Women's Rights

audiobliss

*puts on flame suit, climbs in armored car and drives away*

jdhdiggs

Cathy,

I agree with you in concept, but I also feel that it is the employers rights to hire whoever s/he wants to do the job. It is there responsibilty. What I have a problem with is forcing a business to hire underqualified people to fill their quota's.

At TI, at their internal promotion seminar that tell managers to look for minority and female candidates ONLY and if none of them have the minimum qualifications, then it's ok to look elsewhere. Is that equal rights? No, that's entitlement.

From an owners side, the risk for women is that they will quit to raise a family. Women are also less likely to quit for low pay or fight their bosses for a raise. Hence, they tend to get paid less.

Good looking people make more money and get hired easier too, is that unfair? What if someone was doing it because they thought that the healthier person was less risk than the 400lb guy?

I think everyone should be paid for their abilities and that the business owner should be able to adjust that pay based on the risk of the employee. In the end, the owner needs to stand by his business practices. If they are appalling, then the public will force him out of business. There should be no laws about this.

cheddar

PolkThug wrote:

I seem to remember it more like Cathy does. I remember thinking, that women weren't treated very well in the Bible and that probably most women who claim to be Christians have never actually read the Bible.

Well, to be honest, the Bible does have references to DIFFERENT roles people should take on to live within a Christian community. The Bible has just one real comment about equality. And that is that we are all, if left to our own nature, selfish and self serving at heart. And this preoccupation with our own interests and desires be it monetary, sexual, whatever, will take us away from a more meaningful subservience to God and more meaningful relationships to those closest to us in a Christian community.

It is not how we handle a raise at work that makes us 'equal' or graduation from college that makes us 'equal' that allows us to overcome the depression and anger in our lives. For it has been my experience that those who want money, only want more money when they get it and those that want equality only see more inequality when they succeed in rising up the ladder. But instead, its the relationships we form with those closest to us that will get us past the adversity we all face in our lives that helps us move past our more selfish, brooding nature.

At its core, the Bible is about relationships. Our relationship of subservience to God being paramount. But what is often left out is how the Bible transforms our relationships to those closest to us, forcing us to look away from selfishness and unsatisfied desires to actually helping those closest to us in their times of need. In their quest for equality, I've actually seen friends of mine hate their fathers and destroy a perfectly good, loving relationship because they perceive our society wracked with unfairness, controlled by self-serving men.

Compare that to what happened in the Amish community after the school shooting. When offered top clinical psychiatric services to see them through this disaster, they uniformly turned them down to be with those in their own community. Their faith in God and in the close support and relationships built upon years of faith and principled upbringing (however 'unequal') is worth more to them than all the 'higher knowledge' a secular, more 'equal' society can produce.

I'm not saying that Christians are perfect or superior than a secular society. Or that the Amish are the best example of a God fearing people. Just that Christian's have some options available to them at important times that really are because of teachings in the Bible and their faith and subservience to God.

PolkThug

hearingimpared wrote:

Well my next question is, is this what you were taught or did you actually read it and remember that way. I read it daily and have read a great deal more than several times and the Bible has men and women as equals but far from equal to God.

I actually read. If they are equal, then why is a woman "unclean" for two weeks and not completely clean for 60 daysif she has a female child and unclean for only one week plus 30 days if she has a male child? Why is it only 144,000 'men who have not spoiled themselves with women' who get pulled up when the events of Revelations go down? etc. etc. Men and women are definitely not equal in the Bible.

PolkThug

Have you read Corinthians? After a quick google:

1 Corinthians 14:34 "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."


1 Corinthians 11:5-10: "But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

ND13

The woman ate the apple.:rolleyes:

hearingimpared

PolkThug wrote:

I actually read. If they are equal, then why is a woman "unclean" for two weeks and not completely clean for 60 daysif she has a female child and unclean for only one week plus 30 days if she has a male child? Why is it only 144,000 'men who have not spoiled themselves with women' who get pulled up when the events of Revelations go down? etc. etc. Men and women are definitely not equal in the Bible.

The first part was Old Testament law for surviving in the hot deseart for 40 years. After birth the woman needs to heal plus it is not safe to "know" the woman when blood is present. It is not a put down of women. God went to great pains to micro-manage his people in the deseart so they would survive.

The 144,000, if you read the whole passage:
1And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

4These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

This passage is not putting down women but exhaulting the virtues of purity, those who lived like Jesus. . . virgins, no guile in their mouths, without fault before God these can be both men and women. Those are the first taken. . . the rest are taken later.

The Bible is a matter of personal enterpretation. If you are looking for bad things in it you will find it. If you look at it as the good spirit leads you that is what you will find.

Before I read the Bible I ask for guidance and understanding and then go in with a fresh mind.

cheddar

It's been my experience that pulling passages out of context is probably not the best way to study the true intent of the Bible. There's plenty of ammo there for both sides of this argument. But go at it if you must. Should be interesting.

PolkThug wrote:

1 Corinthians 11:5-10: "But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

For example, the above passage really refers to men's sexual attraction to women with long beautiful hair. Basically, horny men have trouble concentrating on God when they're thinking of jumping the woman next to them...

Word...;)

hearingimpared

Sorry that this thread got hijacked Cathy. . . I was just trying to spell out the difference between religion and spirituality. . .I didn't mean it to go in the direction of a debate on Bible enterpretation.

I read the Big Book, I study it, I don't get out of it that women are less then men I get that they are equal. That's all I am saying.

Joe

bobman1235

Wow. Actually quoting scriptur eon Club Polk today. Didn't see that comin'.

cfrizz

Thank you Thuggy!

This is the same **** that I heard over & over & over again when I was forced to go to church!

And NO priest ever said that it WASN'T meant as negatively toward women as it came across!

Like I said, it was men who wrote the bible & they simply arranged for it to glorify themselves & treat women like 2nd class citizens!

So entire nations were created discriminating against women & it took centuries of fighting for our rights to start getting things on the right path.

cfrizz

No problem Joe. Most men don't have a problem with inteprepting the bible since it clearly favors them!

The plain fact is that God doesn't live here & I'm not putting my faith in ANY man as to what he thinks God meant when men created the bible.

Humans screw things up all the time, the world we live in is plenty proof of that!

hearingimpared wrote:

Sorry that this thread got hijacked Cathy. . . I was just trying to spell out the difference between religion and spirituality. . .I didn't mean it to go in the direction of a debate on Bible enterpretation.

I read the Big Book, I study it, I don't get out of it that women are less then men I get that they are equal. That's all I am saying.

Joe

tommyboy

It should not of your race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, etc, etc, etc. All humans in the United States should have equal rights. End of Thread...........please:).

if that didn't work, pretty please?;)

cfrizz

James the reality was, women & minorities have ALWAYS had the abilities to do the work, but the then mostly white business owners just didn't want to hire them! They didn't care what qualifications they had.

If laws had not been enacted we still wouldn't be given a chance!

I don't believe in hiring unqualified people to do a job either regardless of color or sex!

You obviously don't think racism & sexism still exist in the work place. I do! But so long as there are laws on the books to protect us from such things, we will continue to have the same opportunities as everyone else.

It will be up to us to prove it & we have been ever since!

hearingimpared

cfrizz wrote:

No problem Joe. Most men don't have a problem with inteprepting the bible since it clearly favors them!

You are agreeing with "Thuggy" (a few posts up) a man who is enterpreting the Bible as anti-women.

Do you agree that if a man enterprets the Bible as pro human under God, no matter male or female, that that man is someone you would be inclined to agree with?

audiobliss

cfrizz wrote:

Like I said, it was men who wrote the bible & they simply arranged for it to glorify themselves & treat women like 2nd class citizens!

That's your opinion, whereas fact is that God wrote it through the fingers of men.

You obviously had a very bad experience at whatever church you were 'forced' to attend. I'm not surprised, if they had 'priests'. Several issues with that church, I'd say.

It really is sad that you actually did attend a church for at least some time, and have most likely read at least some of the Bible at some point, and have come off with the feeling that the Bible is anti-female. The Bible and Christianity are no where close to being anti-female. As I said earlier, sure, women are not allowed to have an active roll in public worship, but there are no other stipulations that I can think of at the moment.

I can only pray, and will do so, that at some point in your life you will somehow, for some reason, decide to pick up a Bible again, and that through the Holy Spirit, you would see its true meaning.

PolkThug

hearingimpared wrote:

You are agreeing with "Thuggy" (a few posts up) a bad **** **** who is enterpreting the Bible as men and women not being treated equally.

fixed!

Demiurge

audiobliss wrote:

That's your opinion, whereas fact is that God wrote it through the fingers of men.

You obviously had a very bad experience at whatever church you were 'forced' to attend. I'm not surprised, if they had 'priests'. Several issues with that church, I'd say.

It really is sad that you actually did attend a church for at least some time, and have most likely read at least some of the Bible at some point, and have come off with the feeling that the Bible is anti-female. The Bible and Christianity are no where close to being anti-female. As I said earlier, sure, women are not allowed to have an active roll in public worship, but there are no other stipulations that I can think of at the moment.

I can only pray, and will do so, that at some point in your life you will somehow, for some reason, decide to pick up a Bible again, and that through the Holy Spirit, you would see its true meaning.

I wonder how she feels about Islam.

hearingimpared

audiobliss wrote:

I can only pray, and will do so, that at some point in your life you will somehow, for some reason, decide to pick up a Bible again, and that through the Holy Spirit, you would see its true meaning.

Cathy I am with Bliss on this! Please get a copy of the King James version of the Bible and read it, you will find peace and contentment in your heart. I'll even buy you one and send it to you and pickup the tab. I feel very hostile toward the RC church myself but I dont' want to get into that here. If you have issues with the priests, they are Catholic and they have their own "version" of the Bible and their own dogma. I have no dogma! I am a spiritual person by way of the Bible and I reiterate, I SEE NO ONE SIDEDNESS IN THE BIBLE towards men. It's simply not there just like there is no theology in the New Testament. Organized religions PUT theology there, they create the dogma.

God is the Author of the Bible at least I believe that He is the Author of the one I read.

I am not patronizing you here I speak from my heart.

hearingimpared

PolkThug wrote:

fixed!

"Oh you are a regular riot Alice a regular riot, how would you like to be laughing on the moooooonnnn!"

Ralph Kramden
Male Chauvinist Pig.

cheddar

cfrizz wrote:

Humans screw things up all the time, the world we live in is plenty proof of that!

I think that this is probably the point we can all agree on. At least you didn't say Men instead of Humans.

It is interesting that even from a secular standpoint, men and women both shared in socially organizing themselves into 'traditional' family units to ensure the passing on of their genes (children) into the next generation of humanity.

It's only in the 20th or 21st centuries when we measure the worth of a human by the amount of money they get paid slaving away for some company that we can turn everything around and blame men for some vast conspiracy against women throughout time.

Before the 20th century, a human's worth was measured by their ability to not work but still have money to follow the intellectual pursuits of life (European Aristocracy, etc.). Those men and women who had to work for money were thought to be beneath even the women who benefited from aristocractic wealth. Equality today seems like such a firm and well understood word. But against human history it is very mushy and not well defined. Before aristocracy, I'm sure humans had some other fleeting way of defining the worth of a human.

I wonder how we will be judged a century from now when women work in part as a measure of self-worth and importance when our children of this generation are often put into daycare at only two or three months old? What does equality mean to them? What does it say when working for a company (what men have traditionally done) is somehow more important than taking care of our own children full-time (can be done by men as well) in our current social organization? Are we really in transition toward some new equal utopia? Or are we finding yet another way to screw up humanity?

TroyD

You know.....I really despise when folks selectively quote to support thier agenda.

The 1 Corinthians 11 is about conduct in church; nothing more.

Before someone else does...flip to Ephesians 5. Everyone skips down to verse 22 (men do, anyhow) and stop at verse 25. Again, Paul is giving examples of perfect submission using analogies. If you get right down to it, men have, if you interpret the passage, greater debt of submission to thier wives than vice versa.

Sorry for the typo!

BDT

hearingimpared

TroyD wrote:

You know.....I really despise when folks selectively quote to support thier agenda.

The 1 Corinthians 11 is about conduct in church; nothing more.

Before someone else does...flip to Ephesians 11. Everyone skips down to verse 22 (men do, anyhow) and stop at verse 25. Again, Paul is giving examples of perfect submission using analogies. If you get right down to it, men have, if you interpret the passage, greater debt of submission to thier wives than vice versa.

BDT

Troy, Ephesians ends at chapter 6????? Are you sure this isn't a typo.

ND13

TroyD wrote:

The 1 Corinthians 11 is about conduct in church; nothing more.


BDT

So that means that masturbating in the last row of pews, while fantasizing about the cute, long-haired blonde in the 2nd row of the choir is off-limits, right???;)

shack

I normally stay out of these dicussions.

Christianity is based on the life of Christ, Jesus. The New Testament shows women were a priority in both Jesus' life and Minsitry.

Not my words:

Jesus’ honor and respect was not reserved simply for his mother. It was extended to all women—an attitude largely unexpected and unknown in his culture and time. Jesus, unlike the men of his generation and culture, taught that women were equal to men in the sight of God. Women could receive God’s forgiveness and grace. Women, as well as men, could be among Christ’s personal followers. Women could be full participants in the kingdom of God. Jesus offered full discipleship to women.

These were revolutionary ideas. Many of his contemporaries, including his disciples, were shocked. Women were overjoyed and grateful, of course, and many dedicated their lives to his service.

Women actually traveled with Jesus and his disciples and were part of his ministry.

The Book of Corinthians is primarily correspondece between Paul and the new Church at Corinth. Paul also wrote: “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26-28).

I seems to me that Christianity as shown in the New Testament through the words of Jesus and Paul (probably wrote most of the New Testament) in not only the examples above but throughout the text hold women as equals in the sight of God...the most important aspect of the faith.

Those that blame "Christianity" for the role of women in society through history...well that is just not the case. IMO

brettw22

audiobliss wrote:

That's your opinion, whereas fact is that God wrote it through the fingers of men.

Whose fact? Yours? Hers? Mine?

audiobliss wrote:

I can only pray, and will do so, that at some point in your life you will somehow, for some reason, decide to pick up a Bible again, and that through the Holy Spirit, you would see its true meaning.

She didn't ask you to pray ONTO/for her. Seems a little odd that you'd pray that she sees things your way........

hearingimpared

brettw22 wrote:

Whose fact? Yours? Hers? Mine?

She didn't ask you to pray ONTO/for her. Seems a little odd that you'd pray that she sees things your way........

You angry twisted up little mess of a man. . . you have reason to hate the Bible???? We are trying to show Cathy that what we read in it places women equal and in some case higher than men. I pray for you regularly whether you like it or not.

Joe

PolkThug

ND13 wrote:

So that means that masturbating in the last row of pews, while fantasizing about the cute, long-haired blonde in the 2nd row of the choir is off-limits, right???;)

That's fine, but your wife has to keep her trap shut til you get home. Corinthians rocks! Especially that fine leather they make.

ND13

hearingimpared wrote:

You angry twisted up little mess of a man. . . you have reason to hate the Bible???? We are trying to show Cathy that what we read in it places women equal and in some case higher than men. I pray for you regularly whether you like it or not.

Joe

One thing there Joe....Brett ain't little.

audiobliss

brettw22 wrote:

Whose fact? Yours? Hers? Mine?

She didn't ask you to pray ONTO/for her. Seems a little odd that you'd pray that she sees things your way........

Then please kindly excuse me for praying for someone.

And did I say that I'd pray that she'd see things my way? No. I prayed that she'd see the true meaning. I also pray that God will help me to see the true meaning of His Word, and correct my beliefs where they may be flawed.