Is it harder to talk to women about philosophy and religion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Juansavage
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Juansavage said:
No. I’m wondering if people have experience with evangelizing women versus men.
Click to expand...
Both my parents are EO baptized and they both behave more agnostic leading to atheist than as believers. My father is more open to the idea of the Biblical God than mom even if neither read the Bible, the NT at least. Neither practices our faith. Just from his words and impression dad is more likely to accept that God is Jesus Christ than mom who in her turn has more objections about the Church teaching and even of the Church being in God’s good will.
I am praying both see the truth and come back to our Savior.
Anoother example is that of a coworker who has practiced the faith, then married a Muslim, then became the godmother of a priest’s son, and she still objects to priests and the general Church teaching versus local customs.
From my experience women prefer a set of rules, even superstitions, than men who are more open to the idea that maybe they are wrong in this and that. Women are more grounded than men. If their beliefs are in a way, the Church can only struggle against them in most cases. Even with Sacraments consumed. Of course Christian Martyrs who were pagan by birth and also women stand exempt from this example.
We women are less open to a discussion about our own or inherited beliefs. We base ourselves more on intuition, on personal revelation than men.
 
I usually use natural law arguments when talking about controversial issues.
 
Regardless of how you couch your arguments, there are ways to make them that are insulting, and offensive, and not worth dialoguing with. Even if they are well reasoned. Talking with people isn’t a cut and dry thing. Without knowing the circumstances of these conversations nobody is going to be able to give you actual insight.
 
Right, and I’m curious what makes “genunue” natural law so bullet proof.
 
Natural law arguments can be interesting to people who are at least spiritual or deist.
 
Generally, because natural law exists outside of positive or governmental laws, or even religion. Natural law and related natural rights are considered to be instinctively recognized by humans through the use of reason.

Nothing is “bulletproof.” I’ve heard people attempt to use the concept of natural law to argue for things most people would class as immoral—such as slavery.
 
Juansavage said:
but follows her heart on such matters as abortion and gay marriage, which means she doesn’t want to offend her gay friends or make a woman deliver a baby with birth defects.
Click to expand...
That’s what leftist ideology is.
Juansavage said:
I usually use natural law arguments when talking about controversial issues.
Click to expand...
Natural law isn’t that effective from what I seen.
 
Last edited:
I distinguish hard and soft left by levels of hatred. A moderate liberal abandons standards because of feelings towards the underdog while a hard leftist hates non leftist things and wants to destroy them.
 
Juansavage said:
I distinguish hard and soft left by levels of hatred. A moderate liberal abandons standards because of feelings towards the underdog while a hard leftist hates non leftist things and wants to destroy them.
Click to expand...
That’s an uncharitable and, frankly, false description of anything involving liberalism. It’s this kind of biased and loaded mischaracterization that makes me believe that perhaps, your interlocutors have good reason to react strongly to your discussion. It’s also a textbook example of a violation of the Principle of Charity, which is very important in actual philosophical discussions.
 
Last edited:
Juansavage said:
40.png
redbetta:
If she really thinks religion is for weak people, what does she think of you? That you’re a weak man or don’t truly believe in Catholicism?

I’d be wary. If you guys get married and one of your kids turns out to be gay, that could tear apart your family. Or worse: your teen daughter gets pregnant and your own wife takes your daughter to kill your own grandchild.
Click to expand...
She doesn’t think I’m weak. We were at a spirituality store I refused to buy a vibration stone for $65.00. Also, when she said that she was too smart for religion, I asked if she thought I was dumb and she said, “you’re the only smart one,” which I think has bad implications for all of you. 😀
Click to expand...
Assuming she is an authority on “smart” to begin with. 😉

Willing to spend $65 on a vibration stone doesn’t exactly make her case.
 
Last edited:
There are some politically incorrect facts about average intelligence and sex, also race and intelligence, that are not negligible but not significant except at the extremes. These are just conglomerates of people, though. It’s better to treat everyone as an individual. It just doesn’t makes sense to draw conclusions about talking to or relating to “women” or “men” — because that never happens: it’s always this or that woman, this or that man.
 
Last edited:
True

We can characterize groups all we want but we still deal with and interact with individuals.

There was a famous person who was asked who thought was more intelligent, men or women.

He replied, which man and which woman?

Good answer.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top