(Edited Title) Feminist Christians & logic…

[AngryAtheist8]

Here it is:

21 Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 Wives should be subject to their husbands as to the Lord, 23 since, as Christ is head of the Church and saves the whole body, so is a husband the head of his wife; 24 and as the Church is subject to Christ, so should wives be to their husbands, in everything. 25 Husbands should love their wives, just as Christ loved the Church and sacrificed himself for her 26 to make her holy by washing her in cleansing water with a form of words, 27 so that when he took the Church to himself she would be glorious, with no speck or wrinkle or anything like that, but holy and faultless. 28 In the same way, husbands must love their wives as they love their own bodies; for a man to love his wife is for him to love himself. 29 A man never hates his own body, but he feeds it and looks after it; and that is the way Christ treats the Church, 30 because we are parts of his Body. 31 This is why a man leaves his father and mother and becomes attached to his wife, and the two become one flesh. 32 This mystery has great significance, but I am applying it to Christ and the Church. 33 To sum up: you also, each one of you, must love his wife as he loves himself; and let every wife respect her husband. (Ephisians 5:21-33)

and:

11 However, in the Lord, though woman is nothing without man, man is nothing without woman; 12 and though woman came from man, so does every man come from a woman, and everything comes from God. (1 Corinthians 11:11-12)

Maran atha!

Angel

The second passage says that men need women, but neither one says anything about women being as good as men.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
If the the early Feminists had not rebelled against the natural/godly order, then they never would have achieved any rights at all for women.

…well lets see… the Church champions education and human value and equal personhood… the feminists champion free sex, equality of sex, self-sex, woman can exist without man, the world is better under woman rule… oh… yeah… mass murder of children in their mom’s womb to promote woman health; …have you heard what has been happening in China, India and other places in the world where females are treated as trash as they are discarded through selective abortions, infanticide and abandonment? …heard what the feminists have done in the last couple of decades to combat female genocide?

Maran atha!

Angel

Are you one of those people who doesn’t consider the suffragettes Feminists?
Or do you simply think that getting things like the vote and property rights for women was bad/not important?

 

[Cristiano]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
If the the early Feminists had not rebelled against the natural/godly order, then they never would have achieved any rights at all for women.

Are you one of those people who doesn’t consider the suffragettes Feminists?
Or do you simply think that getting things like the vote and property rights for women was bad/not important?

Here you are proving that using the label feminist is a bad idea. The common use of such a label includes a lot of women with conflicting ideals and thus makes the term really non-sensical. Is a true feminist in favor or against pornography? What makes a true feminist? There are so many other cases that show clear contradictions associated with the label feminism.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Here you are proving that using the label feminist is a bad idea. The common use of such a label includes a lot of women with conflicting ideals and thus makes the term really non-sensical. Is a true feminist in favor or against pornography? What makes a true feminist? There are so many other cases that show clear contradictions associated with the label feminism.

The same sort of conflicts exist among the Catholic community:shrug:

 

[jcrichton]

No it doesn’t.
These days conservative Christians usually complain that Hollywood and the TV channels cast most men in a bad light and women as the competent ones.
Do you have any proof for your claim?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcrichton
…can you be more specific… are you speaking about my observation of hollowood?

Maran atha!

Angel

Yes.

In TV and movies (especially comedies) beautiful, competent, and intelligent women are often paired up with stupid male slobs and this is regarded as normal.
The men embarrass themselves and the women have to clean up the metaphorical mess (because the men can’t or won’t) and this is treated as normal.

…don’t know about those conservative Christians… but I share your observation… I have no problem with ugly, overweight, crass, people/characters… but it seems to me that females are kept, by hollowood and its satellites, in that “lower/lesser” caste… the last decades have casted most females as the romantic interest (wife/girlfriend) of some of the most gross looking and behaving men that can be found… it is as though the male of the species is God’s gift to women and the poor lowly females must thank their lucky stars to be paired off with any hunk or junk…

But that’s not the worst of it… females, in film, do not even have any recognition unless they metamorph into a male persona (females must have male organs in order to be respected or accepted as having equal value as males); even the most liberal female characters must subscribe to being a “b” (female dog in heat) or having brass/steel/big “bs;” just today I caught a new commercial from t-mobile where a slimmed lined female (UltraViolate-type) gets on a motorcycle and the massage that appears on the screen as she throttles off states: no more mr. nice girl… it seems that even a tough biker chic must be a mr. if she’s to get any respect.

…so no… not all Christians think the same… I dare say that anyone who believes that females should be treated and behave as a second rate citizen that person is not representing Christ Jesus!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

The ancient Israelites (supposedly God’s Chosen People) were certainly proud if the Bible is anything to go by.

…mostly they were proud to belong to the One True God… but when pride became a hinderance they succumbed to it and got punished for their pride!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

The second passage says that men need women, but neither one says anything about women being as good as men.

…sorry Sacred Writing is not an unabridged problem solving book… we must use both reason and Faith to allow the Word of God to enlighten us… as a Believer I understand that:

“woman nothing without man and man nothing without woman” means that we are equal in the eyes of God… specially when the end of that passage states:

“…everything comes from God.”

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
If the the early Feminists had not rebelled against the natural/godly order, then they never would have achieved any rights at all for women.

Are you one of those people who doesn’t consider the suffragettes Feminists?
Or do you simply think that getting things like the vote and property rights for women was bad/not important?

…no, I feel for women… but I also know that during the last decades females have been sold out by a fake feminism that is bent on sex, power, and “payback time!” …in the past females were treated as though they could do nothing and had to be protected (dancing was male only… even makeup was male only); but as Islam demonstrates there are dark parts to keeping females “protected.”

The Church sought to bring strength and self-value to the female of the species–I consider education and improved self-esteem the corner stone of feminism… and while the Church cannot dictate to society she tends to support the underdog… secular feminism departed from that when the major concern became empowering women as sexual agents and the portrail of females not just as man’s equal but as counterfiet men.

Proposing aborition as “women health” is feminism gone rampant… it says use me and abuse me 'cause I’m such a strong woman I don’t need emotions or respect (which is inclusive of self-respect) I just want to be as bad as the next man… that, my friend, is not a victory for womankind!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Cristiano]

The same sort of conflicts exist among the Catholic community:shrug:

No it does not. We have a very specific set of teachings and orthodoxy is ensured through papal infallibility and the magisterium. Are you saying that the feminist movement has a magisterium? Here I am talking about very fundamental ideas, is the feminist movement in favor or against pornography? Who has decided that, and on which authority?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…don’t know about those conservative Christians… but I share your observation… I have no problem with ugly, overweight, crass, people/characters… but it seems to me that females are kept, by hollowood and its satellites, in that “lower/lesser” caste… the last decades have casted most females as the romantic interest (wife/girlfriend) of some of the most gross looking and behaving men that can be found… it is as though the male of the species is God’s gift to women and the poor lowly females must thank their lucky stars to be paired off with any hunk or junk…

**But that’s not the worst of it… females, in film, do not even have any recognition unless they metamorph into a male persona (females must have male organs in order to be respected or accepted as having equal value as males); **even the most liberal female characters must subscribe to being a “b” (female dog in heat) or having brass/steel/big “bs;” just today I caught a new commercial from t-mobile where a slimmed lined female (UltraViolate-type) gets on a motorcycle and the massage that appears on the screen as she throttles off states: no more mr. nice girl… it seems that even a tough biker chic must be a mr. if she’s to get any respect.

…so no… not all Christians think the same… I dare say that anyone who believes that females should be treated and behave as a second rate citizen that person is not representing Christ Jesus!

Maran atha!

Angel

Wait…

Are you saying that women who act tough and assertive automatically have metaphorical male organs (i.e. are acting like a guy)?

That’s just…

To be honest, I have trouble even taking that comment seriously.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…mostly they were proud to belong to the One True God… but when pride became a hinderance they succumbed to it and got punished for their pride!

Maran atha!

Angel

Some of the language in the O.T. indicates that God had an almost spousal relationship with Israel.
If so, God could be likened to an abusive husband who smacked his wife around whenever he thought that she was mouthing off.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…**sorry Sacred Writing is not an unabridged problem solving book… we must use both reason and Faith to allow the Word of God to enlighten us… as a Believer I understand that:

“woman nothing without man and man nothing without woman” means that we are equal in the eyes of God… specially when the end of that passage states:**"…everything comes from God."

Maran atha!

Angel

The history of Christendom (the countries historically dominated by Christianity) disagrees with you.

Women have only gained full legal rights and protections (on par with men) within the last hundred years or so. Which its worth noting, is also the period when Christianity’s influence began to serious decline (indicating that Christianity is not the primary factor responsible for this turn of events).

 

[Cristiano]

Some of the language in the O.T. indicates that God had an almost spousal relationship with Israel.
If so, God could be likened to an abusive husband who smacked his wife around whenever he thought that she was mouthing off.

I think that your understanding of the relationship between God and Israel is quite poor. If you were to understand the basic elements of God, you could not jump from the poetic description of a relationship the the representation of an abusive husband. Two different natures, two different essences.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…no, I feel for women… but I also know that during the last decades females have been sold out by a fake feminism that is bent on sex, power, and “payback time!” …in the past females were treated as though they could do nothing and had to be protected (dancing was male only… even makeup was male only); but as Islam demonstrates there are dark parts to keeping females "protected."

The Church sought to bring strength and self-value to the female of the species–I consider education and improved self-esteem the corner stone of feminism… and while the Church cannot dictate to society she tends to support the underdog… secular feminism departed from that when the major concern became empowering women as sexual agents and the portrail of females not just as man’s equal but as counterfiet men.

Proposing aborition as “women health” is feminism gone rampant… it says use me and abuse me 'cause I’m such a strong woman I don’t need emotions or respect (which is inclusive of self-respect) I just want to be as bad as the next man… that, my friend, is not a victory for womankind!

Maran atha!

Angel

To be honest I think Christianity and Islam have historically looked down on women for the most part.

But while Christianity did it in somewhat patronizing and condescending way, Islam is much more brutal, and does a very poor job concealing the fact that it is a religion made by men for the benefit of men.

In practice this means that in Christian Europe men (who tend to be significantly more violent) were much more likely be executed than women.
But in Muslim lands they didn’t (and still don’t) need much reason to imprison, mutilate, or murder women.

I think this is because women were regarded in Christendom as being like children (or pets). Beloved little creatures that had to be protected from the outside world because they weren’t strong, smart, or competent enough to do it themselves.
But the Muslims don’t bother protecting their women (and in fact often abuse them instead), because they see women more like chattel/commodities.

I realize that not all Christians or Muslims are (or were) like this, but I am making generalizations to speak of the overall pattern.

 

[Cristiano]

The history of Christendom (the countries historically dominated by Christianity) disagrees with you.

Women have only gained full legal rights and protections (on par with men) within the last hundred years or so. Which its worth noting, is also the period when Christianity’s influence began to serious decline (indicating that Christianity is not the primary factor responsible for this turn of events).

This is such poor logic and trying to establish cause and effect in such a manner makes me wonder if you are being honest or just trying to push an agenda. If I were to use your logic I cold say that women have been really stupid until now when some of them started to have functional brains and to develop scientific theories. I know that this last statement that I have written is blatantly false.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

No it does not. We have a very specific set of teachings and orthodoxy is ensured through papal infallibility and the magisterium. Are you saying that the feminist movement has a magisterium? Here I am talking about very fundamental ideas, is the feminist movement in favor or against pornography? Who has decided that, and on which authority?

Then what would you call squabbles over things like the Old and New Mass?
You Catholics definitely appear to have factions to outsiders like me.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

This is such poor logic and trying to establish cause and effect in such a manner makes me wonder if you are being honest or just trying to push an agenda. If I were to use your logic I cold say that women have been really stupid until now when some of them started to have functional brains and to develop scientific theories. I know that this last statement that I have written is blatantly false.

And what would you base that argument on?
Or are you just trying to end the debate by saying something outrageous?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Tshi is such poor logic and trying to establish cause and effect in such a manner makes me wonder if you are being honest or just trying to push an agenda. If I were to use your logic I cold say that women have been really stupid until now when some of them started to have functional brains and to develop scientific theories. I know that this last statement that I have written is blatantly false.

Do you have an actual argument to dispute my theory or just vague insults?

 

[Cristiano]

Then what would you call squabbles over things like the Old and New Mass?
You Catholics definitely appear to have factions to outsiders like me.

The teaching of the Church is specific about the forms of the Mass. I think that if you were to be informed about the so called squabbles you would see that independently of personal preferences the belief in either forms is unique.

What I see is that you are still avoiding the way feminist address pornography, that is a fundamental issue for the feminist movement and you are not able to tell me if a feminist should be in favor or against pornography. Should women be free to choose to be treated like objects, is so should males be free to treat women like objects?

 

[Cristiano]

Do you have an actual argument to dispute my theory or just vague insults?

If you were to read the second statement you would understand the argument.