Women and Religion - Does it anger you?

I forgot, I will be outa town all day tomorrow on business.

Again, no problem.I will give you about a week, how's that?

Schraf answered this with one set of figures but you can see the same results any time you google for "divorce" + "religion" or "fundamentalism" or "divorce statistics by religion", etc.Of course, my statement relies on an assumption that it's conservative Christians who follow, generally, your model of marriage, and atheists who follow mine. Certainly it would defy reason to expect atheists to predominantly adopt your model of marriage, and you've largely described that model as "fundamentalist" and "conservative" and associated it with those religious trends, so I think my assumptions are sound, don't you?

You should really read The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan. I personally think that every "loving" husband should read this book. Just because your wife smiles at you whenever you come home from work doesn't mean she's happy with her life.

---

The Laminator

​

It sounds like the child that tries to please the headmaster out of fear. I do not understand how it is even possible to love and cherish anyone that you are in leadership over.
I have a son, and I absolutely love him; but when he grows up and moves out on his own and becomes him own man, I will no longer have the same leadership role that I did when I was feeding him and changing his diapers. There was a time when that was necessary, but after the child matures, then more freedom is extended to him/her. To treat an "equal" partner in the same way, is really sick...unless you're into that sort of thing.Also, if bible believing Christians were assuming the role of head of house as mandated in the bible, wouldn't the divorce rates among Christians be the lowest in the country?*Emphasis, mine.

I've read a little bit on this thread, and so far I can only come up with this:God's love for man:Man needs to obey God's words to evade God's wrath.
Man is inferior to God.
God knows what's best.
God loves Man.Man's love for woman:Woman needs to obey Man's words to evade Man's wrath. (Out of fear)
Woman is inferior to Man.
Man knows what's best.
Man loves Woman.Coincidence? Or did I screw something up?

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

I will be leaving for business outa town today after this post, but honestly, you people, most of whom are scientific minded astound me in your thinking and responses.The Bible and myself are on the side of science and nature in this debate and every one of you people are heading smack dad into the science/nature/historical wind with your rediculous arguments. Science, nature and history tell us that with nearly all of the higher animals there is pecking order or leadership role where the male is and has always been the dominant more powerful protector, provider and leader not only in the male/female family unit role but also in the herd/harem/government cultural role. GET REAL FOLKS!! Wake up and smell the science/nature/historical coffee!! ,,,,,,,,,and do all have a wonderful day!

quote:

---

The Bible and myself are on the side of science and nature in this debate and every one of you people are heading smack dad into the science/nature/historical wind with your rediculous arguments.

---

Um, excuse me?Science does not support your sexism, buz, sorry.That's why you haven't been abole to support a single one of your claims with any scientific evidence thus far.

quote:

---

Science, nature and history tell us that with nearly all of the higher animals there is pecking order or leadership role where the male is and has always been the dominant more powerful protector, provider and leader not only in the male/female family unit role but also in the herd/harem/government cultural role. GET REAL FOLKS!!

---

NO NO NO NO NO!!!That is just copmpletely untrue, buz, and I have already given you examples that you apparently completely ignored.Stop making unsupported claims over and over again, or I'll be forced to tell Admin on you.Support your claims or retract them.I can provide sources for all of my clims below, if you like:Lemurs have a matriarchy.Horses have alpha females that lead the herd.Elephants are matriarchal.Certain babboon species are matriarchal.Lionesses do all of the hunting, so they provide for the young.Many bird species are equal partnerships in raising young, or the male is only around for mating.Tigers and other cats only meet for mating, with the female raising the young alone.And, most damning of all for you, our closest relatives, the Bobobo chimpanzees, are matriarchal and egalitarian.Haven't you embarassed yourself enough buz? A a quick google search got me a lot of info in about 10 minutes, so it's clear that you are pulling this silliness out of your backside.You don't know what you are talking about. You know little to nothing about the various societal structures in the animal world, yet you are perfectly comfortable making claims as if you knew the first thing about any of it.You are completely shameless in your foolish, willful ignorance that I can hardly believe it.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 05-18-2004 09:41 AM

---

Critical thinkers and skeptics don't create answers just to manage their anxiety--Karla McLaren

As usual, an founded and unsupported statement.You have been asked before to supply the information that shows that a woman is weaker than a man or that a woman's brain is responsive while a man's brain is designed to be the leader.You have not supplied such information, IMHO, because it does not exist.Once again, you have nothing but your assertions.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yeah, funny that. Our position is supported by statistics, reason, logic, personal experience, obvious morality, and outright common sense. Clearly, we must be crazy or something.

Buzsaw, I find it very amusing that you are trying to use animal examples (which you incorrectly used anyway) as a basis for human morality.I first heard this argument when I was in high school when some people tried to say that the animal kingdom didn't have homosexual individuals making homosexuality immoral. Right after I heard that, I just bursted out laughing my head off. First of all, many many animal species have individuals that exhibit homosexual behaviors. Secondly, people are reduced to using animal to draw conclusions for human morality.By the way, when I read your post, I giggled to myself a little bit. I guess the internet doesn't have that kind of amusing affect as real life.By the way, whatever happened to the "God made man to dominate over animal" slogan that you Christians use?

---

The Laminator

​

What are you talking about ?How have I disrespected Paul ?I am a Protestant Evangelical Paulinist.Peter and James were morons because God HAD to go outside His apostles to find a man that would cement the gospel (Paul) whereas the other two would have allowed christianity to become a splinter sect of Judaism.This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 05-18-2004 01:37 PM

Just a nit pick:I believe Christianity WAS a splinter sect of Judiasm that split and evolved into a religion of it's own. The early church began to unify and eventually became universal hence the name "Catholic" church. You may not have disrespected Paul but certainly have the apostles James and Peter by calling them morons. Not that I give a rats ass but some may take issue with that moronic statement. *edit omit word {have}This message has been edited by 1.61803, 05-18-2004 03:01 PM

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

God certainly thought they were morons or He wouldn't of gone outside the original disciples and picked Paul.Nowhere in scripture do you see Peter rebuking Paul - just the opposite. Peter was so tradition bound he needed a special vision to convince him that Gentiles were not second rate citizens in the Kingdom.James ? Just go and read Truthlover's topic where I debated him about the so called half brother of Jesus.I know you don't care a rats ass about spiritual matters - you cared about calling me a moron using N.T. figures as a pretext to launch your insult.

Schraninator, I said most I didn't say all. Now let me make something clear. You asked me to come over to this thread and make a contribution. If you got me over here to insult and threaten me that your're going to sic admin on me if I don't please you, I'm nota gona participate. I was busy elsewhere and I think I've made my position clear here.I want to check out the stats on the divorce rate when I can get to it and then I'll get back and respond to that.