Religion: An Anti-Female Invention?

[Laurence_of_PA]

Several weeks ago I was watching an interview with Christopher Hitchins on the Daily Show, who made many disparaging statements about religion in general. However, one was particularly scathing. His argument was that organized religions were founded by people afraid of the birth canal, or in other words, they believed intercourse and ordinary child-bearing was evil. He mentions the virgin birth of Christ and how Bhudda was delivered through a cut in the side of the womb.

There were other examples too, but the common theme was that organized religions were invented by ignorant, chauvinistic men fearful of the reproductive systems of women.

Without merely bashing his name or theological ignorance, anyone care to comment on this sentiment? I’m personally not very well-served enough to comment/refute it myself.

 

[LilyM]

Several weeks ago I was watching an interview with Christopher Hitchins on the Daily Show, who made many disparaging statements about religion in general. However, one was particularly scathing. His argument was that organized religions were founded by people afraid of the birth canal, or in other words, they believed intercourse and ordinary child-bearing was evil. He mentions the virgin birth of Christ and how Bhudda was delivered through a cut in the side of the womb.

There were other examples too, but the common theme was that organized religions were invented by ignorant, chauvinistic men fearful of the reproductive systems of women.

Without merely bashing his name or theological ignorance, anyone care to comment on this sentiment? I’m personally not very well-served enough to comment/refute it myself.

Julius Caesar was delivered by a ‘cut in the side of the womb’ too - it’s called a caesarean for precisely that reason Hardly means those who go for caesareans are afraid of natural childbirth.

Besides which, we believe in a God whose very first command to humans was to ‘be fruitful and multiply’. We Catholics take it so seriously that we have the most stringent code of all the Christian groups against contraception and abortion - so how on earth does he come up with the idea that we’re SCARED of childbirth??? :ehh:

 

[Laurence_of_PA]

Just to add on to what I just stated, Hitchins asks why we should take religion seriously when it systematically labeled the natural course of child-bearing as sinful, that is, when religion should have been embracing it.

Blunty, he asks why the religion-founders were so afraid of sex that Jesus had to be born from a virgin, or in other words: “are the rest of us so unholier than Jesus because we were concieved through that seemingly evil, repugnant, unnatural act known as sex?” or “Why couldn’t Mary have sex if its so natural and God-created?” or “Why are all these ignorant men 2,000 years ago telling us that the Holy Family couldn’t take part in our culture of intercourse?”

(not my ideas personally, but added on for the sake of a complete, proper understanding of Hitchin’s own position)

 

[LilyM]

Just to add on to what I just stated, Hitchins asks why we should take religion seriously when it systematically labeled the natural course of child-bearing as sinful, that is, when religion should have been embracing it.

Blunty, he asks why the religion-founders were so afraid of sex that Jesus had to be born from a virgin.

One man in all of history (fathered by God no less) brought into life asexually and he labels Christians as afraid of sex??? What a load!

 

[Laurence_of_PA]

One man in all of history (fathered by God no less) brought into life asexually and he labels Christians as afraid of sex??? What a load!

I edited my above post if you’d like to take a look. It would a lot more helpful if the questions could be brought up and refuted in their entirety.

 

[LilyM]

I edited my above post if you’d like to take a look. It would a lot more helpful if the questions could be brought up and refuted in their entirety.

Hitchens isn’t really worth spending a second on. Clearly Jesus wasn’t conceived in the regular way because his father was GOD!!! That makes him and his mother unique, for the rest of their lives and beyond, set apart as priests and nuns are, not that celibacy and virginity automatically makes them ‘holier’.

On the contrary, it’s because sex is SO holy, so important, so valuable, that we have the rules about it as we do.

 

[CarlosG]

You know I caught that interview too, and I wont attack his character because that would be too easy (rimshot! hehe) but I remember when he started talking about the birth canal and started ‘alluding’ to the fact all religions are the same, he started making horrible comparisons to Egyptian and Greek gods (how they were born) and left it to the audience to connect the dots to Christianity and the virgin birth. This alone shows me his scholarship is at best that of a community college flunkee with a chip on his shoulder.

It seems like these authors don’t even bother with arguments anymore because people seem to like complaints better because they are simpler.

 

[CCM08]

Honestly, anyone stupid and ignorant enough to generalize about every faith (past or present) isn’t worth a response.

 

[blessedtoo]

His argument was that organized religions were founded by people afraid of the birth canal, or in other words, they believed intercourse and ordinary child-bearing was evil. He mentions the virgin birth of Christ and how Bhudda was delivered through a cut in the side of the womb.

This is his opinion based on poor research. Nowhere in Catholic theology is it stated that child birth is evil nor is there a suggestion that the birth canal was feared. I think his argument is fairly pedestrian and quite ubiquitious, the same old “Christians hate sex” canard. Lily addressed this issue quite eloquently.

There were other examples too, but the common theme was that organized religions were invented by ignorant, chauvinistic men fearful of the reproductive systems of women

.

Nothing new in this ridiculous premise. You could search the forum for an effective refutation of the sexism of the Church.

Just to add on to what I just stated, Hitchins asks why we should take religion seriously when it systematically labeled the natural course of child-bearing as sinful, that is, when religion should have been embracing it.

Again, the Church has never believed or held that childbirth is “sinful”. The Blessed Mother did indeed “give birth”, correct? As far as we know, Jesus was delivered through the birth canal, correct?

Blunty, he asks why the religion-founders were so afraid of sex that Jesus had to be born from a virgin, or in other words: “are the rest of us so unholier than Jesus because we were concieved through that seemingly evil, repugnant, unnatural act known as sex?” or “Why couldn’t Mary have sex if its so natural and God-created?” or “Why are all these ignorant men 2,000 years ago telling us that the Holy Family couldn’t take part in our culture of intercourse?”

This is, IMO, the crux of the issue. We are, indeed, “unholier” than Jesus. I think it’s safe to say that we are, none of us, the second Person of the Trinity. The fact that Christ was born of a Virgin does not imply that sex is sinful. It does indicate that a supernatural means was necessary to bring the Son of God’s incarnation about. It means (as it was supposed to mean with Buddha, Ceasar, the Greek and Roman gods) that something other-worldy, something outside of the natural process has occurred. It means that the human method of conception was completely unnecessary for this supernatural conception to occur. It separates the human from the divine. It does not judge or demean or diminish what God has put into place for human conception.

 

[Ghosty]

One man in all of history (fathered by God no less) brought into life asexually and he labels Christians as afraid of sex??? What a load!

And what’s more, the Catholic Church (which is the largest organized religion in the world by far) is most often derided for encouraging TOO MUCH birth. We’re notorious for our high birthrates in general, or at least were in the past, all because of the strong emphasis on having a family.

Apparently this man has never seen “The Meaning of Life” by Monty Python.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Eliza10]

…There were other examples too, but the common theme was that organized religions were invented by ignorant, chauvinistic men fearful of the reproductive systems of women…

Its the devil’s reasoning, so there is a certain fascination about it. Its a snag for the intelligent thoughtful mind. What you quote is a common theme of Feminism. Many of those proponents have been real victims of men who act out of a fear perhaps rooted in this demonic motive. Many such victims adopt a whole worldview colored this way, which they preach to the world. So it starts to sound like truth in the minds of many. Many have a total void as far as worldview and this is all they hear, and they fill the void with this.

Also I must say that many of the same feminists overcompensate for the said men’s fear by becoming overly obsessed with their reproductive systems. Its all perverted!

I think these theories hold fascination because they contain some truths within them. Truths are always part of the web when the devil spins his lies to ensare people away from truth.

 

[Tom]

organized religions were invented by ignorant, chauvinistic men fearful of the reproductive systems of women.

Yeah, that’s what I was thinking, the Catholic Church was made by chauvinistic men… the Church that is continually charged with elevating a woman to the level of God… the Church that condemns ABC… The Church that condemns abortion… Is there any organized group who “worship” (hee hee) a woman more than we do Mary? Yeah, we’re all male chauvinistic pigs.

 

[st_lucy]

And what’s more, the Catholic Church (which is the largest organized religion in the world by far) is most often derided for encouraging TOO MUCH birth. We’re notorious for our high birthrates in general, or at least were in the past, all because of the strong emphasis on having a family.

Apparently this man has never seen “The Meaning of Life” by Monty Python.

Peace and God bless!

I was going to say the same thing. As Catholics we get dumped on for having too many babies and now we are getting dumped on for being afraid of sex.

I think that this shows how disperate the secular world is to try to destroy the Church. I would say they would have a better time at if they stuck to one or the other, you can’t have both.

 

[VociMike]

He’s assuming what he wants to prove, that Christianity is an invented religion. Since we believe it was God, not man, who chose that Jesus should be born of a virgin, I guess Hitchens now has to argue that God is afraid of female sexuality.

Not that you’d know it from all the other children born “the normal way” in the bible.

Oh, and did he notice that those “afraid of female sexuality” Christians have more children than anybody else in the western world? Guess they must not be too afraid!

 

[Ghosty]

I was going to say the same thing. As Catholics we get dumped on for having too many babies and now we are getting dumped on for being afraid of sex.

I think that this shows how disperate the secular world is to try to destroy the Church. I would say they would have a better time at if they stuck to one or the other, you can’t have both.

We also get dumped on for “mother-goddess” worship. Go figure!

 

[Potato1]

Several weeks ago I was watching an interview with Christopher Hitchins on the Daily Show, .

There is the first problem.

If it is so chauvanistic then why are most of the people in the pews on Sundays women?

 

[gardenswithkids]

…the common theme was that organized religions were invented by ignorant, chauvinistic men fearful of the reproductive systems of women.

Without merely bashing his name or theological ignorance, anyone care to comment on this sentiment? I’m personally not very well-served enough to comment/refute it myself.

The oft repeated phrase, “Blessed is the Fruit of thy womb, Jesus” comes to my mind. If those who contributed to the Catholic faith truly fear the repoductive systems of women, they would not encourage us to mention the word “womb” over and over–53 times in a rosary. Rather than fearful of women’s reproductive systems, I think they have reverence and respect for women’s reproductive systems, enough so that we meditate upon them in our prayers.

Now, if you want to talk about people who fear reproductive systems, consider the word “protection” is commonly used by people to describe contraception. Women shouldn’t need to protect ourselves from our husbands’ reproductive parts or the children sex might reproduce. :ehh:

 

[TheApologist]

I also assume when married couple discuss NFP deeply they are also completely scared of what they are talking about. When we go over abortion and the few times it’s okay(indirect abortion) and talk of tubals, we’re completely scared of 'em!!!

Wow I missed something… :whacky:

:dts: I think I somebody needs to do their research…