I took that under attack about the demographics in India she fired back that there are plenty of Muslims in India. The implication I took from that was 1) none, she was just swinging back and didn't mean to imply anything specific, or 2) that surely having millions of followers of a religion proven to often be oppressive of women contributes to a situation where women are oppressed. To take away from her statement that Muslim men rape is a bit of a stretch.
A bit of a stretch? Really? But yet making a statement about how 13% of a population somehow add oppression to the women of said country isn't? In a country of 1.7 Billion? Really? That's pretty funny. And it's also funny that you called bens and my posts directly out, yet for some strange reason you didn't take her to task on her A-25% of Muslims are extreme or whatever poll and B-the Muslim population in India somehow add to the rape or oppression of women there or whatever she was talking about. Why is that? And what Ben posted was absolutely right. She wrote something that wasn't off the cuff. She thought it out, it was a long post, she must of reread it before she posted it no? And just like she's been calling people out, as has you, he called her out on it. I'm not trying to start shit with you cuz as far as I can tell, you seem like a good person, mite not agree on a lot of things but doesn't mean I don't value what you have to say. I just think if you're gonna call someone out on some bullshit, you have to call everyone out on their bullshit.
My take away from that is that you don't think I'm good person. Kay.
I already explained myself on BOTH of these points badbrains. You're just beating a dead horse IMO.
Wasn't even talking to you Jesus. You love to poke. It's not that I don't think you're a good person (I can careless) I, personally, bad brains, find u to be a phony. IMO, and if you'd like, maybe I'll sit down and send u a pm explaining why, if not, no loss to me.
This thread pretty much sums up why I dislike religion. Now this is likely a gross oversimplification of things but it seems to me that most religions seem to focus on following a set of obscenely outdated texts rather than encouraging members to think independently (ironically, this also includes ardent atheists who seem as focused on indoctrination as most religious people do). It certainly doesn't help to know that those texts were written in a time period where women were worth less than dirt. I have a hard time when people tell me that these texts preach tolerance because I have rarely seen evidence that supports such a claim. For every passage that speaks about being kind unto thy neighbour there is another that demeans, threatens or subjugates women, homosexuals or non-believers. Only through a lose interpretation of such texts is it even possible to claim that these religions are remotely tolerant, and even then it leaves the door open for intolerant practitioners to reconcile their mistreatment of others.
Simply put; I don't like the idea of Christianity, Judaism or Islam. From what I can see, the texts are hopelessly outdated and tremendously cruel. A literal interpretation of any of these texts seems incredibly dangerous to me which is why fundamentalists of any faith scare the crap out of me.
I took that under attack about the demographics in India she fired back that there are plenty of Muslims in India. The implication I took from that was 1) none, she was just swinging back and didn't mean to imply anything specific, or 2) that surely having millions of followers of a religion proven to often be oppressive of women contributes to a situation where women are oppressed. To take away from her statement that Muslim men rape is a bit of a stretch.
A bit of a stretch? Really? But yet making a statement about how 13% of a population somehow add oppression to the women of said country isn't? In a country of 1.7 Billion? Really? That's pretty funny. And it's also funny that you called bens and my posts directly out, yet for some strange reason you didn't take her to task on her A-25% of Muslims are extreme or whatever poll and B-the Muslim population in India somehow add to the rape or oppression of women there or whatever she was talking about. Why is that? And what Ben posted was absolutely right. She wrote something that wasn't off the cuff. She thought it out, it was a long post, she must of reread it before she posted it no? And just like she's been calling people out, as has you, he called her out on it. I'm not trying to start shit with you cuz as far as I can tell, you seem like a good person, mite not agree on a lot of things but doesn't mean I don't value what you have to say. I just think if you're gonna call someone out on some bullshit, you have to call everyone out on their bullshit.
I wasn't a part of the thread with the 25% business and I haven't read it so that's why I didn't weigh in on it. That's why I started a new thread, and in this thread I saw a 2 on 1 fight so I jumped in to help her out. It isn't super easy to be logical and concise when it is coming from more than 1 direction. And yes, I think 13% is a large enough proportion to add to the oppression of a particular group in a particular place. A few staunch racists held civil rights back for years in America, in India I can easily imagine that fundamentalist Muslims contribute to oppression, even if just by supporting oppression by the Hindu majority. I don't really know much about the governance of India so I can't say for sure. I don't have any problems with you, I like your zest, I do feel this has gotten a little personal though, some distance would be good for y'all...religion gets folks heated lol I love it!
My take away from that is that you don't think I'm good person. Kay.
I already explained myself on BOTH of these points badbrains. You're just beating a dead horse IMO.
Wasn't even talking to you Jesus. You love to poke. It's not that I don't think you're a good person (I can careless) I, personally, bad brains, find u to be a phony. IMO, and if you'd like, maybe I'll sit down and send u a pm explaining why, if not, no loss to me.
Sure, send me a PM. I'm not a phony everyone.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
I took that under attack about the demographics in India she fired back that there are plenty of Muslims in India. The implication I took from that was 1) none, she was just swinging back and didn't mean to imply anything specific, or 2) that surely having millions of followers of a religion proven to often be oppressive of women contributes to a situation where women are oppressed. To take away from her statement that Muslim men rape is a bit of a stretch.
A bit of a stretch? Really? But yet making a statement about how 13% of a population somehow add oppression to the women of said country isn't? In a country of 1.7 Billion? Really? That's pretty funny. And it's also funny that you called bens and my posts directly out, yet for some strange reason you didn't take her to task on her A-25% of Muslims are extreme or whatever poll and B-the Muslim population in India somehow add to the rape or oppression of women there or whatever she was talking about. Why is that? And what Ben posted was absolutely right. She wrote something that wasn't off the cuff. She thought it out, it was a long post, she must of reread it before she posted it no? And just like she's been calling people out, as has you, he called her out on it. I'm not trying to start shit with you cuz as far as I can tell, you seem like a good person, mite not agree on a lot of things but doesn't mean I don't value what you have to say. I just think if you're gonna call someone out on some bullshit, you have to call everyone out on their bullshit.
I wasn't a part of the thread with the 25% business and I haven't read it so that's why I didn't weigh in on it. That's why I started a new thread, and in this thread I saw a 2 on 1 fight so I jumped in to help her out. It isn't super easy to be logical and concise when it is coming from more than 1 direction. And yes, I think 13% is a large enough proportion to add to the oppression of a particular group in a particular place. A few staunch racists held civil rights back for years in America, in India I can easily imagine that fundamentalist Muslims contribute to oppression, even if just by supporting oppression by the Hindu majority. I don't really know much about the governance of India so I can't say for sure. I don't have any problems with you, I like your zest, I do feel this has gotten a little personal though, some distance would be good for y'all...religion gets folks heated lol I love it!
My take away from that is that you don't think I'm good person. Kay.
I already explained myself on BOTH of these points badbrains. You're just beating a dead horse IMO.
Wasn't even talking to you Jesus. You love to poke. It's not that I don't think you're a good person (I can careless) I, personally, bad brains, find u to be a phony. IMO, and if you'd like, maybe I'll sit down and send u a pm explaining why, if not, no loss to me.
Sure, send me a PM. I'm not a phony everyone.
I said IMO. I will gladly send u the pm, hopefully you'll see where I'm coming from.
My take away from that is that you don't think I'm good person. Kay.
I already explained myself on BOTH of these points badbrains. You're just beating a dead horse IMO.
Wasn't even talking to you Jesus. You love to poke. It's not that I don't think you're a good person (I can careless) I, personally, bad brains, find u to be a phony. IMO, and if you'd like, maybe I'll sit down and send u a pm explaining why, if not, no loss to me.
Sure, send me a PM. I'm not a phony everyone.
I said IMO. I will gladly send u the pm, hopefully you'll see where I'm coming from.
Yeah, adding "IMO" makes it so much less hurtful when you call someone that.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
This thread pretty much sums up why I dislike religion. Now this is likely a gross oversimplification of things but it seems to me that most religions seem to focus on following a set of obscenely outdated texts rather than encouraging members to think independently (ironically, this also includes ardent atheists who seem as focused on indoctrination as most religious people do). It certainly doesn't help to know that those texts were written in a time period where women were worth less than dirt. I have a hard time when people tell me that these texts preach tolerance because I have rarely seen evidence that supports such a claim. For every passage that speaks about being kind unto thy neighbour there is another that demeans, threatens or subjugates women, homosexuals or non-believers. Only through a lose interpretation of such texts is it even possible to claim that these religions are remotely tolerant, and even then it leaves the door open for intolerant practitioners to reconcile their mistreatment of others.
Simply put; I don't like the idea of Christianity, Judaism or Islam. From what I can see, the texts are hopelessly outdated and tremendously cruel. A literal interpretation of any of these texts seems incredibly dangerous to me which is why fundamentalists of any faith scare the crap out of me.
I completely see where you're coming from on this. Anything taken literally or to the extreme can be damaging; I'd hope those with conscience and compassion DO cherry-pick and take in the positive sides of the text.
And even the books aside, more important are the tenets by which we live our lives. They don't have to come from religion, but they can.
The kindness you mention is a common thread in most (all?) religions. Though agnostic now, would I be who I am without religion? I don't know, but the canons and examples with which I was raised certainly played a part.
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
But that IS the good word...it's the BIBLE I quoted, not some priests take on the bible. Do you realize that Timothy is supposedly a letter from Paul? You know Paul, he's the guy that founded the original Christian church.
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
Slow down, Sally!
Homosexuality, women priests and child abuse in the same breath of things that shouldn't be met with approval....
I only see one thing that is unacceptable in that phrase.
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
But that IS the good word...it's the BIBLE I quoted, not some priests take on the bible. Do you realize that Timothy is supposedly a letter from Paul? You know Paul, he's the guy that founded the original Christian church.
Then the wolves snuck in, its all money and power now with a few sincerely hearted people out of good heart are blinded, and Paul was an apostle who wrote a letter to timothy and he followed Jesus who was the founder of Christianity, Paul was just an apostle and preacher forming congregations in worship of God and of keeping the faith in Jesus ransom sacrifice, it doesnt mean the centuries on people would keep strict observance of the good word penned by the prophets by means of Gods holy spirit it went in its own direction, it really depended on the individual to follow the word correctly and not subject themselves to any good teaching because of the followers are nice hearted people who is probably blinded, that in itself is the truth, there are many sincere but have no clue, but its those who make people believe what is wrong out of their good faith
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
Slow down, Sally!
Homosexuality, women priests and child abuse in the same breath of things that shouldn't be met with approval....
I only see one thing that is unacceptable in that phrase.
The bible and God are against homosexuality and women priests, incase you didnt know oh and child abuse, the use of man unnatural use of each other is considered immoral
This thread pretty much sums up why I dislike religion. Now this is likely a gross oversimplification of things but it seems to me that most religions seem to focus on following a set of obscenely outdated texts rather than encouraging members to think independently (ironically, this also includes ardent atheists who seem as focused on indoctrination as most religious people do). It certainly doesn't help to know that those texts were written in a time period where women were worth less than dirt. I have a hard time when people tell me that these texts preach tolerance because I have rarely seen evidence that supports such a claim. For every passage that speaks about being kind unto thy neighbour there is another that demeans, threatens or subjugates women, homosexuals or non-believers. Only through a lose interpretation of such texts is it even possible to claim that these religions are remotely tolerant, and even then it leaves the door open for intolerant practitioners to reconcile their mistreatment of others.
Simply put; I don't like the idea of Christianity, Judaism or Islam. From what I can see, the texts are hopelessly outdated and tremendously cruel. A literal interpretation of any of these texts seems incredibly dangerous to me which is why fundamentalists of any faith scare the crap out of me.
I completely see where you're coming from on this. Anything taken literally or to the extreme can be damaging; I'd hope those with conscience and compassion DO cherry-pick and take in the positive sides of the text.
And even the books aside, more important are the tenets by which we live our lives. They don't have to come from religion, but they can.
The kindness you mention is a common thread in most (all?) religions. Though agnostic now, would I be who I am without religion? I don't know, but the canons and examples with which I was raised certainly played a part.
Indeed.
I think there are some incredibly kind-hearted, Muslims, Christians and Jews. That being said, I'll place my faith with those individuals rather than with the texts that they work to interpret. I've always been skeptical when it comes to organized religion simply because I've met too many genuine and decent people who are tolerant and accepting yet do not espouse any particular set of beliefs.
In short, people can be awesome but I'm never going to be too fussy about religion itself. It may bring out the best in some people, but it definitely brings out the worst in others.
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
Slow down, Sally!
Homosexuality, women priests and child abuse in the same breath of things that shouldn't be met with approval....
I only see one thing that is unacceptable in that phrase.
The bible and God are against homosexuality and women priests, incase you didnt know oh and child abuse, the use of man unnatural use of each other is considered immoral
But what about people themselves? The ones who do live lives of charity and decency, and see no problem with the first two so-called sins?
My apologies for derailing the thread (in a way I guess though I suppose this is related).
In short, people can be awesome but I'm never going to be too fussy about religion itself. It may bring out the best in some people, but it definitely brings out the worst in others.
I'd be curious to see a comparison of living standards in countries broken down by religious majority....then relate it somehow to living standards in predominantly Christian nations throughout history...then use that to compare extremism, and women's equality. I mean...in some of the places that extremism flourishes, the living standards can't be much different than they were in the days Christians settlers were still burning witches, or involved in the slave trade, or slaughtering natives, with a belief in racial superiority rooted in their religion. This still goes on with Bible Belt political activism and it's support for war against Islamic countries on religious grounds. To me, that is a very real problem that isn't addressed often enough. Kind of a tangent from the topic, but (I think) I'm going somewhere with this:
the best thing we can do to support women's equality in their chosen religion, women's rights, and human rights in general, is help to raise the living standards in the countries we deal with, and stop trying to fuck over the ones we don't. Improved equality (and decline of extremism, as well as organized religion in general) is a pattern that repeats as countries become more wealthy and secure (godless?)....Of course this convolutes the issue because it opens the door to discussions on consumerism and traditional family values...but as a whole, making people's more comfortable, or at least helping them meet their basic needs, makes it easier for people to evolve as cultures and individuals, regardless of which god we believe in (or don't). The best way to raise living standards, and the causes of low living standards?....that's a whole other discussion...one in which our political ideologies and religious beliefs usually divide us further. Sometimes these issues feel overwhelming :(
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
Slow down, Sally!
Homosexuality, women priests and child abuse in the same breath of things that shouldn't be met with approval....
I only see one thing that is unacceptable in that phrase.
The bible and God are against homosexuality and women priests, incase you didnt know oh and child abuse, the use of man unnatural use of each other is considered immoral
But what about people themselves? The ones who do live lives of charity and decency, and see no problem with the first two so-called sins?
My apologies for derailing the thread (in a way I guess though I suppose this is related).
I think you've answered your own question; it's about the people, not the religion. Essentially, those people had to reject or at the very least reconcile a certain aspect of their faith. I would suspect that all religions likely have similar discrepancies. Essentially a fundamentalist is not wrong in his or her interpretation of religion. They are simply following a stricter set of rules which in turn calls for some level of intolerance.
Other persons practise a loser interpretation of their religion which I assume is because they cannot reconcile their own beliefs or lifestyle with what is written in their religious texts. This may lend a person to giving one portion of a religious doctrine more weight than another. It would seem to me that most of these texts are somewhat inconsistent allowing for multiple interpretations, or at the very least some flexibility in the way in which the religion is practised. I'm not religious, but it is my understanding that Christians can ask forgiveness for their sins. Isn't that essentially a get-out-jail-free card that allows for a pretty flexible interpretation of one's faith? If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me.
On some real shit, I want to come out and apologize to pjsoul for calling her a phony. I get you now. Sorry for the misunderstanding. And fuck the Canucks!
I dont think Christianity have Systematic Subjugation of women, true Christianity just teaches that man take responsible headship of worship and family not meaning they can rape the women or boss them around but meaning they make the proper decisions according to bible guidelines and women to compliment their husbands in their decisions if not even change their minds so women too get their say provided their husband is not a jerk and ignores their wifes views, that is true Christianity, because God made a companion ''compliment'' for Adam as headship, man is supposed to be leader and woman have allowance to manipulate their views to otherwise with power of reason...
Christianity doesn't have it much nowadays, but back in it's fundamentalist heyday...oh yeah plenty! What say you to the "she should keep silent business"?
Thats not the proper Christian view but coming from people who profess to call themselves Christian and have given Christianity a bad reputation just like most religions do nowadays, its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
Slow down, Sally!
Homosexuality, women priests and child abuse in the same breath of things that shouldn't be met with approval....
I only see one thing that is unacceptable in that phrase.
The bible and God are against homosexuality and women priests, incase you didnt know oh and child abuse, the use of man unnatural use of each other is considered immoral
Wow...just wow... You drink the cool-aid for sure!
On some real shit, I want to come out and apologize to pjsoul for calling her a phony. I get you now. Sorry for the misunderstanding. And fuck the Canucks!
Thank you badbrains. All is forgiven and right with the train, lol .... except for the Canucks bashing.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Comments
I already explained myself on BOTH of these points badbrains. You're just beating a dead horse IMO.
Simply put; I don't like the idea of Christianity, Judaism or Islam. From what I can see, the texts are hopelessly outdated and tremendously cruel. A literal interpretation of any of these texts seems incredibly dangerous to me which is why fundamentalists of any faith scare the crap out of me.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
And yes, I think 13% is a large enough proportion to add to the oppression of a particular group in a particular place. A few staunch racists held civil rights back for years in America, in India I can easily imagine that fundamentalist Muslims contribute to oppression, even if just by supporting oppression by the Hindu majority. I don't really know much about the governance of India so I can't say for sure. I don't have any problems with you, I like your zest, I do feel this has gotten a little personal though, some distance would be good for y'all...religion gets folks heated lol I love it!
I'm not a phony everyone.
Sucks to see two people I genuinely like and respect go at it like this.
I wanna give you both noogies
its right in there with Christianity approving homosexuality, women priests, child abuse and i could go on, no wonder religion brings about arguments, look at all the lives it has mislead and destroyed, while they teach their own rules and not the good word...
And even the books aside, more important are the tenets by which we live our lives. They don't have to come from religion, but they can.
The kindness you mention is a common thread in most (all?) religions. Though agnostic now, would I be who I am without religion? I don't know, but the canons and examples with which I was raised certainly played a part.
Homosexuality, women priests and child abuse in the same breath of things that shouldn't be met with approval....
I only see one thing that is unacceptable in that phrase.
the use of man unnatural use of each other is considered immoral
I think there are some incredibly kind-hearted, Muslims, Christians and Jews. That being said, I'll place my faith with those individuals rather than with the texts that they work to interpret. I've always been skeptical when it comes to organized religion simply because I've met too many genuine and decent people who are tolerant and accepting yet do not espouse any particular set of beliefs.
In short, people can be awesome but I'm never going to be too fussy about religion itself. It may bring out the best in some people, but it definitely brings out the worst in others.
My apologies for derailing the thread (in a way I guess though I suppose this is related).
Kind of a tangent from the topic, but (I think) I'm going somewhere with this:
the best thing we can do to support women's equality in their chosen religion, women's rights, and human rights in general, is help to raise the living standards in the countries we deal with, and stop trying to fuck over the ones we don't. Improved equality (and decline of extremism, as well as organized religion in general) is a pattern that repeats as countries become more wealthy and secure (godless?)....Of course this convolutes the issue because it opens the door to discussions on consumerism and traditional family values...but as a whole, making people's more comfortable, or at least helping them meet their basic needs, makes it easier for people to evolve as cultures and individuals, regardless of which god we believe in (or don't).
The best way to raise living standards, and the causes of low living standards?....that's a whole other discussion...one in which our political ideologies and religious beliefs usually divide us further. Sometimes these issues feel overwhelming :(
Other persons practise a loser interpretation of their religion which I assume is because they cannot reconcile their own beliefs or lifestyle with what is written in their religious texts. This may lend a person to giving one portion of a religious doctrine more weight than another. It would seem to me that most of these texts are somewhat inconsistent allowing for multiple interpretations, or at the very least some flexibility in the way in which the religion is practised. I'm not religious, but it is my understanding that Christians can ask forgiveness for their sins. Isn't that essentially a get-out-jail-free card that allows for a pretty flexible interpretation of one's faith? If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me.