without which we could not do the technical things we do.

It is inconcievable that the above could come about without intelligence being involved.

Exactly PG.
No matter what our beliefs PG we can still help each other out can we not with each others intelligence.

I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Some Muslims follow an ideology, as written in their religious writing, which allows slavery of Muslim women. This sect of Islam allows the sale of child brides to others within their cult. These people want a Caliphate that promotes and uses slavery.  

The Muslim men in this slave holding cult have submitted to Allah and are eager slaves to him thanks to the pleasant heavenly gifts he promises. They believe themselves to be favored by God and hate all those who are not.    

History of religion, especially Christianity, shows that when a belief is strong, even if miss-guided, ends all compromise within the believer. Thus is born Inquisitions, Jihads, Honor killing and murder of non-believers and apostates.

The assumptions that these people make of God, without any proof and based on the supernatural and the writings of imperfect men, become so arrogant, that they act as slave traders based on their beliefs without regard for moral and ethical standards. They in fact break their own reciprocity rules.

These Muslims allow this theological certainty to create a tyrannical cult of slaved men who then make second class slaves out of their female children. Naming these Muslim women and girl’s chattel would be an understatement. They are truly slaves, as Allah demands.

These Muslims imitate their slave holding master, Allah, and like all tyrants, hate all others not of their ilk. They allow their hate to push them to violence against the free people in the free world.

Islamophobia is a fear of Islam. Those who do not fear and hate this slave holding cult of Islam, along with the other inhuman and immoral policies that Islam and Sharia allow, are not moral people. Moral people will fight against slavery.

I fear that free people will not be Islamophobic enough, because of their fear of being labelled racist or Islamophobe, to rise up and give secours to the unwilling female slave of Islam.

I am proudly an Islamophobe. If you are not you might not be a moral person.

Are you a moral person?



Regards
DL

“Then the Lord God made the man fall into a deep sleep, and while he was sleeping, he took out one of the man’s ribs and closed up the flesh. He formed a woman out of the rib and brought her to him.” (Genesis 2:21-22)

I used to think that a phobia was a great fear, so I’m surprised anyone can be “proud” to have a phobia. Of course Islamophobia has become more than just a fear of a religion. Since most followers of Islam don’t have white skins, Islamophobia has degenerated into prejudice, hatred and racism against all Muslims, even though the vast majority of them are decent, law-abiding people. Yes, Islam is riddled with misogyny, but so are other Abrahamic religions, as the above quote from Genesis illustrates.

I am afraid of terrorism carried out in the name of Islam, and I am conscious of the danger of a possible attack when visiting large cities or airports. But as a rationalist (I don’t accept anything for which there is no logical or rational explanation), I know that the chance of being caught up in a terrorist outrage is very small and so I won’t let it affect my day-to-day life. And we should spare a thought for how all those peaceful Muslims must fear possible reprisals every time that atrocities are carried out by monsters who have hijacked their religion.

Christianity has had its bestial moments, such as the Crusades and the Inquisition. Irish nationalists carried out acts of terrorism for the last thirty years of the twentieth century, but we don’t condemn all Catholics for that. So-called Christians in the USA have gone on gun rampages or murdered doctors who have performed abortions, but most of them have white skins so they don’t seem to provoke hatred towards all Christians. Lehi (the Stern Gang) were Zionist terrorists in the 1940s, but that doesn’t mean we have to fear all Jews.

I am an atheist, and so is everyone else. I’m an atheist to all the 300 religions in the world. Those who subscribe to one of them are atheists to the other 299. All religions have their absurdities, whether it be a virgin birth and a resurrection or an archangel visiting the cave of Muhammad, who later supposedly flew to heaven on a winged horse. Voltaire said that “those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities”, while Richard Dawkins has argued that “faith is an evil precisely because it requires no justification and brooks no argument”. Perhaps faith is what we should all fear, regardless of any particular brand of it.

I find the touting of Islamophobic views (hate speech in effect) to be distasteful in the extreme - with Ivan I question why anyone should be proud of such divisive and racist views.

One could be charitable and describe the opening commentary as "honest debate".

Though it's not, it's trying to take a rise out of gullible readers.

Ignore trolls and they just go away.

Ivan wrote:“”. Perhaps faith is what we should all fear, regardless of any particular brand of it.

I agree.

Nice post BTW.

I did want to question you on your view of just a few Muslims being the fly in the ointment. How few is few when the majority are way over on the right wing of Islam?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pSPvnFDDQHk

How many attacks would you call a few?

https://www.therebel.media/tiffany_gabbay_april_19


" I know that the chance of being caught up in a terrorist outrage is very small and so I won’t let it affect my day-to-day life."

This may be true, but in your daily life, as a free man, do you not see it as your first duty to do whatever you can to free the women and girls of Islam who are slaves to Muslim men?

And yes, due to being able to buy a child bride and the wife beating laws and Afghanistan rape law, Muslim women are truly slaves.

Regards
DL

boatlady wrote:I find the touting of Islamophobic views (hate speech in effect) to be distasteful in the extreme - with Ivan I question why anyone should be proud of such divisive and racist views.

Should we not hate religions and the religious that make slaves of their women?

I find Islam a hell of a lot more distasteful than my hate fore them.

You, a woman, should be hating them even more than I do.

If you do not, then I guess slavery and honor killings do not bother you enough to hate those who propagate it.

Regards
DL

oftenwrong wrote:One could be charitable and describe the opening commentary as "honest debate".

Though it's not, it's trying to take a rise out of gullible readers.

Ignore trolls and they just go away.

You do the same type of name calling as those who use the term Islamophobic to try to end debate on an immoral and inhumane religion.

You show what kind of morals you have. Yuk.

Regards
DL

Please do not feed the troll.

oftenwrong wrote:Please do not feed the troll.

Why are you following me around. I already have an anal orifice.

Regards
DL

I am very close to closing down this thread

Ivan wrote:“ I used to think that a phobia was a great fear, so I’m surprised anyone can be “proud” to have a phobia. Of course Islamophobia has become more than just a fear of a religion. Since most followers of Islam don’t have white skins, Islamophobia has degenerated into prejudice, hatred and racism against all Muslims, even though the vast majority of them are decent, law-abiding people. Yes, Islam is riddled with misogyny, but so are other Abrahamic religions, as the above quote from Genesis illustrates.

I dislike the made up phrase Islamophobia intensely, as it is an overt accusation of racism and often in my opinion used unjustly to deflect justifiable criticism or even comments on immoral, discriminatory, and prejudiced beliefs and practices within Islam.

If someone espouses racism then the word racist more than suffices, and decent people should be able to tell whether comments or criticism are being directed at religious beliefs and practices that are themselves immoral, or are simply using Islamic faith as an excuse to espouse racism. Since Islam is a religion and not (necessarily) indicative of "race", skin colour or ethnicity, then criticism of Islam is demonstrably not racist, unlike blanket criticisms of Muslims of course which invariably is racism, and here you are perfectly correct that opportunistic racists often masquerade as trying to make a legitimate comment on, or criticism of, the religious beliefs and actions of others.

I think we should be just as careful not to make blanket assumptions about those who overtly criticise religions, as we are not to make blanket assertions about Muslims. Whilst being vigilant to resist and attack racism in any form, and to always try to protect the rights of the individual. I think falsely accusing people of racism is as unconscionable as racism itself, and of course it is ironically the intolerant minority of religious people who tend to use this dishonest tactic to deflect criticism of their beliefs and actions.

It's ironic but on other forums I have found myself called an Islamophobe by some theists, and in the same threads I was being decried by others as a bleeding heart Liberal for condemning opportunistic racist attacks on Muslims masquerading as legitimate criticisms and comments on Islam and it's doctrines and practices. It behoves us all to stand up for the rights of the individual, and thus separate our comments from those seeking to espouse prejudice.

Of course it is true that bigots and racist are happy to opportunistically use Islamic extremism as an excuse to espouse their racist ideologies, and it is also true that there are many millions of decent people who claim to be Muslims. However it seems to me they are decent despite the doctrine of their religious texts, though of course I agree this is no less true about Christians who cherry pick the parts of the bible they find morally palatable. To paraphrase Matt Dillahunty, most American Christians may claim to despise Fred Phelps and the Westborough Baptist Church, but his appalling beliefs actually more accurately reflect biblical texts. 

Ivan wrote:All religions have their absurdities, whether it be a virgin birth and a resurrection or an archangel visiting the cave of Muhammad, who later supposedly flew to heaven on a winged horse.  Voltaire said that “those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities”, while Richard Dawkins has argued that “faith is an evil precisely because it requires no justification and brooks no argument”. Perhaps faith is what we should all fear, regardless of any particular brand of it.

Very true, and there are undoubtedly those who'd delight in labelling such a comment as Islamophobic. The problem I have with the phrase "Islamophobia" is I don't see why we need a special made up phrase to protect one religion, and to imply people are racist when they criticise it. If people are being racist then that is what we should label the behaviour, and of course only when the behaviour justifies it.

Greatest I am wrote:I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

You are mistaken here I think, the phrase implies racism that is masquerading as legitimate moral criticism of the religious doctrines and beliefs of Islam. I think you have chosen the phrase in error. As Ivan has pointed out, there is much to dislike and criticise about Islamic beliefs and practices, just as there are in other Abrahamic beliefs, but this is not "Islamophobia". A terrible misnomer of a phrase anyway, and one I hope is soon consigned to the dictionary-dustbin.

My favourite quotation on the subject was made by a columnist in The Observer some forty years ago, in which Katherine Whitehorn wrote, "I never hate in plurals."

Some people grasp the fundamental difference between hating the belief and hating the believer. Sadly I have encountered people who simultaneously admire the worst excesses of Islam and Sharia, whilst espousing prejudiced and hatred of 'Muslims'. An attitude that can embrace racism seldom has any problems embracing misogyny and homophobia in my experience.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

You are mistaken here I think, the phrase implies racism that is masquerading as legitimate moral criticism of the religious doctrines and beliefs of Islam. I think you have chosen the phrase in error. As Ivan has pointed out, there is much to dislike and criticise about Islamic beliefs and practices, just as there are in other Abrahamic beliefs, but this is not "Islamophobia". A terrible misnomer of a phrase anyway, and one I hope is soon consigned to the dictionary-dustbin.

What race do you think I have implied?

True that I miss-used the term and those who are astute will recognize that my fears are real while Islamophobia is usually describes as an unreasonable fear. My fear is quite reasonable.

Regards
DL

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote: You are mistaken here I think, the phrase implies racism that is masquerading as legitimate moral criticism of the religious doctrines and beliefs of Islam. I think you have chosen the phrase in error.

Greatest I am wrote:What race do you think I have implied?

None, as I said, you used a phrase to describe yourself, and that phrase is synonymous with racism, so I suggested you had used it in error for that reason.

I think the phrase is a horrible misnomer anyway, as I also said. The word racist is perfectly adequate to describe those who espouse racism, so this made up word is unhelpful, and I suspect is misused sometimes to deflect genuine criticism of Islamic doctrine and dogma. Just as I suspect that there are racists who hide behind the idea they are making genuine criticisms of Islam. Better for everyone if this phrase is abandoned, and those who espouse racism are labelled as racist. Whilst genuine criticisms of religious doctrine are are addressed candidly and if it is possible rationally.

I agree that that word id used to deflect away from criticism.

I also agree that some miss-use it as a synonym for racism because it does not designate any race, but only a religious connection.

I guess we will all continue to use it until those who use it to deflect stop doing so.

Regards
DL